Слике страница
PDF
ePub

WAGES IN THE UNITED STATES AND EUROPD

PROTECTIVE TARIFF BENEFITS Contrast the above with the wages paid in the United States.

American statesmen are all agreed that our first duty is to The protective-tariff system is a factor in supporting a higher the American people by maintaining their standards of living wage level here than exists elsewhere in the world. The higher from destruction through prevention of dumping in the markets purchasing power which naturally results is of great importance of our land of the manufactures and of agricultural commodito the farmers who dispose of 90 per cent of their production in ties produced by cheaper labor living under lower standards of the domestic market.

living abroad. In 1924, according to the United States Bureau of Labor re

Such importations tear down the prosperity and the wellport, the average daily wage in the United States was $5.60; in being of the United States. England, $2.60 per day; in Germany, $1.55 per day; in Belgium,

Protective tariff has increased American prosperity. Pro$1.29 per day; in France, $1.01 per day; and in Italy, 90 cents tective tariff has increased the domestic production of flax,

wool, sugar. Our domestic consumption is increasing faster per day. The farmers want the wage earners to have a high buying domestic market to himself the law of supply and demand will

than the population, If the American farmer could have his power. Imagine the condition of our farmers if the 90 per cent

run directly in his favor. of their annual production which is consumed within this coun

Removal or lessening the tariff on agricultural products would try were sold to wage earners who received only an average of 90 cents per day, as in Italy; or $1.01 per day, as in France ; lessened purchasing power, poorer schools, poorer homes, larger

be a death blow to our rural communities. It would result in or $1.29 per day, as in Belgium ; or $1.55 per day, as in Ger

burdens, and longer hours. many; or even $2.60 per day, as in England, which is less than

It is unthinkable that the great American people would aphalf the United States average wage scale as reported by the

prove such a policy. Labor Bureau.

It is inevitable that the failure to provide adequate protection How would our farmers fare under such conditions ?

against foreign imports will result in a lower standard of living

in the country than in the city. It follows that if the farmer's About 90 per cent of American agricultural production is protection shrinks the share of labor will shrink. The welfare directly affected by foreign competition. This is the reason the

of both of these classes is interdependent. There must be jobs American farmer is so vitally concerned with our tariff-protec- for the worker in order to give a profitable home market to the tion policy. This foreign competition affects the farmers in farmer. two ways-on the foreign market, where we export, or in the

Labor wants steady employment, increased real wages, better domestic markets into which we import.

conditions of living, and a fair scale of living costs. Wool and hides, for example, enter the United States from all The farmer wants fully employed labor and protection from parts of the world, and compete in the United States with foreign competition. domestic production. Producers of butter, onions, prunes, and

IMPORTS FOR CONSUMPTION hemp are just as much affected. The prices received for farm I insert in the RECORD a table showing imports for consumpproducts are determined in part by the volume and quality of tion of various agricultural commodities--included in II. R. the foreign production.

9357—in the United States, 1924, 1925, 1926, 1927: Imports for consumption of various agricultural commodities in the United States, 1924, 1985, 1926, 1927

FARMERS ARE INTERESTED IN PROTECTIVE TARIFF

[blocks in formation]
[ocr errors]

---do..

...do.

Do.

Do.

707 Milk and cream:
Cream.

Gallon... 4, 197, 528 $6, 141, 231 5, 171, 498 $7, 591, 025 5, 374, 131 $8,050, 912
Milk, n. e. s.

4, 843, 228 $7, 606, 206 Upward.
do...

5, 159, 883 818, 960 7, 366, 494 1, 225, 061 7,386, 203 Sour milk and buttermilk.

1, 245, 392 do..

4, 493, 067 32, 461

Do.

748, 168 8, 626 55, 639 17,002 25, 403 708 Condensed and evaporated

6, 852 99, 472

31, 095

Do.
milk in hermetically sealed
containers:
Unsweetened..

