364 DOCUMENTARY HISTORY OF THE FLORIDA CANAL

 project, but does not take in some collateral factors, such as national defense,
 avoidance of natural hazards, and other items which might be considered.
 The Senator says shipping companies will not use the canaL He says they
 so state. That is an all-embracing statement. The fact is, only a few ship-
 ping companies have made statements to that effect in some communications;
 but the same writers on other occasions have taken the contrary view, and
 have so stated. Only a comparatively few shipping companies have said they
 would not use the canal. Not all the shipping companies have made such a
 statement, as could be Implied from the remarks of the Senator. This matter
 was discussed on the 17th of March.
 The Senator from Colorado speaks as if all the shipping companies will not
 use the canal at all. That is not the case. Only a few shipping companies have
 written letters to that effect, and they contradict themselves in other letters.
 The board of review, established by the President, estimated and recommended
 to the President that if the construction of the canal cost $160,000,000, the
 expenditure of that amount would be Justified. The cost is now fixed at $143,-
 000,000, and nobody knows as much about the project as the engineers of the
 War Department, the engineers of the P. W. A., and the board of review, which
 combined all the reports and all the data up to the time the recommendation
 was made. They made their report to the President recommending that the
 canal be constructed at a cost of $100,000,000. The cost was finally set at
 $143,000,000. No one has any right to name any other figure.
 I shall not go into all the details in connection with the canal; but, I will say,
 as bearing upon the question of its economic justification, that the engineers say
 it will create benefits to commerce of $7,500,000 a year.
 On the subject of approving the other three projects and not approving the
 Florida ship canal project, and the right of the Congress to do so, I will only say,
 as the Senator from Missouri [Mr. Clark] has well said, that the Atlantic to Gulf
 ship canal stands upon identically the same footing as the other three projects
 so far as their authorization is concerned.
 The authorization of the other three projects, which have been agreed to by
 the Senate, was the same authorization by reason of which the work was begun
 on the Florida ship canal, and the same recommendation to Congress was made
 by the same authority. If the other projects were authorized, the Florida ship
 canal project was authorized. There is no escape from that conclusion. The
 only difference is in the amendments involved.
 Mr. President, I decline to think that the Senate will tolerate discrimination
 and unfairness such as would obtain if the Florida ship canal project were
 rejected and the other three projects allowed to continue. The other projects
 stand upon the same footing as the Florida ship canal project. If they were
 authorized, the Florida ship canal project has been authorized and is authorized
 under the law. Concerning that I have no question whatever in my mind.
 My amendment would add the Atlantic-Gulf ship canal to the three projects
 the Senate has approved and would add $12,000,000 to the appropriation as
 recommended by the Secretary of War and the Chief of Engineers and included
 in the Budget estimate. The President has submitted all these projects to Con-
 gress with his recommendation. These projects were authorized in the same
 way and stand on the same basis. They were all legally authorized; all were
 surveyed by the Army engineers; and all are meritorious and should be treated
 alike.
 Mr. President, I ask that a letter bearing upon this subject which I have
 recently received from the Port and Waterway Survey of New York City be
 read at this time.
 The PaEMIsNT pro tempore. Without objection, the letter will be read.
 The legislative clerk read as follows:
 PORT AND WATERWAY SUBVET,
 New York Citv, March 18, 1936.
 Senator DUncAN U. FLTrCHUr,
 United States Senate, Washington, D. C.
 Mr DEAR SENATOa: This office followed very closely your effort to secure
an appropriation for the continuance of the work on the Florida ship canal.
 During the World War the railroads were unable to carry the transportation
burdens of the country and it was then generally conceded that as a matter
of national safety, the construction of strategic inland waterways should be
undertaken. France continued the construction of the Marseille canal system