the way of activity on the part of the State of New Jersey in cooperating with the Government in this enterprise.

The CHAIRMAN. We will soon have to close.

Mr. MOORE. How long will you give us?

The CHAIRMAN. We gave you an hour and you have already used an hour and a quarter.

Mr. MOORE. Can you give us 15 minutes?

The CHAIRMAN. Yes.

STATEMENT OF HON. FREDERICK W. DONNELLY, OF

TRENTON, N. J.

Mr. DONNELLY. Mr. Chairman, and gentlemen: We have been going up and down this coast for eight years carrying on this campaign of education. Arguments have been presented so favorably before, so many times before, and so many times by the business men along the Atlantic seaboard that the time is past, I think, for much more statistics or data pertaining to the advantages to the Atlantic seaboard cities and States. The first argument ever advanced in the interest of the intracoastal project, so far as New Jersey was concerned, was virtually after we had been satisfied as to the commercial possibilities and the economic results which would come from the project not only to the Eastern States and the Northern States, but to the States south. The battle ground of this whole project will be the State of New Jersey, and New Jersey has placed herself in a position to render service to the North and South in the establishment of a free waterway. I want to say, briefly, that some members of the House from various parts of the country wonder why we do not use the Delaware and Raritan Canal. For 30 years commissions, individuals, and business men have striven to find a way to relieve it from the control of the railroads to which it has been legitimately leased for 999 years and, briefly stated, chloroformed and put out of business except for the service they want to have it used for.

Mr. EDWARDS. Legitimately leased for an illegitimate purpose? Mr. DONNELLY. Yes. It is impracticable to improve that canal. The main line of the Pennsylvania Railroad goes under it at Trenton, and a 6-foot depth is the greatest depth that can be maintained. It is a nuisance to the city of Trenton and to many other cities. If you gentlemen have ever passed through my city, you will find that 16 streets had to be elevated to allow it to go through.

Now, as to the State's position in the matter of a ship canal. Four years ago the State enacted legislation and created a harbor commission, and to-day has a commission which has all of the waterways in the State of New Jersey under its jurisdiction, and the State pledged itself to buy a right of way over the route that was recommended by the Government engineers. That legislation was enacted four years ago, and New Jersey has stood ready for the past four years to present to the United States Government a strip of land through the farm lands of New Jersey which will not interefere with or obstruct any of the municipalities, but will perhaps give the municipalities a chance to grow in the years to come, all of which will involve an expense to the State of upward of a million dollars, in order to contribute his strip of land required.

It is interesting to note that of the 14,000,000 acres of soil on the Atlanti seaboard the reports of the Agricultural Department show

that in the State of New Jersey alone we have millions of acres of virgin soil that has never been developed for farming purposes. This canal goes right through that section. It is not sandy soil or dumps; it is back from the coast, and is good, rich soil.

Jersey City is making great preparations for terminal development on municipally owned water front to the extent of many millions of dollars. The city of Newark is planning to spend many millions. The city of Trenton, as you are well aware, is spending several million dollars for public docks that are being constructed. We are, therefore, in a position to receive the benefits from this intracoastal waterway, being on one of the 248 rivers along the Atlantic seaboard that enter into it. We are prepared, as I say, and I believe the time has now come when some action should be taken by the Congress of the United States.

The President of the United States is committed to this project, if I may be permitted to quote from his speech wherein he said that nature had contributed to this highway and the connecting links here and there where the waters could flow freely and where no man could have a monopoly.

The CHAIRMAN. I understand you to say that the State of New Jersey has already procured this right of way?

Mr. DONNELLY. It is surveyed, and the State is now in a financial position to present this land to the Government as soon as the Government shows a willingness to take it over.

The CHAIRMAN. Has the money been provided to pay for the right of way?

Mr. DONNELLY. There are ways provided by the Ways and Means Committee to turn this land over to the Government any time you say so.

The President, when governor of New Jersey, was the best waterway advocate in the State; he was the only governor who attended the meetings and made possible the gift of this strip of land to the Government, and in numerous speeches he has been very favorable to this project. The Secretary of War is committed to it. The Secretary of the Navy is committed to it. The Secretary of Commerce is committed to it. People all along the seaboard are committed to it. It is therefore useless to attempt to go any further at the present time, but we in New Jersey feel that some recognition should be made of this gift, and we think the time has arrived when some action should be taken to meet at least the steps we have taken.