Pounds.. 1, 288, 664 142, 371 633, 490 66, 748 1,320, 561
Sweetened..

129, 227
4, 713, 948

2, 089, 342 176, 689 Do.
691, 387 3,987, 981
Whole-milk powder.

471, 565 343, 930 36, 263
---do..
735, 481

289, 741

24, 639 | Downward. * 155, 074 719, 614 Skimmed-milk powder.

151, 190 1, 562, 895 355, 541 2, 745, 838 1, 132, 627

488, 767 Upward.
84, 771 4,410, 641 352, 601 3, 809, 223 322, 180
All other...

.do.
149, 379

3, 296, 893
236, 430

Do.
8,653 2, 337, 734
Malted milk and compounds,

210, 438 2,477, 309 218, 315 do

896, 227 17, 892

Little variation. 6, 497

86, 682 5,098

930 mixtures, or substitutes for

11, 574 3,057

1, 259

340 Downward. milk or cream. Cream powder

-do. 709 Butter (8 cents per pound duty)!

5, 950

985 19, 279, 309

11, 294

3,721 | Upward. 6,958, 372 6, 861, 435 2, 553, 219 3, 276, 024 Butter (12 cents per pound duty)

1, 156, 381 do. 710 Cheese and substitutes thereof:

3, 451, 031 1, 233, 006 8, 456, 397 2,873, 177

Do.
Free...

---do..

684
162
135

41
315

467
5 cents per pound duty. -do..

6,628, 632 1, 143, 610 Cheese and substitutes thereof

5, 183, 116 906, 328 16, 871, 008 2, 876, 053 17, 391, 011 3, 131, 583
--do..

Do.
53, 191, 511 | 16, 645, 460 57, 448, 583 16,655, 694 59,012, 292 17, 502, 454 56, 741, 842 19,537, 417
(25 per cent ad valorem).

Do. 771 | Rutabagas (turnips).

do 153, 616, 286 712 Birds, dressed and undressed:

690, 985 153, 782, 675 43, 674 96, 584, 310 596, 059 112, 049, 291 668, 334 Poultry.

.do.

1, 665, 779 428, 900 All the foregoing prepared

2,799, 784 865, 036 5, 916, 591 2,003, 322
do.

3,567, 212 994, 245
470, 813 307, 536 362, 967 236, 670 461, 111 293, 960
or preserved in

576, 503

Do.

357, 681 any manner and n. s. p. 1. 713 Egg albumen: Dried.

do... 2, 946, 826 Frozen or otherwise pre

1, 994, 839 3, 119,693 2, 452, 856 3, 457,817 do.

2, 516, 479 3, 387, 939 2, 143, 449

Do. 1, 475, 544

189, 373 4, 292, 100 497, 580 3,656, 690 pared or

484, 103 preser ved,

1,560, 323 221, 273 Little variation. n. s. p. 1. Egg yolk: Dried..

.do.. 4,015, 874 1, 148, 821 Frozen or otherwise pre

5, 591, 185 1, 365, 508 5, 461, 176 1, 595, 515 3, 209, 066
.do.

1, 394, 690 Do.
4, 296, 925 721, 364 6, 201, 113 1,059, 395
pared

4, 237, 820 756, 135
or preserved,

2,816, 204 465, 425 Upward. n. s. p. f. Eggs of poultry in shell.

Dozen...

347, 030 Whole eggs:

108, 821 476, 499 137, 190 297, 843 103, 665 249, 925 74,840 Downward. Dried

Pounds...

1,589, 539 712, 971 2, 520, 973 1, 267, 261 Frozen or otherwise pre ...do....

1, 575, 263 858, 101 879, 697 433, 691 Do. 5,857, 593

909, 617 11,935, 448 1, 755, 444 pared or preserved, n.s.p.f.

10, 621, 650 1, 831, 045 2,797, 133 518,736 Do. Buckwheat; Flour, grits or groats..

49,859 2, 220 80, 846 2, 139 97, 980 Hulled or unhulled.... -do.

