DOCUMENTARY HISTORY OF THE FLORIDA CANAL 355

collateral benefits exceeding $6,000,000. Our report furnished Federal Engineer
Department in 1931. Tampa, Orlando, Fort Pierce, and other Florida cities have
previously endorsed project, provided route would run through their back yards.
Certain shipping companies who have not definitely endorsed project and some
who have opposed it route their ships through Kiel Canal, cutting Jutland
Peninsula between Baltic and North Seas, in Europe, although Kiel Canal less
capacious than proposed Florida canal Colonel Shutts' opinion, quoted by
Senator Vandenberg, south Florida may become another great American desert,
completely refuted by special board of engineers and geologists employed by
Government, and also by letters Florida State geologist. Ample economic justi-
ficati6n exists for this project as regular river-harbor project under formulas
heretofore used in justifying such projects.
 GILBama A. YOUNGBEIG.

 WAX DEPARTMENT APPROPRIATIONS

 The Senate resumed the consideration of the bill (H. R. 11035) making
appropriations for the military and nonmilitary activities of the War Depart-
ment for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1937, and for other purposes.
 The PsmIDINo OrrIcE. The question is on agreeing to the amendment offered
by the Senator from Florida [Mr. Fletcher].
 Mr. CoPxLAND. Mr. President, may I ask if there are other Senators who wish
to discuss the amendment? If not, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
 The PBR~EsID OFrICEa (Mr. George in the chair). The clerk will call the
roll.
 The Chief Clerk called the roll, and the following Senators answered to their
names:
 Adams, Austin, Bachman, Bailey, Barkley, Benson, Bilbo, Black, Bone, Borah,
Brown, Bulkley, Bulow, Burke, Byrd, Byrnes, Capper, Caraway, Carey, Clark,
Connally, Copeland, Costigan, Couzens, Davis, Donahey, Duffy, Fletcher, Frazier,
George, Gerry, Gibson, Glass, Guffey, Hale, Harrison, Hatch, Hayden, Holt,
Johnson, Keyes, King, La Follette, Lewis, Logan, Lonergan, McAdoo, McGill,
McKellar, McNary, Maloney, Metcalf, Minton, Moore, Murphy, Murray, Neely,
Norbeck, Norris, Overton, Pittman, Pope, Radcliffe, Reynolds, Robinson, Russell,
Schwellenbach, Sheppard, Shipstead, Smith, Steiwer, Thomas of Utah, Town-
send, Vandenberg, Van Nuys, Wagner, Walsh, Wheeler, and White.
 Mr. LEwIs. I reannounce the absence of certain Senators and the causes
therefore as given on a previous roll call.
 The PRESIDING OFFICEL Seventy-nine Senators have answered to their names.
A quorum is present. The question is on agreeing to the amendment of the
Senator from Florida [Mr. Fletcher].
 Mr. COPL&NAD. On that question I ask for the yeas and nays.
 The yeas and nays were ordered.
 Mr. VANDmNBme. Mr. President, I wish to make but a brief observation before
 the vote is taken. There are three minor projects attached to the amendment
 which have not been discussed and which are of relatively minor concern.
 There is an ample way for those three lesser projects to be cared for in the
 course of the session. On the one hand, they could be cared for, as a matter
 of fact, by a continuing Executive order and could be completed out of emer-
 gency funds. On the other hand, they could be cared for by the method recom-
 mended in the House committee report which passed specifically upon them.
 The House committee report recognized the fact that the Sardis Reservoir
 and the Bluestone Reservoir have been favorably recommended by the Board of
 Rivers and Harbors Engineers, but the House committee insisted, and I am
 quoting now from their report, that-
 "If for no other reason, the committee feels that the total ultimate cost
 involved is too great for it to recommend an appropriation for further prosecu-
 tion of work upon such projects until they have run the usual gantlet of scrutiny
 by the Corps of Engineers, the legislative committees having Jurisdiction of such
 matters, and the legislative bodies themselves."
 The House committee then proceeded to say:
 "The committee's action does not mean in any sense that these five unauthor-
 ized projects are to be abandoned. Two of them, as has been previously stated,
 already have been favorably recommended by the Chief of Engineers. It is
 entirely possible that all will be. There would seem to be ample time for the
 appropriate legislative committees to study the projects in order that the House
 may at least have the views of such committees before being called upon for the