386 DOCUMENTARY HISTORY OF THE FLORIDA CANAL

 that can be established. We do not believe this to be the case. In every report
 on this subject since the Civil War, the definite route recommended has been the
 Okeechobee-Caloosahatchee, or southern route."
 Note they endorse the cross-State canal
 Mr. Bacm. What does the Army engineers report find?
 Mr. SuBas. I will come to that directly. I will not overlook that.
 Now, there was another cross-State canal proposed, running from Tampa
 and going out across to Fort Pierce. In other words, apparently we were all
 for a cross-State canal until the engineers selected by the President decided
 that a cross-State canal should run from Jacksonville and should come out at
 Yankeetown. Mr. Chairman, I have numerous endorsements of the canal from
 different parts of south Florida, but I will not burden the record with them.
 I have here a map which shows that most of the opposition to the cross-State
 canal outside of Florida has come from the Atlantic coast and from that section
 of the country where there are no rivers and harbors.
 Mr. THanusoN. I do not want to break into the sequence of your statement,
 but at some time in your remarks will you explain the length, depth, and cost
 of the canal, the possible tonnage, and the receipts that will be derived from
 that tonnage?
 Mr. BAcoN. Will it be a toll canal?
 Mr. S as. It cannot be under the law.

 THE POLITICAL ASPECT OF THE CANAL PROJEOW
 At this point, Mr. Chairman, may I say to the committee, and I hope my
 remarks will not be misunderstood, during the years I have been in Congress
 I have supported all measures from a national viewpoint I will not question
 the motives of those who are now opposing me, but I have gone through many
 of these fights. I went through the Cape Cod Canal fight, and I am sometimes
 wondering why it is that some of my colleagues who are now bitterly fighting
 me were so anxious and willing to accept support in the Cape Cod fight.
 Mr. BAcoN. Please do not look at me, Mr. Congressman, because I voted
 against the Cape Cod CanaL
 Mr. 8&masn I have never in my life indulged in any criticism of my colleagues.
 I have never reflected upon any of my colleagues since I have been in Con-
 gress, but I am giving you the facts. There was then no hue and cry raised
 about the waste of money. The same fight was put up against the Cape Cod
 Canal, but in that case Congress appropriated $27,000,000 for the completion of
 13% miles of canal and $11,730,000 for the old canal and outstanding bonds.
 Whether that was done wisely or unwisely, it was done, and at the same rate
 of expenditure per mile you could spend six or seven hundred million dollars on
 the Florida cross-State canal, and it would not cost any more in proportion to
 the mileage than the Cape Cod Canal cost. I have voted for the Great Lakes
 improvements. As a mater of fact, we have not asked very much for Florida
 Improvements. Florida has contributed dollar for dollar to meet the appropria-
 tions that the Government has made for our harbors beginning with Miami
 Harbor. I recall that shortly after I came to Congress, Miami spent more than
 the Government spent on improvements; I know that West Palm Beach built
 their own harbor without cost to the Government, and I know that Fort Pierce
 provided its harbor, and Port Everglades did not cost the Government a penny.
 Now, I voted for the Bell Gate improvements and for the Albany improvements;
 yet, like a voice out of the wilderness, there comes a cry from a statesman, who
 is able, capable, and forceful, at one end of the legislative branch of the Govern-
 ment, and at the other end of the legislative branch of the Government we hear
 the echo of his colleague from Michigan trying to save 80 percent of my friends
 in Florida from their madness by stopping the construction of the Florida cross-
 State canaL
 Of course, that is their privilege; but I differ with them, and I do have a fight
 to make against any propaganda which is misleading and which is not correct,
 or Information which was given to them by someone with a motive to deceive
 them. I hope that I shall never be led into the same sort of attack on projects
 in the districts of my colleagues. Of course, my colleague from New York, my
 colleague from Michigan, and my colleagues from the other States have the
 right to save the people of Florida from their madness if they please to do so,
 but I appeal to them to base the fight on facts and not error. I do not want
 to make the canal political at all. I have never seen a political issue on
Improvements raised until during the last 2 years. This should not be a politi-