DOCUMENTARY HISTORY OF THE FLORIDA CANAL 147

 Walter F. Coachman, Jr., of Jacksonville, executive vice president of the
National Gulf-Atlantic Ship Canal Association, likewise denies that our waters
will be polluted with salt after this canal is built. Says.he: "For the infor-
mation of the people of Florida who are not familiar with the very extensive
surveys made by several departments of the United States Government, all of
these questions were studied in most elaborate detail over a period of 3%
years and at an expense of approximately $340,000."
 To Mr. Coachman I say that I have read all of the official reports of these
investigations, that I am familiar with them, and that every word of every
sentence in every one of the geological sections of these reports proves beyond
question of any doubt that Florida's water supply may be most seriously
affected by a salt-water canal.
 Furthermore, I say that Mr. Coachman and his associates know this and
that they have purposely sought to suppress the report of that $340,000 survey
by postponing its publication through political pull. They fear, and with
good reason, that the people of Florida would rise against them if they knew
what that report said about their water supplies.
 There have been two reports made on this canal by two groups of Govern-
ment engineers. They are explained in a letter from Brig. Gen. G. B. Pills-
bury, Acting Chief of Army Engineers, on May 9, which reads in part as
follows:
 "To carry out a survey authorized by Congress of a ship canal across Florida,
 a special board of officers of this Department was convened and has reported
 thereon. This report is now before the Board of Engineers for Rivers and
 Harbors for the review required by law, but consideration of the report has
 been deferred at the request of the proponents of the project. In accordance
 with the request presented to me in a separate letter, you were afforded the
 privilege of examining the report of this special board, subject to the usual
 restrictions that its contents should not be published before submission to
 Congress. The canal under consideration in this report is a lock canal, with
 a summit level of 40 feet above mean sea level.
 "A board of review consisting of two officers of the Corps of Engineers and
 two engineers appointed by the Administration of Public Works has further
 investigated the project. This board, after securing the advice of an engineer
 expert in water supply, found that a sea-level canal was the more advantageous,
 and that with a sea-level canal any possible damage to agriculture beyond the
 right-of-way to be secured for the canal would be negligible, that the damage
 to water supply would be small and would consist only in lowering the levels
 of nearby wells."
 The $340,000 survey was made by the Army engineers. Before it goes to
 Congress and is made public it must be reviewed by the full Board of Engi-
 neers for Rivers and Harbors. A public hearing was called by this Board
 last January to permit local interests to be heard concerning the need and
 layout of the canal. That hearing was postponed at the request of the pro-
 ponents of the project, who we know to be the members of the National
 Gulf-Atlantic Ship Canal Association.
 For 5 months the Jacksonville canal advocates have succeeded in post-
 poning publication of the voluminous report of the Army engineers, which is
 generally known to be unfavorable to them. In the meantime they prevailed
 upon the President to appoint a special board of review of but four engineers,
 who see things more their way. This special board did not make exhaustive
 surveys and investigations as did the Army engineers, but it drafted a very
 brief set of recommendations. Its conclusions, made public, necessarily are
 based on the data developed by the Army engineers, but the report of the
 Army engineers is carefully kept under cover. Since reading that report I can
 understand why the Jacksonville proponents of the project would like to delay
 the hearing on it until the canal is built.
 In addressing the Sanford meeting of farmers and businessmen in opposi-
 tion to a resolution which they adopted against the canal, A. F. Knotts, of
 Yankeetown, one of the leaders in the fight for this waterway, said it would
 put Florida a thousand miles nearer to sulphur mines, petroleum fields, iron
 ore, and coal deposits, "because through a system of barges you will be able
 to send and receive products and produce to and from this great Mississippi
 Valley at greatly reduced freight rates."
 Why, in heaven's name, build a sea-level ship canal for barges which do
 not need more than 8 or 9 feet of water? And if we are to have a canal across
 Florida, why not dig it through a part of the State where it will serve our