DOCUMENTARY HISTORY OF THE FLORIDA CANAL 351

 "'This would be quite an item, and if the canal were free of tolls no doubt
a large number of vessels would use the canaL'
 "From the Newtex Steamship Corporation, pier 23, North River, New York
City, under date of May 23, 1933, signed by D. A. Moloney, president:
 "'In the coastwise trade, due to the keen competition and the low freight
rates, it would be necessary to either have a free canal, or at the most a
nominal charge per net ton, not to exceed say, 5 cents per net ton for one
transit of the canal. This can be readily seen, when I tell you that the current
revenue on cargo carried in this coastwise trade does not exceed $5 per ton,
for a voyage of approximately 2,000 miles; and standard commodities such
as flour, rice, paper, etc., are carried 2,000 miles for an average of $3 to $3.50
per ton.
 "'It would, therefore, appear that it would be an encouragement to coastwise
shipping if the canal were operated as a toll-free proposition.'
 "From the Kellogg Steamship Corporation, 17 Battery Place, New York City,
under date of May 20, 1933, signed by R. A. Murphy, treasurer:
 "'We are very much interested in the proposed trans-Florida ship canal out-
lined in your letter of May 9, 1933, and the enclosed map of one of the sug-
gested locations.
 'As we see it, this canal would make possible a saving for our vessels of
about 1 day's steaming time in each direction between Atlantic and Gulf ports.
Our vessels do not operate regularly in this trade, but have been making a
substantial number of voyages a year, which would benefit from the proposed
canal.
 "'In our opinion, the possible saving, the value of which varies with existing
conditions, is not sufficient to warrant the imposition of tolls. We would,
therefore, endorse the project if the canal be made toll free after completion.'
 "That such testimony cannot safely be, and is not, used as a guide to the
 economic justification of such a project is clearly stated by the Chief of Engi-
 neers as follows: I quote from exhibit F-la, which has been introduced into
 the record.
 "'You refer to my appearance before the subcommittee of the Committee on
 Commerce on January 17, in which certain questions were asked with respect
 to the replies received from shipping concerns to a questionnaire sent out by
 the special board of this Department in connection with their investigation,
 and asked if these letters were used to establish the economic justification of
 the project, and further as to the usual factors which are studied in deter-
 mining economic justification. This Department has not stated that the replies
 to these questionnaires represented the economic justification for the canal
 project, nor are such letters generally used for the establishment of economic
 justification. The special board of Army engineers made an extensive economic
 survey, and was aided in the preparation of its report, by an independent survey
 undertaken by the Department of Commerce at the request of the Chief of
 Engineers. The determinations of the special board with respect to the eco-
 nomic benefits of the project were based in large part on these surveys. The
 letters to which you refer are some of the replies to questionnaires addressed
 by the special board to shipping concerns, so that it might be informed as to
 their opinions with respect to the effect of the project on the individual interests
 of the companies concerned. In determining the economic justification of a
 proposed river and harbor improvement, the investigating officers ascertain the
 definite savings in time and distance which will be made available to navigation
 without increased hazards as a result of the improvement in question. These
 savings in time and distance converted into monetary savings and such other
 incidental benefits as clearly accrue to water-borne commerce and the general
 public interest, such as a reduction in the hazards of navigation, form the
 basis for the determination of the economic justification of a project. The
 views of navigation and commercial interests as to the effect which the proposed
 improvement may have on their operations are an aid to the Board in weighing
 the public value of the savings and benefits as determined by the Board.' "
 "Likewise the statement of Prof. Emory Johnsbn, Special Commissioner for
 the Panama Canal. I quote from a letter from Professor Johnson to Senator
 Fletcher, under date of February 8, 1935 [reading] :
 "'As to the methods to be followed in deciding what use will be made of
 a proposed canal, the only way to do is to do what was done in estimating
 the probable traffic of the Panama Canal and what was done by those who
 measured the tonnage of shipping that would use a trans-Florida canal, 1. e.,
 to make up a record of actual vessel movements for a year over routes for