DOCUMENTARY HISTORY OF THE FLORIDA CANAL


 Secretary IcKES. It was not necessary, Senator, because we turned
 it down regardless of that consideration.
 The CHAIRMAN. That really did not enter into the conclusion you
 reached
 Secretary ICKES. No; but if it had been a border-line case we
 would have felt under obligation to take that into consideration.
 But we did not; we turned it down on other grounds.
 Senator FLETCHE. Now, Mr. Secretary, may I ask you what re-
 port is referred to here?
 The CHAIRMAN. Excuse me just a minute, Senator. Then you did
 not consider this at all a border-line case
 Secretary IcIKE. No.
 The CHAIRMAN. You felt that the evidence was overwhelming
 against the approval of the project as far as your organization was
 concerned ?
 Secretary ICKEs. It was at least a preponderance of the evidence
 that way. That doubt could not be overcome to our satisfaction.
 The CHaIRAN. Let me ask this one last question: Had it been so
 close to the border line that every element would enter into the
 matter of making your decision, would the possible effects upon the
 ground waters have been an important matter
 Secretary ICKEs. Yes; it would. We would have held a public
 hearing, and we would have given an opportunity to the objectors,
 on that ground or on any other substantial ground, to appear and
 present their evidence.
 Senator FLErcHER. You were considering a lock canal all the way
 through, were you not ?
 Secretary ICKES. No; we were considering either a lock or a sea-
 level canal.
 Senator FLxrcHER. You never reached a sea-level canal until this
 board reported, this board of review
 Secretary IcKEs. The original application to the R. F. C. was for
 a lock canal. Originally we did consider it on that basis. That
 inter-departmental memorandum, the photostat copy of which I think
 you hold in your hand, Senator, did deal with it as a lock canal.
 Subsequently, when this special board was set up, it considered it
 also as a sea-level canal, and then naturally we began to look at it in
 that way.
 Senator FLErCma. Here is your description, originally signed by
 you disapproving the loan and signed by the administrator January
 29, 1935, description of the project:
 Construction of a deep-sea canal with two sets of locks across the State of
 Florida connecting the Gulf of Mexico with the Atlantic Ocean.
 Secretary IcxES. Yes; that was the way it came in originally.
 That rejection was of a lock canal.
 Senator FLECHER. As a matter of fact, Mr. Secretary, the Board
 of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors were first considering a canal
 with locks, and then your board considered the lock canal, and then
 there was a wide divergence of opinion between the Board of Engi-
neers for Rivers and Harbors and your board
 Secretary ICKES. Yes. That was because the cost of a lock canal
was so high, and we were trying to bring the cost down.


208