Mr. MOORE. While there are many more representatives from the States along the line of the Atlantic intracoastal waterway, I will only ask two other gentlemen to address you for five minutes each. I will first call on Commodore Frank Fessenden Crane, of Massachusetts.

The CHAIRMAN. We shall be very glad to hear Mr. Crane.

STATEMENT OF MR. FRANK FESSENDEN CRANE, OF MASSA

CHUSETTS.

Mr. CRANE. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, I am vice president of the Atlantic Deeper Waterways Association for Massachusetts, and I want to speak very briefly about Massachusetts's claim to recognition in this project. The State of Massachusetts has paid into the

United States Government annually about $35,000,000. We have received for the rivers and harbors of that State in that time about $26,000,000. I wish to say a few words about the commercial end of the proposition, for Massachusetts is largely interested in the commercial end.

The CHAIRMAN. You state that the State of Massachusetts has paid how much?

Mr. CRANE. Annually, about $35,000,000.

The CHAIRMAN. Paid in what?

Mr. CRANE. In duties.

The CHAIRMAN. You do not mean that the State has paid any of that amount?

Mr. CRANE. I mean to say that you have received from the State of Massachusetts that amount.

The CHAIRMAN. The Government has received?

Mr. CRANE. Yes, sir; the Government has received that amount. The CHAIRMAN. Through the ports which happen to be in that State?

Mr. CRANE. Yes, sir; through the port of Boston, principally. There are 25,000,000 tons of freight which come around the cape annually, largely from southern ports to the port of Boston. The reason we are intensely interested in this project is that in 10 years we have lost by wrecks between Narragansett Bay and Cape Cod, largely, about $40,000,000 of property and over 2,000 lives-between Narragansett Bay and Boston Harbor. The canal which we are intensely interested in is not the Cape Cod Canal, because the Cape Cod Canal is a private enterprise, a toll canal. The canal in which the State of Massachusetts in intensely interested is the Atlantic deeper waterways route, as surveyed by the United States Engineers, a free canal to every man, rich or poor, in our State.

Mr. TREADWAY. Please state briefly where that canal will run. Mr. CRANE. It is expected to start at Narragansett Bay, the largest bay on the North Atlantic seaboard, having an area of over 300 square miles and anchorage of 200 square miles, capable of holding the entire Navy of the United States, and go to Taunton River. The people of that section are intensely interested in this proposition, and you can very easily see the reason for it. To ship a bale of cotton to Fall River by railroad costs $4.40 and by water 80 cents. We are spending in New England $100,000,000. The cotton costs about $30,000,000 in the South, and $70,000,000 is expended in the freight on it. We are a manufacturing country, and we have to bring all the raw material in and ship the manufactured products out. We do not raise the raw material. Boston Harbor has a very nice anchorage for a great many vessels, but there are very few places for manufacturing sites, and this canal and approaches will afford places for a great many sites and increase our opportunities very greatly. It would connect the largest coaling station in the United States, on the north Atlantic seaboard at Narragansett Bay, with the largest naval magazine on the Atlantic seaboard, at Hingham, and it would connect the navy yard at Boston and the Fore River shipbuilding plant at Quincy with the war college and torpedo station at Narragansett Bay.

It may be said right here, if you are going to take the item of preparedness into consideration at all, and speaking with the innate

modesty of the true Bostonian, that greater Boston has the largest and greatest purchasing community, greater than any other section of the United States except, perhaps, a small section of the Bronx, in New York; that one-third of the savings are in the savings banks of greater Boston; that we have more men in that section earning $2.50 a day and less men earning $1.50 a day than any other section of the known world; and where would the Atlantic seaboard be liable to attack except, we will say, take the section from New York to Boston-350 miles-and if you are going to consider that proposition, I wish you would give us the advantage of your thought for our commercial interests and also our protection. I thank you, gentlemen.

Mr. MOORE. I shall ask that the hearing be closed with a fiveminute talk by Mr. Wilfred H. Schoff, secretary of the Atlantic Deeper Waterways Association, who will speak on the general subject.

The CHAIRMAN. We shall be glad to hear Mr. Schoff.

