Evening star., 1941-06-20
Calls for Defeat
Of Seowoy Plan
Writer Objects to Proposal for
St. Lawrence Development
Of No Benefit to the u. S.

To the Editor OF The Star:
There are several aspects Of President
Roosevelts recently proposed plan for
the development Of power and the con-
struction Of a seaway leading to and from
the Great Lakes at the international
Rapids on the st. Lawrence River that
imperatively demand the earnest atten-
ton of every citizen Of the United States.
Some years ago when the project was
embodied in treaty between the United
States and Canada, 1t was exhaustively
debated in the Senate and definitely and
decisively rejected as not in the interest
of the United States.
Any plan for joint action between the
United States and another country
undoubtedly should be in treaty form
and should require for ratification a
thirds vote in the Senate
1t now is proposed, however, to embody
this ST. Lawrence project joint under
taking with Canada, in so-called
agreement" which may be ratified by
a mere majority in the Senate and the
House.
Time after time, and most emphatical-
ly, the construction of the proposed sea-
way has been condemned as economically
unsound, a colossal waste OF public
funds, with no benefit to the United
States. On the contrary, as was plainly
shown in the Senate debates, it would
result in great injury to established
Transportation systems in the United
States, destruction of property values IN
ports along the Atlantic seaboard, the
Great Lakes and the Gulf of Mexico.
For a considerable part of the year ice
would render the seaway unusable. In
addition to the high cost of the work
In the st. Lawrence, it would be neces-
sary to eXpend other large sums in deep
ening the channels and harbors in the
Great Lakes.
Again, if completed, foreign tramp
ships would have almost exclusive use
of the st. Lawrence Seaway" and allen
tramp steamers would dump cheaply
produced commodities on the Great
Lakes market and mo rate route for
profitable trade between American ports
would be offered by" such seaway.
The power development is urged as
defense measure, a plausible but utterly
untenable argument as 1t is agreed, even
by the proponents of this phase, that no
power would be available before le45.
If more power is really needed for our
defense it could be created much more
~,
nomica!ly, by the erection OF steam
plants at, or near where the power
would be needed. Or it easily could be
provided by putting into effect plans
already made for restoring the beauty
of Niagara Falls and providing for a
greater diversion of water for power
purposes, which is perfectly feasible,
and which would produce on the Amer
ican and Canadian sides combined
total Of 253,00O horsepower, or over
500, 900 900 kilowatt hours per year. and
this at a cost of not more than per
cent of the total cost of the st. Law
renee project. Again it is urged that the
project would give to the people OF
Northern New York more power, and
result in a great industrial deVelopment
in the northern part of the State.
Granted it does, who is going to pay
for it? The answer is-the taxpayers OF
the Nation from the Atlantic to the
Pacific, from Vermont to Arizona. 1t
will be the taxpayers all over the coun-
try who must dig down into their pock-
cts to help pay for the light and power
bills of the people in Northern New
York.
the project is without merit as
defense measure, and even though 1t
had merit in other respects why under
take so costly an enterprise at this time
when the people will be subjected to
such heavy burdens Of taxation for the
national defense, and which will be
almost confscatory should we be unfor-
tunately drawn actively into the war?
If the Congress is faithful to the best
interests of the people and the Nation
this project will be voted down unani-
mously.
MAI. ALEXANDER SIDNEY LAN1ER.