DOCUMENTARY HISTORY OF THE FLORIDA CANAL 243

approximately 32 years. If capitalized at 3 percent, it shows a
margin over the cost of construction of $99,000,000.
 Senator VANDENBERG. How do you square that with the fact that
the special board of review said you could not even justify it in
paying off a bond issue in 80 years?
 Mr. BUCKMAN. Senator, I have already explained to you twice that
that was a question of their not being able to pay off a bond issue in
80 years, and they, the board of review, said that an 8-cent toll would
not yield enough revenue to pay off the cost and 2-percent interest in
80 years. They did not say the benefits of the project would not pay
it off.
 Senator VANDENBERG. I think you are entirely correct in your
statement. I simply go further than you do. I assume if Congress
is not willing to pay anything for the benefit that the benefit is more
fictitious than real.
 Mr. BUCKMAN. That is your assumption, Senator.
 Senator VANDENBERG. That is correct. That is entirely my as-
sumption.
 r. BUCKMAN. In other words, on the basis used by the Board for
Rivers and Harbors of the Corps of Engineers, the project shows that
it will pay in direct benefits sufficient to meet all interest, operation,
and maintenance charges, and repay its entire cost, including interest
during construction, in approximately 32 years. It is therefore not
only economically justifiable but is in a highly preferred class of proj-
ects. This becomes even more apparent when the ratio of cost to
benefits of the project is compared with the ratios of cost and benefits
of other meritorious authorized projects.
 Senator FrLECHE=. I think it can be fairly assumed, without any
 argument at all, that ships are going to use that route which is more
 advantageous to them.
 Senator VANDENBERG. Yes.
 Senator FLEInHm. If they can save a little money, even a few
 dollars, they will use that route.
 Senator VANDENBERG. Yes. The question is whether it is advan-
 tageous. That is what it boils down to.
 Senator FuLCHEm. Yes; that is the question-if they can save a
 little money, time, and distance, and all of that, why, they are going
 to use it.
 The CHAIR AN. You may proceed in your own way, Mr. Buckman.
 Mr. BUCKMAN. If the committee please, before leaving this question
 of economic justification, I should like to point out on this question of
 ratios of benefits to costs to compare the figures found for the Florida
 canal and those of other highly meritorious and authorized rivers
 and harbors projects.
 The following is a list of the most outstanding of these:

 N of project Ratio of cost to Rank according to
 ben ofts rprojecio

 Florida Canal...........--------------- ------ ------------- to 1.6 ---------First.
 Delaware River to Philadelphia and to Trenton.--.----..------. to 1.3------------ Second.
 New York-Nw Jy h -------.....--...--------------..................... 1 to 1.2.------...--. Third.
 ChuapeL & Delaware Canal....------------------------ to ...----------- Fourth.
 Beaver, Mahooln Canal...-------------.---...--.---...-- do....-------. Do.
 Cape Canal.......--------............................... do.....---... Do.