DOCUMENTARY HISTORY OF THE FLORIDA CANAL 337

in chambers of commerce and elsewhere, and probably here in Washington,
for aught I know to the contrary.
 Mr. CouzzNs. Mr. President, will the Senator yield further?
 Mr. FlzrCHER. I yield.
 Mr. CouzwEs. What is the attitude of the Committee on Commerce, which
usually passes first on appropriations of this kind?
 Mr. FLIwCHEB. With reference to what?
 Mr. CouzEN8. With reference to the project What is the attitude of the
Committee on Commerce with respect to the Florida project?
 Mr. FLETCHZE This project has not been before the Committee on Com-
merce. A subcommittee of that committee had a hearing on a resolution in-
volving the matter, but has not yet made its report The subcommittee will
report to the full committee.
 Mr. CouzENs. May I suggest that it might be a better program to put this
additional appropriation in a deficiency bill after this report shall have been
made, rather than to attempt to push it through prior to the time a senatorial
committee has passed upon the question?
 Mr. FLrTCHEL. I submit that a senatorial committee has nothing to do with
it; that the act of 1935 vested the authority and power in the President, and
the President is to consider matters which ordinarily a Senate committee would
consider as to their merits. The President has obtained information through
the Army engineers and the P. W. A. engineers and the special board of review
who have examined the project. That is the same information which would
be laid before a committee. It was not necessary to lay it before a committee.
It had to be presented to the President. The reports were made to the
President.
 With reference to the benefits, I invite attention to a comparison between the
benefits to be derived from this project and the benefits in relation to cost
of other river and harbor projects in the United States which have been
adopted by Congress.
 The benefits in relation to cost in this instance, taking only direct benefits
to shipping, stand at about 1 to 1.6. The ordinary ratio of cost to benefits of
river and harbor projects throughout the country is much less than this. This
project stands in the front rank of river and harbor projects in the country.
All things considered, the ratio of cost to benefits of this project will be higher
than that of any other project now in existence that I know of or of which we
have any record.
 That comparison is all covered in the hearings, and I shall not take the time
 to go into it. It appears at page 61 of the hearings before the subcommittee
where comparisons are made with various other projects, such as the Dela-
ware River to Philadelphia and Trenton, the New York-New Jersey channel,
the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal, the Beaver-Mahoning Canal. and the Cape
Cod Canal. In the three latter cases the ratio is as 1 to 1. In the case of
the Florida canal the ratio is 1 to 1.6, according to the figures given by the
experts who have examined the whole matter.
 Let me now take up the exhibits and maps on the wall. Some comment has
 been made rather facetiously about the map and what it is intended to show. I
 call attention to the fact that each and every ship located on the map is indi-
 cated by a red marker, placed there by the Department of Commerce. The red
 markers indicate the location of the ships on the 10th day of December 1932,
 at noon. The map shows the location of the ships on the seas at that hour, at
 noon on the 10th day of December 1932. The ships which would ordinarily
 use the canal are so indicated. The English Channel is shown, with ships
 coming from Holland, France, and Germany. On the other side of the map
 are shown the ships along the Atlantic coast, ships from New York and
 Baltimore.
 The actual location of ships at that hour on that day is shown with refer-
 ence to those ships which would use this canal. The entrance to the canal on
 the Gulf side and on the Atlantic side is shown. At noon on the 10th day of
 December 1932 the ships were actually located as shown on the map. There
 is no guesswork about it. That information is furnished from the records of
 the Commerce Department. Each red marker on the map represents an actual
 ship in its actual location at noon on the 10th day of December 1932. It was
 necessary to greatly magnify the size of the ships to make them appreciable on
 the map.
 About 900 ships are shown. An additional 100 or more could not be shown,
 because they were in portions of the world not covered by the map. Those