DOCUMENTARY HISTORY OF THE FLORIDA CANAL 275

 That was in their report and the recommendation when this special board of
review-all expert engineers, two Army engineers, two P. W. A. engineers, and
a civilian engineer-the P. W. A. engineer and his assistant, and this civilian
engineer, and the two Army engineers commending the deepening of the canal
to 35 feet when traffic should justify it.
 The board further found, based upon an economic survey of the special board
of the Corps of Engineers, such a canal would be economically justified on a
4-percent basis up to a cost of $1OG,000,000. That is in this report of the board
of review to the President; and the President, when that report was made to
him, authorized the construction of this canal and set aside $5,000,000 to begin
the work with, and that instructed the Chief of Engineers to proceed under the
plans submitted by this board of review.
 That $5,000%000 has gone into it. The $400,000 in addition to that has been
allotted by the President to continue the work there and the work is under
way-begun last September.
 The President had the board of review's report; the report of the board of
survey, by the Army engineers; report of the engineers of rivers and harbors,
and the P. W. A. engineers; the board of review made up their own conclusion
and certified it to the President.
 What more protection could he have had? He had full protection of all of
the engineers, these experts, and final reports of the board of review, which I
have just read to you from.
 Now, It is not the case of having given the President the power to adopt the
project just offhand without definite information. He had all of the informa-
tion that Congress could have had, or any committee could have had, that
anybody could have had. He had the experts of the country pass on it
and he did not name these engineers. The War Department, General Mark-
ham, named two, the P. W. A. named two of them, and then the board selected
a third, Mr. Douglas, of New York, who was made chairman of that board,
and that is the report upon which the President acted.
 Now, when the Senator admits that the President had authority to proceed
with this thing, that the act of 1985, whatever may be the practice or the theory
heretofore in rivers and harbors matters, that act superseded any other
authority so far as that is concerned. It gave him authority to adopt this
project. It became a Federal project. It is entitled to treatment as a Federal
project just as if it had been adopted by all of the routine provisions from the
district engineer on up to the House.
 Now, I say under those circumstances, just as Judge Parks, at page 23 of the
House hearings, part 2, said: "I think it has been held that any project that
.has actually been begun on which money has been expended, stands on the same
level with projects authorized by Congress."
 That is true; there is where we stand. These projects have been authorized
by the President under the authority of the act of 1985 and the money has been
expended on them, $5,400,000 expended or committed on this project, and on
the other projects so much money, that is detailed, I think, at page 15 of the
House hearings, but can be given in more detail if you would like to have it, if
you would like to see how much has been expended; and what the project
calls for in each instance and what is recommended by the Budget and Chief
of Engineers. Now, it is up to the Congress to say that we will not recognize
this Federal project. We will ignore the authority given to the President upon
which he has acted and we will refuse appropriations to it and leave that
project with a hole in the ground and abandon the work. Will you do that,
or will you go on with it?
 I am willing to ask General Markham now, will he recommend an appropria-
 tion in connection with this canal; will you do that, General?
 General MARKHAM. I have recommended $12,000,000. That was submitted in
the Budget.
 Senator FLurCHBL Yes.
 Senator CABeY. Well, General, I would like to ask you about a statement
 in the hearings before the House committee:
 "Mr. PowEas. General Pillsbury, just to clear up something in my own mind,
 will you tell me this about the Florida ship canal: Was that approved by the
 same type of board that the Passamaquoddy project was approved by?
 "General PILLSBUBY. No; to the best of my recollection, that was not recom-
 mended by any board. The report is now before the Board of Engineers for
 Rivers and Harbors, and, upon the request of Members of Congress from Florida,