3,615 41, 469 2, 537 Little variation. 724 Corn:

18,516, 415 346, 193 16, 159, 916 30€, 137 4, 272, 555 74, 632 3,016, 355 51, 866 Downward.
Cracked..

Bushels. 249, 863 217, 538 8.922
Entire grain...

9, 885 50, 315 54, 833
-do...

9,021 8, 143 Do. 3, 905, 667 3,393, 863 1, 123, 193 1, 223, 276 1,055, 895 908, 911 4,916, 615 3. 906, 699 | Upward. "No butter substitutes imported. Such imports would be subject to internal-revenue tax of 15 cents per pound in add.tion to the tariff of 8 cents per pound.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Imports for consumption of various agricultural commodities in the United States, 1924, 1925, 1926, 1987-Continued

[blocks in formation]

---do. ---do

Grass seods:

Alfalfa..
Alsike clover.
Crimson clover
N. s. p. f. clover (sweet).
Red clover.
White clover.

Timothy.
Starch, potato.
Skins of all kinds, raw, and

hides, n. s. p. f.

Pounds... 0, 432, 191 $1, 263, 132 2, 450, 566 $536, 722
7,983, 299

4,950, 643 $868, 734
964, 773

3, 602. 202 11, 084, 341

$718, 761 Stationary. 1,798, 543 5, 479, 085

6, 650, 850 1, 287, 337 5, 313, 424 305, 376 6, 158, 776

1, 347, 101 Tpward. -do.

321, 165 7,412, 789

3,840, 468

238, 329 774, 203

1, 245, 993 5, 439, 538

167, 879 Little variation. --do.

455, 568 19, 439, 002

9, 816, 912 752,823 2, 874, 231 11, 217, 069

5, 843, 592 521, 115 Upward.

2, 450, 552 17, 656, 541
-do.
1, 190, 461 389, 625

7, 144, 931 1, 533, 341 Do.
1, 626, 629
..do.

472, 019 1, 463, 653 3, 460

334, 726 917, 223 515

217, 777 Do. 4, 659

344
..do
11, 440, 594 378, 98510, 714, 747

37, 159

5, 201

15, 756 1, 270 Little variation,

418, 670
..do.

19, 166, 890
356, 527, 743 75,053, 777 362, 214,062 -6,736, 601 368, 959, 968 96, 771, 443 447, 173, 077 112, 856, 146

599, 038 27, 272, 018 1,006, 173 Upward.

,088, 85)

85 166-3

Do.

THE ST. LAWRENCE DEEP WATERWAY

[H. Res. 185, 70th Cong., 1st sess. ] Mr. PEAVEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask consent to extend my Whereas it appears that of all the legislative and other proposals remarks in the RECORD on the subject of the St. Lawrence deep which have been submitted for the governmental relief of agriculture in waterway, and as a part of that extension I ask permission to

the Middle and Northwestern States the development of a waterway include letter from the Canadian Government dated September from the Great Lakes to the Atlantic Ocean would be the most 1, 1927, and the answer by Mr. Kellogg, Secretary of State, dated practical and economically sound; and October 17, 1927, and also certain correspondence between myself Whereas every engineering body and commission, including the and the Secretary of State and a letter written by myself to the United States-St. Lawrence Commission, appointed to study the potenSt. Lawrence Tidewater Association and its reply, the whole tialities of such a waterway have, without exception, submitted favornot to occupy more than three or four pages of the RECORD.

able reports; and Mr. UNDERHILL. On what subject?

Whereas the building of such a waterway would alleviate the present Mr. PEAVEY. On the subject of the international waterway. agricultural depression of the mid-continent through lessening the Mr. UNDERHILL. About how many columns of the RECORD

economie handicap of adverse transportation costs; and would it occupy?

Whereas the legislatures of Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, MinneMr. PEAVEY. It would not cover more than three pages of sota, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, and the RECORD.

