372 DOCUMENTARY HISTORY OF THE FLORIDA CANAL

 leans and back. Naturally he would get more mileage for his ship, having
 made this trip, and that man naturally would be against shortening of the
 distance of transportation from New York City, we will say, to New Orleans.
 That is only to be expected. However, the man that operates his ship himself
 naturally wants to see this saving in coal, this saving in operating expense, and
 this shortened mileage obtained.

 UTILIZATION o CANAL
 So when this canal is opened I believe that 99 percent of the shipping inter-
 eats that now ply the lower Atlantic and the Gulf of Mexico will utilize this
 canal. It has been estimated by careful surveys-surveys by the Department
 of Commerce and specially employed engineers-that 10,000 ships per year will
 go through the canal carrying the usual tonnage carried by boats in the Gulf
 of Mexico and the lower Atlantic. You can very well see that within 32 years
 the canal would liquidate its cost of construction, at a 4-percent bond, and pay
 for the cost of operation.
 Another great reason why it should be completed is because of the storms
 that boats run into in going around the peninsula of Florida. We had last
 year some disasters down there from storms. The boats will cut through this
 canal and absolutely eliminate any serious danger from storms. The storm
 insurance to the boat owner will be lessened. His premium will be smaller;
 casualties will be practically eliminated, and citizens traveling from every State
 in the Union will be benefited and protected by it.
 Another thing: Suppose you wanted to empty your fighting craft from the
 Atlantic to the Gulf of Mexico, or vice versa, in time of war. The next trouble we
 have that is serious is going to come from south of us. You have got here an outlet
 that will put every one of your fighting vessels from the Atlantic to the Gulf of
 Mexico, or vice versa, in only a few hours. You have there a defense that can-
 not be paralleled anywhere else in the United States. If this canal is com-
 pleted-and it will be-your Navy will forever be secure. It could never be
 captured. Our Navy sometime may have to retreat into the Gulf of Mexico
 from the Pacific Ocean through the Panama Canal or from the Atlantic Ocean
 through the Florida Canal. You have enough natural resources to feed your
 Navy and to feed your people in the Mississippi Valley and to maintain and
 rebuild your Navy there. As a national-defense feature alone, it warrants a
 $143,000,000 expenditure. It will not require that much. They have already
 spent about 5% millions on it. It probably will be completed for $125,000,000.
 Now, gentlemen, when we are spending these moneys as we have been-and
 I feel gravely the responsibility of it, the indebtedness that we are incurring
 as an absolute condition of necessity, brought on by conditions that this present
 administration inherited-as we are spending these moneys, undoubtedly they
 should be spent on projects which are of lasting improvement to the American
 people. And this one is a lasting improvement to the American people. Eighty
 percent of the money that has gone in the project and will go to complete this
 canal goes directly and indirectly into the hands of labor.
 I do not ee what better project could be developed. The Chief of Engineers
 of the Army has repeatedly told me that as a straight Army engineering project
 alone, as a river and harbor project alone, it justifies an expenditure of over
 $100,000,000. If we are going to develop our national waterways, why not put
 this main link in there that will link up the Gulf commerce with the Atlantic
 commerce, and thereby enhance the value of every dollar we have expended in
 the Missisippi Valley and on the Atlantic coast?
 We have developed an intercoastal waterway from Boston to Jacksonville,
 Fla., and we have jumped right across and on the other side of Florida we
 have developed it on to the Rio Grande River. Now, why not put in this further
 link there? I cannot believe that this committee will permit the matter to be
 tied up here and the money that you have already put in thrown away.
 Do you think Congress is going to appropriate money to fill up that 16-mile
 ditch that the Army engineers have dug there? The Army engineers have a
 canal there today approximately 16 miles long and 30 feet deep. You can land
 an airplane in it and it is the best landing field you ever saw-the bottom of that
 canal. They have it in some places down almost to sea level. Now, then, are
 we going to be an unwise Congress and go there and fill up the hole that we
 have already dug, or are we going to do what the engineers say is prudent,
 what the Department of Commerce says is prudent, and what the shipping com-
 panies that are not selfish say is prudent-and go on and complete it? Are we
going to help the east coast of the United States all the way down from Boston