Evening star., 1938-06-02
St. Lawrence Waterway.

In 1894, before New Deal fortunes rode
the rough seas of congressional insur-
gency, President Roosevelt suffered his
first major defeat in the Senate. His
treaty with Canada, looking to joint de-
velopment and use of the Great Lakes
st. Lawrence River basin, failed of rati-
fication. Stubborn opposition led by
Senators Wagner and Copeland of New
York and Senator Lewis of Illinois
thwarted the Administrations purpose.
Undiscouraged by that rebuff-possi-
bly, filled with revived hope by the sub
sequent disappearance from Congress of
seven senatorial opponents of the treaty
Secretary Hull has submitted new
pact to Ottawa. The 1884 plan evoked
almost as much antagonism in Canada as
1t encountered here. The main objec-
tions of our northern neighbors were two
fold. Ontario feared it would have to
bear disproportionate share of the
$40, 100000 cost. Quebec envisioned a
devastating diminution of the importance
of Montreal as an Atlantic port of entry.
There are no early indications that even
the "liberalized" plan just offered to the
Dominion will overcome the inhibitions
which previously dampened its ardor for
a waterway deal. Already it is suggested
across the border that the United States
suddenly awakened zeal for an agree
ment springs from Washington's anxiety
to accelerate Canada's enthusiasm for a
new trade agreement.
Old senatorial opponents of the plan
also manifest unabated displeasure, even
with the revamped form presented by
Secretary Hull. New York City still views
with alarm the prospect of losing its
prestige as the worlds leading port
through the detouring of tonnage to in
land harbors like Cleveland, Chicago and
Duluth. Illinois contends that the treaty
would permit diversion of only 1,50O cubic
feet, of water a second into the Chicago
Drainage Canal, a volume held to be
perilously inadequate. Mississippi Valley
Chicago's drainage needs, the Father of
Waters must receive far more water than
is projected, in order to fill proposed
e-foot channel.
Administration proponents argue that,
besides removing objections previously
raised by Canada, notably respecting
cost, the now proposed combination of
cheap power and the possibility of OBJ
tanning raw materials by water would lead
to the foundation of new cities in both
countries. Fixing our cost share at about
$225, 100000, Secretary Hull tells Canada
that his new offer would enable the
United States to proceed Immediately
with the International F,apids section
link in the deep waterway and the Incl
dental power development. Canada
could defer her part of the work, if neces-
sary until 1949, until her power needs
warranted 1t. Envisioned is a 5000 mile
27-foot channel for shipping, clear from
the head of Lake Superior to the Allan
tic, with eventual provision of additional
100000 hydroelectric horsepower and
a water route for 100000 tons of COM
merce at an estimated annual freight
saving of ss7,OO0,0OO.
The project deserves studious and dis
passionate consideration strictly on its
merits. Intelligent decision as to its de-
STABILITY is not promoted by such taunts
as Senator Copeland's description of the
seaway as IAN all-British canal" BY no
stretch of even the partisan imagination
Is that fair charge.