Wisconsin have all passed joint resolutions calling upon the President The SPEAKER. Is there objection?

of the United States for immediate action in the building of a waterThere was no objection.

way from the Great Lakes to the Atlantic Ocean via the St. Lawrence Mr. PEAVEY. Mr. Speaker, I am making this statement that River, which resolutions have been supported and indorsed by 10 the people of Wisconsin may be informed about my activities as

additional Northwestern States, and by a petition of a representative their Representative in Congress on a subject of vital importance New England committee, consisting of prominent citizens of Connectito them.

cut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont : The most important question before the people of Wisconsin Now, therefore, be it and the entire Northwest to-day is the building of the St. Law

Resolved, That the report submitted by the United States-St. Lawrence rence waterway from the Great Lakes to the Atlantic Ocean.

Commission on December 27, 1926, known as Senate Document No. In order that the waterway may be built it is necessary that 183, upon the development of a waterway from the Great Lakes to a treaty be negotiated with Canada to provide for its construc

the Atlantic Ocean, via the St. Lawrence River, be adopted as the policy tion and a proper division of the costs as well as a partition of of the House of Representatives of the United States, the Senate the hydroelectric power, navigation, and other benefits to accrue concurring, and that the President and the Secretary of State be to both countries.

requested to conclude negotiations for a treaty that will permit the The building of the St. Lawrence waterway will not only early completion of such a waterway. mean the opening of world commerce and trade to the interior It took the joint commission, created under the act of 1909, of America but it will to a large degree restore general com- 14 years to prepare a report to Congress. Then another commerce to the cities and harbors on the Great Lakes. General mission was created, headed by Herbert Hoover, Secretary of commerce on the Great Lakes not only means cheap transporta-Commerce, which commission took nearly four years to present tion but it would mean reduced transportation charges on every- a report made by the Department of United States Engineers. thing the people of the Northwest produce for sale and a con- These two St. Lawrence commissions and their activities have sequent low freight rate on manufactured goods purchased from cost the Government of the United States from 1909 to Decemthe East.

ber, 1926, more than $1,000,000 in salaries and expenses. For It would mean a saving to the farmers and business men of the most part their reports and recommendations and facts on 21 Northwestern States of over $123,000,000 annually. Forty which they were based were made by the United States Engimillion people living in those States are demanding it and have neers, paid by the War Department, and requiring about three been for the past 25 years. No one excepting a few selfish years' actual preparation. I ask you again, Why all this delay? interests in New York have ever opposed the waterway. I ask, It must be apparent to any student of this great problem that Why the delay?

the illegal and unwarranted diversion of water from Lake Every dollar needlessly spent for transportation by the people Michigan by the sanitary district of Chicago is, to a large of the Northwest is a dollar lost. According to the St. Law- extent, the key to the whole situation. rence commission, appointed by the President, the annual loss Were it not for this illegal diversion and for the several milto the people living in the Great Lakes States is computed to lion dollars a year unjust and unrighteous money collected be over a hundred million dollars on excessive freight rates on through the sale of hydroelectric power by the Chicago Sanitary grain alone.

District, no serious difficulties would be encountered in our negoThis is just so much human toil and energy going to waste tiations with Canada. Were it not for the intolerable and coreach year. It means people living in the Northwest must be rupt use of these same millions to influence Congress to thwart content with $125,000,000 less annual business and to do without legislation and defeat any move to curb or stop this act of interthe consequent happiness and prosperity this vast sum would national thievery, the St. Lawrence waterway might now be bestow.

under construction. Every official action and pronouncement pertaining to the Were the waterway to be built, no city in the continent would building of the St. Lawrence waterway has been to delay and profit as would Chicago, because of its dominating position on forestall progress. Why?

