438 DOCUMENTARY HISTORY OF THE FLORIDA CANAL

 nished, and the data on file, and then make report to the President. I submit
 that it is important to limit the time, because unless provision is made for
 carrying on the projects the work on the canal and on the tidewater develop-
 ment in Maine will have to cease on or about July 1.
 The President laid the projects before Congress because he did not have
 sufficient funds with which to proceed with them under the act of 1935. Having
 himself initiated them, having allotted funds for them, and having started the
 work, he submitted the projects to Congress.
 On the Florida project the Government has spent $5,400,000. The right-of-way
 for the canal has been provided by the six counties through which it will run.
 This has been done at a cost of $1,500,000. The work will have to be discon-
 tinued and 5,000 or 6,000 people employed there will be dismissed and have to
 go on the relief rolls unless some arrangement is made whereby the work may
 be continued. The work will stop by July 1 or about that time unless some-
 thing is done by Congress in the meantime. The President has placed the
 matter squarely before Congress with this in view.
 Of course, I can conceive that it would be somewhat pleasing to the oppo-
 nents of the administration, to those who wish to claim some shortcomings or
 some abuse of authority or some waste inexcusable in its nature, if they could
 picture an abandonment of these projects and perhaps exhibit photographs of
 weeds growing where the work had started and an utter failure of the projects
 themselves, to say nothing of the distress brought upon the people who were
 there employed.
 The Atlantic-Gulf canal project would give employment to 20,000 people for
 5 or 6 years. At the present time there are about 5,000 or 6,000 employed.
 Are they to be turned loose? Is this picture to be held up before the country?
 Is it to be said that here was a project undertaken by the President without
 sufficient authority and without sufficient funds and that it had to be aban-
 doned? Shall the people have wasted $11,00,000 of their funds which have been
 used in the purchase of a right-of-way for an abandoned canal? Is that the
 kind of picture which the proponents of the amendment propose to have sub-
 mitted to the country?
 That, of course, is aside from the main question. I speak particularly with
 reference to the Florida canal, leaving to the Senators from Maine, who are
 more familiar with the subject, all reference to the other provision in the
 amendment with reference to the Passamaquoddy project.
 With reference to the canal, the surveys were authorized by the River and
 Harbor Act of 1927 and again by the act of 1930. Since those acts were passed
 the Chief of Engineers has been engaged in the work of making surveys, esti-
 mates of cost, and his reports thereon. Some 5 or 6 years of time have been
 spent and expenditures of large sums of money have been made for the purpose
 of making the investigations, surveys, and studies, and ascertaining the data
 with reference to this project. Those data are all available. The board pro-
 vided for in the amendment can easily examine the reports which have already
 been accumulated during past years respecting this project, and I think they can
 do so readily within the time limit of July 20. The data are all on hand. It will
 not be necessary to do any field work. It will not be necessary to sink 117 wells,
 or more, for they have already been sunk. It will not be necessary to do over
 again the work which has been done. The reports on that work are all now-
 available.
 The fact is that the following examinations of and reports on this project have
 already been made by agencies of the Federal Government:
 "(a) War Department, Corps of Engineers: Complete physical and economic
 surveys by a special board of survey, under the direction of the Chief of Engi-
 neers, pursuant to the provisions of the River and Harbor Acts of 1927 and 1930.
 "(b) Federal Administration of Public Works: An examination of the project
 with a view to determining the justification of a loan for its construction, to be
 repaid out of tolls to be collected from shipping."
 It will be recalled that the application before the Public Works Administration
was for a loan suffcient to build the canal. The Public Works Administration
considered the application and made a thorough examination:
 "(c) A board of review, appointed by the President, and representing the
Corps of Engineers and the Administration of Public Works: An independent
study of the project and a review of the studies and reports of the special board
of survey of the Corps of Engineers and the Administration of Public Works."
 This board was composed of as able engineers as can be found in the country,
two of them river and harbor engineers, two of them P. W. A. engineers, the