STATEMENT OF MR. WILFRED H. SCHOFF, SECRETARY, PENNSYLVANIA.

Mr. SCHOFF. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, something has been said already about municipal terminals under construction, and I want to show what is being done by the city of Philadelphia. There have been constructed by the city two new municipal piers, and in a loan bill now pending before the city council there is an item for the improvement of the water front, and those are parts of a project which will run to about $25,000,000, to the construction of which the city is committed, which will be taken up and completed as time permits and funds are made available. That is the work of one city in providing water terminal facilities, and it occurred to me that it would be fair to compare the $25,000,000 project of the city of Philadelphia with the whole project as the engineers have surveyed and recommended it. The southern section of the Atlantic intracoastal waterway as the Army engineers have it is estimated to cost only $14,400,000. That is to provide a depth of 7 feet between Beaufort Inlet, N. C., and St. Johns River, in Florida. Another section of the waterway, as far as the engineers have recommended it, is $33,400,000 to provide 12-foot navigation between Long Island Sound and Beaufort Inlet, N. C. It seems to me as if that project, which makes a total of less than $50,000,000, was not an excessive request for the gentlemen to present to Congress in the hope of receiving your favorable consideration when the city of Philadelphia is committed to a project for its own local improvement costing one-half that

amount.

There is only one other thought that has been in the minds of the directors of our association that I should like to mention here. It has been suggested that new projects may not be considered at the present juncture. The surveys made by the engineers were made under authority of an item in a recent river and harbor bill which provided for a continuous inland waterway between certain points and the surveys reported were for one continuous waterway project. So we feel that we are not coming before you advocating a new project when you take up one single link in what is to be a whole

continuous chain. As Congress has already recognized this project to the extent it has, taking over one of the links of the chain and providing liberally for its improvement, we feel that we are not coming before you with a new project this year, hoping that we may be favored with consideration for another link.

The CHAIRMAN. It is a new project. It may not be a new project from your standpoint, but from ours it is a new project. I do not say that we will not take up new projects, for, of course, I do not know what the committee will do.

Mr. SCHOFF. We do not wish to argue with you, but simply to express the thought in our minds that it is a part of the same project, as you understand.

The CHAIRMAN. The Chesapeake Bay part was favorably considered at one time, but not the whole project; that is divided into many links, some of which have not been adopted.

Mr. SCHOFF. Mr. Chairman, with your permission I should like to file with the stenographer this summary of the Atlantic intracoastal waterway project as a whole, copies of which will be supplied to each member of the committee. We have attempted to put it in as brief form as possible and will ask your kindly consideration of it.

Mr. MOORE. I was going to ask Mr. Murray Hulbert, a new Member of Congress from the State of New York, who I understand is likely to be very closely associated with your committee, to say a few words, in view of the fact that Mr. William S. Bennet, who was to have spoken for the New York delegates, is not here. I do not think that I am doing anything indelicate in asking you to hear Mr. Hulbert.

Mr. HULBERT. Having been designated by the Democratic caucus as a prospective member of this committee, I will remain silent, except that I should like to say that Mr. Bennet, my colleague from New York, who is vice president of the Atlantic Deeper Waterways Association and who intended to be here this morning, was unexpectedly called to New York yesterday, and I will ask at a later time that he may come before the committee and present his views.

The CHAIRMAN. We shall be pleased to hear Mr. Bennet.

Mr. HUMPHREYS of Mississippi. I will preface my remarks by saying that I am in entire accord with this project. More by way of suggestion than otherwise, I want to call attention to one thing, which, in my opinion, has militated against sentiment in favor of this canal, and that is this map [indicating]. I do not know whether you had this map prepared or not, but whoever did made a very serious mistake. That map has done a great deal to create a sentiment against this canal. It is misleading to those who do not go into the details of this project. Here [indicating] you have a blue line from Boston running down to the Mexican border. That map for a number of years hung in the Democratic cloakroom, and I suppose a similar one hung in the Republican cloakroom. The average citizen of the country, looking at that map, comes to the conclusion that you want to build a waterway from Boston all the way down here [indicating], and, without making an investigation, he estimates that it is going to cost many millions of dollars, and that it is altogether a ridiculous undertaking. Of course, as you know, as a matter of fact, it is just a few links, as one of the speakers suggested, to connect waterways already existing. So, I think, it would