the Great Lakes. A few unscrupulous and unprincipled politiThe Senate amendment of 1909 created the joint commission cians banded together under the posthumous institution known and took the waterway out of the hands of Congress for 19 as the Chicago Sanitary District are being allowed to set aside years. My resolution, which was drawn last January, the in- the State laws, defy national authority, injure the whole Northtroduction of which was withheld until now at the suggestion west and Canada, and destroy the future progress of Chicago of Frank B. Kellogg, Secretary of State, is the first move made itself to satisfy individual profit and greed. That the people since 1909 to get this matter back before Congress, where the who care to know may have the entire facts, I am inserting business of the public belongs. The resolution follows:

below the official correspondence between Frank B. Kellogg, LXIX-538

Secretary of State, and the Canadian minister. These letters

OCTOBER 17, 1927. speak for themselves :

SIR: In further reply to your legation's note, No. 230, of SepCANADIAN LEGATION,

tember 1, I have the honor to inform you that this Government

raises no objection to the publication of the correspondence referred Washington, September 1, 1927.

to therein, relating to the diversion of water from Lake Michigan at SIR: I have the honor to refer to the note which you addressed to

Chicago, Mr. Chilton on December 7, 1926, regarding the publication of certain

This Government has not failed to recognize the importance of the correspondence relating to the diversion of water from Lake Michigan contentions made by the Canadian Government relating to the abstracby the Sanitary District of Chicago.

tion of water from one watershed and the diversion of it into another. His Majesty's Government in Canada has noted that the Government

In my note of July 26, 1926, I informed the British ambassador that of the United States considers that the reference in the report of the

this Government was not prepared to admit the conclusions of law Joint Board of Engineers on the St. Lawrence waterway project to the

stated in his notes of February 5, 1926, and May 1, 1926, on this queslimited effect on lake levels of the diversion of water through the Chi

tion. I did not think it was advisable to enter into a discussion of cago sanitary canal greatly alters the understanding of the situation,

this legal question in view of the fact that the issues involved in and that it might accordingly be considered undesirable to publish the

certain cases which were then and are still pending in the Supreme correspondence in question.

Court of the United States are closely parallel to the questions I have been instructed to inform you that His Majesty's Government presented in the ambassador's notes. For this same reason I do not in Canada has not been under any misapprehension as to the extent to

now desire to enter into a discussion of this question at the present which the abstraction of water through the Chicago sanitary canal has

moment, lowered the levels of the Great Lakes and that it has been fully advised

This Government, however, has heretofore indicated that it is prethat this lowering has been in the neighborhood of 6 inches. The pared to enter into discussions and negotiations with Canada covering papers which His Majesty's Government in Canada desires to publish

the whole question of preservation of lake levels in the mutual interest incorporate its viewpoint with respect to the general principle of

of the two countries. abstracting water from the Great Lakes system and diverting it into

This Government is glad to note the agreement by the Government of another watershed, and include the protests of the Government of Canada with the conclusions of the Joint Board of Engineers that the Canada against the abstraction, submitted on behalf of the people of

diversion at Chicago has affected lake levels less than 6 inches. It Canada generally, as well as the protest of the government of Ontario, also notes the feeling on the part of the Canadian Government that submitted on behalf of the people of that Province. Any reference in

lake levels could be dealt with, so far as navigation is concerned, by the report of the Joint Board of Engineers as published as to the

compensating works as recommended by the Joint Board of Engineers, actual effect of the withdrawal of water through the sanitary canal

It would appear in this connection that the question as to the practical does not in any degree whatsoever affect the viewpoint of His Majesty's results of diversion in its effect on navigation could be entirely Government in Canada as expressed in this correspondence.

remedied. His Majesty's Government in Canada desires to take this oppor- As to the observation by the Canadian Government that the installatunity of pointing out that if any misapprehension exists in the United

tion of compensatory works to restore lake levels would not recoup to States or in Canada as to the degree of lowering occasioned by the the Great Lakes system the power lost to the system by the diversion at Chicago abstraction the publication of these papers will go a long way Chicago, I would, without in any way admitting the principles of toward removing such misunderstanding.

