334 DOCUMENTARY HISTORY OF THE FLORIDA CANAL would be less cost in connection with building a sea-level canal; it would be less expensive to operate, and so forth. The figure it gave would be a conservative figure for such a canal. The board of review, as I said, estimated the cost to be justified at $160,000,000. But this proposed project will not cost $160,000,000. It figures down to $143,000,000. The right-of-way, of course, is to be furnished by the State, and the State has furnished that right-of-way. I will come to that point in a moment Gentlemen, what higher authority could be called upon and what more com- plete study and investigation could be made of any project than has been made of this project? Six years has been spent on it by engineers, and finally the culmination and the accumulation and the coordination of all the work which has been done was submitted to the board of review, which reported to the President and recommended this project as being thoroughly justified, and that it ought to be undertaken. What higher authority could we have? Mr. Noslms. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. FLECHEa. I yield. Mr. Nosus. The Senator several times has mentioned that a sea-level canal would cost less than a lock canal. While I do not know that it is material to this discussion whether the canal shall be a lock canal or a sea-level canal, I am, however, very curious to know in the first place why the Senator makes that statement. Secondly, in reaching the conclusion, as some of the boards did, that the canal ought to be a lock canal, how high did they decide that the locks are to be, and where will they get the water to supply the locks; and if the canal is made a sea-level canal, how much deeper will they have to make such a canal than they would have to make it if it were a lock canal? Mr. FLtrcz. My understanding is, Mr. President-I am not an expert engi- neer-that the depth will be the same, 30 feet in either case, a lock canal or a sea-level canal. I think that was the estimate made as to the depth of either canal. The first board of survey, the special board of survey of the Army engineers, considered three locks in the canal. The P. W. A. engineers con- sidered two locks. Mr. Nosas. If the sea-level canal and the lock canal are to be of the same depth, what is the necessity for any locks? Mr. FLtrcHss There is usually a choice between the two types. The decision is determined by many factors. The final decision in this case is for a sea-level canal Mr. Noasms. I cannot understand that yet. As I said, it may not be material in considering this subject, because we are not passing on the question of whether it should be a lock canal or a sea-level canal. I know, however, that when we built the Panama Canal there was great controversy, which was national in its scope, as to whether the canal should be a lock canal or a sea- level canal, and President Roosevelt-Roosevelt the First-appointed an eminent corps of engineers, some of them foreigners, some of the greatest engineers in the world, to study that question and to report to him. I am speaking entirely from memory now, but as I remember, that board of engineers recommended, and I believe unanimously, though there may have been a dissenting vote, that the canal should be a sea-level canal. President Roosevelt set aside their recommendations entirely and decided on a lock canal. Some other engineers had recommended that the canal be a lock canal, although they were in the minority. We built a lock canal. One of the greatest arguments against a sea-level canal was the enormous additional cost that would be made necessary by a sea-level canal. I cannot understand how a sea-level canal can be built for less money than a lock canal can be built, and I cannot understand why any locks are necessary unless the intervening ground between the ocean and the Gulf is so high that the cost of digging a canal at sea level would be prohibitive. Mr. FLTrcHEm I will say to the Senator from Nebraska that most of this route is practically level. There is 75 miles of cutting. I think the highest elevation would be about 70 feet. Mr. Noals. That is one of the things I wanted to find out. Of course, if we have a lock canal, then the water must be supplied from a river or some other place that is higher than sea level. Mr. FLzrc aa. I read further from the report of the board of review: "The board of review, after further investigation, is of the opinion that these conditions are not controlling, and for the following additional reasons, prefers the sea-level canal: