DOCUMENTARY HISTORY OF THE FLORIDA CANAL 101

resulting from differences of opinion and judgment and not from confusion
of facts or questions involved.
 True comparison of the estimates of the two groups of engineers requires
that the actual construction cost figures, before loading with interest during
construction, contingencies, engineering, etc., be set side by side. For a canal
of 30-foot depth, the computed estimates are in round numbers:
 Army engineers-------------- ---------- $152,000,000
 Public Works engineers---------.--------------- 78,000,000
 Difference..-----------.-------- 74, 000,000
 This amounts to a difference of nearly 100 percent. Upward of 70 percent
of this difference lies in the two items, excavation and locks and auxiliary
works.
 For these two items the computed estimates are, in round numbers:
 Army engineers ----------.--- --- $131,000,000
 Public Works engineers---------------__ -------- 66- 000,000
 Difference-_-- -------- --- -- 65,000,000
 Between these two major items the difference is again approximately 100
percent.
 It is apparent that on these principal items which should be subject to
 reasonably accurate computation, there is a divergence too great to be accept-
 able without further examination. The engineers of the proponents are in
 substantial agreement with the engineers of the Public Works Administration
 and are convinced that the lower cost estimates have been computed with an
 accuracy which can be defended. It is apparent, therefore, that there is, to
 say the least, no preponderance of evidence upon which the project can be
 rejected.
 This project is so national in scope and of such great importance, especially
 to the States of the Mississippi Valley, the Gulf, and the Atlantic seaboard, and
 its prompt construction as a part of the Public Works program appears so
 appropriate, that we urge that its examination be continued without delay.
 We, therefore, request that you constitute and appoint a special board of
 review to examine this project, and that provision be made to meet the expense
 of this examination out of any funds available to the Public Works Adminis-
 tration and not otherwise allocated; and that the Board be instructed to pro-
 ceed with all reasonable dispatch to complete its studies of the project and
 render a report to you.
 Very truly and sincerely .yours,
 Duncan U. Fletcher, Park Trammell, Morris Sheppard, Tom Con-
 nally, J. H. Bankhead, Huey P. Long, John H. Overton, Pat
 Harrison, H. D. Stephens.


 DOCUMENT NO. 46 (FILES OF S. C. A. OF S. OF F.), MAY 3, 1934

 AN ARTICLE BY COL. SUMTER L. Lownr, JR., A CANAL ACROSS
 FLORIDA, PUBLISHED IN THE MAY 3, 1934, ISSUE OF REVIEW OF
 REVIEWS AND WORLD' WORK

 The above article is given herewith in full, as follows:
 A CANAL ACROSS FLORIDA
 By SumTm L. LowaB, Jr.

 Why delay the building of the Gulf-Atlantic ship canal across the State of
 Florida? If there is a single project that fits all of the requirements of the
 President's public-works program it is this Florida ship canaL It will put
 80,000 men to work, will pay a fair return on money invested by the Govern-
 ment, and above all it can be started almost immediately.