compensation, call attention to the fact that Canada now receives With reference to the suggestion that His Majesty's Government in 36,000 second-feet at Niagara as against 20,000 cubic feet per second Canada enter upon a further discussion of the practical question of on the American side for power purposes. I would further observe that providing compensatory works as recommended by the Joint Board of without development of the lower St. Lawrence this question does not Engineers, it may be pointed out that the installation of compensatory | arise in that connection. works for the restoration of lake levels will in no way recoup to the I again wish to point out that all these problems appeal to the Great Lakes system the power which is lost to that system by the American Government as matters that may be settled by practical water abstracted therefrom through the sanitary canal. While recog- engineering measures which might be adopted pending further discusnizing the marked advantages which may be gained by the construction sion of the principles involved. of suitable compensating works, His Majesty's Government in Canada Accept, sir, the renewed assurances of my highest consideration. would not be prepared to enter upon a discussion of any plans for

FRANK B. KELLOGG. the construction of such works if this course involved an assumption The Hon. VINCENT MASSEY, that the present abstraction is to continue.

Minister of the Dominion of Canada. With reference, however, to the question immediately under consid- For your further information I am printing herewith my own eration, His Majesty's Government in Canada observes nothing in the correspondence with Mr. Kellogg on the subject : report of the Joint Engineering Board, including appendices, which

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, would render inadvisable the publication of the papers in question. On the contrary, it is considered that the release of these papers would

Washington, February 19, 1927. have a marked effect in clarifying public opinion on the question in

MY DEAR MR. PEAVEY: I am in receipt of your letter of February 11, both countries.

1927, inquiring what steps, if any, have been taken by this department

toward concluding a treaty or treaties with Canada looking to the conI have the honor, therefore, to inquire whether the Government of

struction of the St. Lawrence deep waterway. the United States would not be prepared to publish the correspondence listed in Mr. Chilton's note of November 16, 1926, together with Commission, in its report on a reference made to it by the Governments

You will recall that on December 19, 1921, the International Joint subsequent correspondence, at such early date as may be found

of the United States and Canada, recommended, among other things, convenient to both Governments.

that the Governments of the United States and Canada enter into an I have the honor to be, with the highest consideration, sir, Your most obedient, humble servant,

arrangement by way of treaty for a scheme of improvement of the St.

Lawrence River between Montreal and Lake Ontario. On May 17, 1922, LAURENT BEAUDRY,

this Government suggested to Canada that a treaty be negotiated framed Chargé d'Affaires.

on the basis of the report of the commission, or such modifications The Hon. FRANK B. KELLOGG,

thereof as might be agreed upon. In its reply to this suggestion, made Secretary of State of the United States, Washington,

on January 30, 1924, the Canadian Government indicated that it pre

ferred that before the negotiation of a treaty a further report be made SEPTEMBER 12, 1927.

covering the engineering features of the whole project, including its

cost. At the same time the Canadian Government indicated that it was SIR: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your note No.

its intention to form an advisory committee to inquire fully from a 230 of September 1, 1927, inquiring whether this Government would

national standpoint into the other questions involved. be prepared to make public certain correspondence in regard to the

In accordance with the desires of the Canadian Government a joint diversion of water from Lake Michigan by the Sanitary District

engineering board was appointed and instructed to make a further study of Chicago.

of the engineering features of the project. An advisory commission was The proposal made by the Canadian Government that the corre

also appointed by the President with the Hon. Herbert IIoover as chairspondence be made public has been referred to the authorities of this

man, to examine into the matter from the standpoint of the national Government directly concerned with the matter to which the corre

interests of the United States. spondence relates. I shall be glad to inform you at the earliest date

As you are aware, the reports of the joint board of engineers and the possible of the views of this Government in regard to the publication

St. Lawrence Commission of the United States have recently been made. of the correspondence.

