DOCUMENTARY HISTORY OF THE FLORIDA CANAL


 General MARKHAM. I do not think that is figurable.
 Senator VANDENBEnR. I imagine it is not. It might be very
extensive and might not be extensive.
 General M"xHaMx. I think the consensus of unanimity is that it
could not be extensive.
 Senator VANDENBEmo. You think that the rather generally ex-
pressed fears in general and southern Florida are without founda-
tion
 General MARKHAM. I think they are wholly without foundation.
 Senator VANDENBERG. I imagine that Senator Copeland may want
to come back to that. I would just like to complete my prelimi-
nary request for information regarding the project itself from the
national standpoint. Is this project economically justified, under
the usual tests which are applied by the Board of Rivers and Har-
bors engineers to rivers and harbors projects?
 General MARKHAM. I do not think I can answer the question
 because the procedures that would finally bring an answer to that
 to the satisfaction of myself as the momentarily responsible head,
 have not been prosecuted, have not been concluded.
 Senator VANDENBERG. I do not want to use any information which
 is not justified at any time in this connection, first, because I want
 to be fair, and, second, because I have a great respect for anything
 that Senator Fletcher is interested in. If you will bear with me,
 I want to just pursue this economic problem, to be sure I am not
 in error.
 General Pillsbury wrote me, under date of December 21, 1935, that
 in determining the approximate use of the canal by shipping inter-
 ests-I am quoting his letter:
 the Board contacted the shipowners engaged in the Gulf-Atlantic trade during
 1931. Altogether 61 shipping concerns were contacted.
 He reports that out of 61 concerns contacted there were 9 who
 said they would use it; 5 said they would not use it; and 47 were
 not interested enough even to reply. So I gathered the conclusion
 that the economic justification upon which reliance was being placed
 was the reply of these nine shipping companies
 Now I asked General Pillsbury for a list of the 61 shipping com-
 panies which he contacted, which he very kindly furnished.
 I sent a questionnaire to the 61. I got 19 answers saying that they
 positively would not use the canal. I got none saying positively they
 would use it. I got 7 that were friendly but inconclusive; 2 no
 decision; and 30 no answer at all.
 Now, this is the interesting thing which I am sure the committee
 will want in the record, and which I am very anxious to put in, in
 the presence of Genieral Markham, so he can comment as we proceed
 along with it, because it seems to me this is very illuminating.
 Out of the nine shipping companies which General Pillsbury's
 letter reported to me the Board relied upon to economically justify
 the subsequent use of the canal, all nine said to me that they would
 not use the canal. Now, I want to be very meticulous about that.
 These are the nine, and I think this ought to all be in the record,
 because these are the nine shipping companies whose attitude, ac-
 cording to General Pillsbury's letter is the reliance of the Depart.
 ment for the economic justification of the project.


193