220.


DOCUMENTARY HISTORY OF THE FLORIDA CANAL


show that the margin of saving would be so small that probably we would but
seldom use it. But even if it were a free canal, the probable extra time saved
by using the canal rather than going around would not necessarily make it an
economical waterway for our ships to use.
 I have already put in the record Mr. Pew's letter on behalf of the
Sun Oil Co. of Philadelphia.
 Moore & McCormack Co., signed by Robert C. Lee, vice president,
dated January 21, 1936:
 It would not seem to us, however, that there is anything like sufficient naviga-
tion to warrant this expenditure.
 The Gulf Refining Co., by its agent at Miami:
 There is no demand for the canal by any shipping company, and all of them
have shown no interest in it.
 Then he refers to the water hazard.
 Richfield Oil Co. of California, Los Angeles, signed by P. C.
Lamb, marine department, dated January 7:
 It is hardly conceivable that this canal could justifiably be constructed and
maintained as a free canal. If, on the other hand, the canal were operated on a
toll basis, the tolls would have to be confined to the limits of saving in operating
costs by reason of the distance cut off; and if the tolls were held to these limits,
we seriously doubt that the revenue would cover the cost of maintenance, to say
nothing of liquidating the investment.
 Sabine Towing Co., Port Arthur, Tex., January 3, 1936, signed by
its vice president:
 Our firm does not deem an expenditure on this project of between $140,000,000
and $200,000,000 warranted by navigation savings, because of the fact that
$200,000,000 at 4 percent would be $8,000,000 interest charges, which could not
be realized by the combined savings of all the vessels that would use this
waterway.
 The CaanMAx. That completes the list, does it
 Senator VNmDENBEo. That completes the list of direct comment.
I have also heard from probably 25 others of the shipping companies
which were listed to me by the War Department, and they expressed
no interest in the matter one way or the other, and have come to no
conclusion as to whether or not they would care to use the canal.
 The CHAMMAN. Senator Fletcher, have you any material you would
like to put in the record
 Senator FL mCHE. I would like to put in the record here the exact
statement of Colonel Youngberg in regard to what I said with
regard to the analysis made for shipping for 1929. It is paragraph
29 of his letter [reading]:
 For the Florida Canal, a very complete analysis was made of the shipping for
1929. Every vessel was traced into and out of the Gulf, and out of a total of
1,71 vessels carrying the total foreign and domestic commerce of the United
States Gulf coast ports, it was found that 1,487 different ships made 10,341
voyages that could have used the canal to advantage. The total net registered
tonnage for these voyages was 38,45,124, while the cargo amounted to 45,174,704
tons of 2,000 pounds each. Of these voyages, 7,610 were made under the Ameri-
can flag, with a net tonnage of about 28,800,000 tons. A similar analysis of the
1981 commerce was made by another agency and showed 9,575 potential
transits. The reduction below the 1981 figures was due to the smaller number
of foreign-flag vessels, and this, in turn, was due to the world-wide depression
and the corresponding reduction in commerce.
 Now, has Senator Vandenberg concluded ?
 Senator VANDENEaGm. Yes.