The reports are being given consideration by the interested branches of Accept, sir, the renewed assurances of my high consideration.

this Government, but as yet no negotiations based upon thera Dave been

FRANK B. KELLOGG. instituted. Mr. LAURENT BEAUDRY,

I am, my dear Mr. PEAVEY, very sincerely yours, Chargé d'Affaires ad interim of the Dominion of Canada.

FRANK B. I'ELLOGG.

[Western Union]

APRIL 27, 1928. WASHBURN, Wis., May 2, 1927.

Hon. FRANK B. KELLOGG, Hon. FRANK B. KELLOGG,

Secretary of State of the United States, Secretary of State, Washington, D. C.:

Washington, D.C. Please advise what steps, if any, have been taken by State Depart- MY DEAR MR. SECRETARY : In consideration of the recent publication ment toward negotiating treaties with Canada for construction of of the official correspondence exchanged by the State Department of the St. Lawrence deep waterway. Will you wire answer by night letter? United States and the Canadian Government on the subject of the treaty

H. H. PEAVEY,

negotiations leading to the construction and development of the St. Member of Congre88. Lawrence waterway, it occurs to me that you might now wish to answer

my communication of February 21, at which time I submitted to you a [Western Union)

tentative draft of a resolution in support of the waterway, the intro

duction of which I withheld at your suggestion. WASHINGTON, D, C., May 3, 1937.

Also, considering the further press releases from the State DepartHon. H. H. PEAVEY,

ment, it would appear that the Canadian Government has altered its Washburn, Wis.: . Your telegram, May 2, regarding St. Lawrence deep waterway. Chicago Sanitary District since our conference held some time ago,

position relative to the diversion of water from the Great Lakes by the have recently taken up this subject with the Canadian Government, and

when you assured me that, in your opinion, the Canadian Government am awaiting an expression of the views of that Government pending an

was willing to accept the principle of compensatory works at Chicago. understanding with the Government of Canada. In respect to the publi

It now occurs to me that it might be advisable to introduce a bill cation of my note I am giving out no information as to its contents.

or resolution providing in substance the theory or principle laid down FRANK B. KELLOGG.

by the United States Board of Engineers in regard to the water Secretary of State.

diversion at Chicago, namely, a fixed graduated reduction in the

amount of diversion down to one or two thousand second-feet, the WASHBURN, Wis., October 1, 1927. minimum amount necessary for sanitation and navigation in the Hon. FRANK B. KELLOGG,

Chicago and Des Plaines Rivers. Secretary of State, Washington, D. C.

The extraction of this tremendous amount of water from the Great DEAR MR. SECRETARY : Many inquiries have come to me respecting the Lakes at this time is deeply resented by the people of Wisconsin as status of the negotiations between the United States and Canada upon well as those of the entire Northwest, and the refusal of Canada to the subject of the proposed St. Lawrence deep waterway.

countenance this action by the Chicago Sanitary District is not at all Will you please advise what progress has been made toward the con- surprising to me, and I therefore feel that only through action by summation of such treaties?

Congress limiting the diversion of water can it be expected that Canada Thanking you in advance, I am,

will fully concur on all phases of the waterway subject. Very respectfully yours,

I can assure you of the individual interest of the people of my H, H. PEAVEY. district and the entire Northwest in the matter and express to you

their most earnest hope that treaties satisfactory to both the United FEBRUARY 21, 1928.

States and Canada will be consummated at an early date. The Hon. FRANK B. KELLOGG,

Very truly yours, The Secretary of State of the United States,

H. H. PEAVEY. Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. SECRETARY : Permit me to thank you for your courtesy

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, in informing me with relation to the status of the present negotiations

Washington, May 2, 1928. between yourself and the Government of Canada with regard to the

MY DEAR MR. PEAVEY: I have pleasure in acknowledging the receipt securing of a treaty or agreement under which it will be possible to

of your letter of April 27, 1928, in which you referred to your letter build the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence waterway. I sincerely hope your

of February 21, 1928, inclosing copy of a proposed resolution, declaring optimism in this matter will be borne out by future developments. In

the report submitted by the United States-St. Lawrence Commission the name of the people of the district I represent, as well as those of

on December 27, 1926, on the development of a waterway from the the entire Northwest, permit me to wish you complete and immediate

