DOCUMENTARY HISTORY OF THE FLORIDA CANAL


405


p. W. A. is limited. It left but one official agency concerned with the canal
This was the President's own board of review, which recommended a sea-level
canal
 It was then too late to include the canal in the rivers and harbors bill for the
fiscal year of 193586, but along came Congress and handed the President
$4,800,000,000 to do with about as he pleased, to set up the Works Progress
Administration.
 W. P. A. projects do not have to be self-liquidating. So the President handed
 the Corps of Engineers $5,000,000 and told them to go to it. They went to it.
 With the original $5,000,000 and two additional allotments of $200,000 each they
 have cleared the entire right-of-way, built a village for the workers to live in
and necessary buildings for administration headquarters, built the piers for the
first of the numerous bridges that will span the canal, and set 4,000 men at work
starting the actual digging, a little south of Ocala.
 Incidentally, before the President allotted the first $5,000,000 for the canal he
called the entire Florida delegation in Congress to the White House-the two
Senators and the five Representatives. He asked each individually, in the pres-
ence of the others, if he was whole-heartedly in favor of the project, and each
answered in the affirmative.
 The President signed the Executive order allotting $5,000,000 to the canal on
 the afternoon of August 28, 1935. That date is perhaps not important, except
 that it explodes the myth that there was some relation between the starting of
 the canal and the accident to the steamer Diie. The Diaie was blown upon a
 reef near the eastern entrance to the Florida Straits, and for a while her 350
 passengers were in peril. Opponents of the canal have tried to make it appear
 that the canal allotment was made in hysterical haste as a result of the Diiee
 affair. That might be more plausible if it were not for the fact that the Disie
 grounded at midnight on September 2, more than 5 days after the canal order
 had been signed!
 OPPOSITION SPRANG UP AT STAWr OF CONSThUIrlON

 Up to the time when work on the canal actually began, no serious opposition
 to it had publicly developed anywhere in or out of Florida. As soon as work
 started a flood of criticism was let loose. Some of the opposition is so obviously
 inspired by partisan political motives that it need not be considered too seriously.
 Some of it merits examination as to its sources and the facts.
 The opposition voiced since work began on September 19, 1935, is on three
 main grounds.
 1. That a sea-level canal will drain the fresh water out of the soil of Florida
 and so ruin agriculture.
 2. That the infiltration of salt water from the sea will contaminate the fresh-
 water supplies of Florida cities and farms.
 3. That ships won't use the canal after it is built.
 The answer to the last objection is fairly simple. That is what was said about
 the Panama Canal, the Suez Canal, the Kiel Canal, the Corinth Canal, and every
 other canal before it was finished. "Ships won't use it" It is being said today
 about the proposed Nicaragua Canal. But the history of every canal that cuts
 down mileage and steaming time is that ships do use them in preference to the
 long route.
 It is not necessary to rely upon that experience, however, in this instance.
 Almost every steamship line running cargoes to and from Gulf ports is on record
 as enthusiastically favoring the construction of the Florida Canal, and these
 expressions were made in 1932 and 1933, when what was contemplated was a
 lock canal charging tolls. That a sea-level canal, taking less time to traverse,
 and a free canal, will not be even more welcome to shipping is hardly to be
 credited.
 The board of review made a careful study of the savings in operating costs
 to ships using the canal instead of going through the Florida Straits. Figur-
 ing an average time saving of between 20 and 23 hours, and basing their
 computations upon actual costs, the board calculated that tankers would save
 $800 and other freighters and combination freight and passenger ships over
 $525, each trip, by using the canal. And, as the head of one large shipping
 concern put it, "Any skipper of mine who doesn't take advantage of any chance
 to save $10 on a trip will get fired!"
 The real opposition is from the railroads. On general principles all rail-
 roads are opposed to any inland waterways. If the New York Central could