Great Lakes to the Atlantic Ocean by way of the St. Lawrence River success in your undertaking.

to be the policy of Congress. In accordance with our conversation by telephone last Thursday, I am submitting herewith a tentative draft of a resolution which I

I have no suggestions or objections to offer in regard to the resolution contemplate introducing in Congress in the near future. I shall be which you propose to introduce. I assure you, however, that the matter

of the St. Lawrence waterway has received and will continue to receive glad to get your reactions or suggestions with regard to this proposal. The people of the mid-continent have been deprived of their rights

the energetic attention of the department and of other officials of the in the matter of water-borne commerce. The failure to make physical

Government concerned in the project, and all proper action will be connection between the railroads and the boat lines has driven prac

taken to bring the negotiations to an early conclusion. The corretically all general trade ships off the Great Lakes. It has isolated the spondence published on April 14, 1928, reveals the present status of the people of the Northwest, making them wholly dependent on the rail

negotiations. roads for transportation. This padlocking of the harbors of the Great

I am, my dear Mr. Peavey, Lakes has removed every vestige of competitive railroad rates. We

Very sincerely yours,

FRANK B. KELLOGG. believe the building of the St. Lawrence waterway will to a large Inserted below is a recent letter by myself to the St. Lawextent restore general commerce on the Lakes, and this appears to us rence Tidewater Association and their reply: as a natural heritage. The movement for the development of the St. Lawrence waterway is

MAY 1, 1928. not new. It has been before our people for the past 60 years. Since

Mr. CHARLES P. CRAIG, the creation of the joint commission by Congress in 1909 public officials

Executive Director, St. Lawrence Tidewater Association, and other agencies have repeatedly assured the people that the canal

I'ashington, D. C. would be built in the near future. You will therefore understand, DEAR MR. CRAIG : I have your letter of April 13 and note that you Mr. Secretary, the reluctance on the part of the people of the North- are working out a program of political action with the purpose of west to accept further promises on a matter of such national im- securing the adoption of "a Great Lakes to the ocean via the St. portance, which they feel has been already too long delayed.

Lawrence waterway” plank by the Republican and Democratic National The 40,000,000 inhabitants of the area tributary to the Great Lakes Parties at the June conventions. are demanding action by Congress, the administration, and yourself, to About a year ago the President of your association, Ex-Governor the end that some definite action may be taken looking to the actual Harding, of Iowa, appeared before the Ashland Public Forum and made a building of this waterway. It would seem important, therefore, that speech in support of the St. Lawrence waterway. Taking advantage of Congress, by the reassertion of its policy with reference to the building the rules of the Ashland Public Forum, I asked Mr. Harding some ques. of this waterway, would satisfy this demand and to that extent aid tions. Among others, I asked him the following: “The St. Lawrence you in carrying on your negotiations with Canada. I am proposing this Tidewater Association has publicly stated that 24 Northwestern States resolution and writing this letter as a matter of duty that this appeal are pledged to the immediate building of the St. Lawrence deep waterfrom the people of my district and the whole Northwest may be con- way and that President Coolidge and Secretaries Kellogg and IIoover veyed directly to you.

are favorable to the project. Why has the association failed to induce I wish to assure you, Mr. Secretary, that it is not my purpose or in- the Republican Party to go on record in favor of the St. Lawrence tention to embarrass or in any way hinder you in conducting these nego- waterway or adopt a plank to that effect in their national conventions?" tiations with Canada. On the contrary, I have every desire to aid and Governor Harding answered as follows: "I am president of this assoencourage and to wish you early and complete success.

ciation not as a Democrat, Republican, or Socialist, but as an American Very respectfully yours,

citizen. We are not trying to play politics with the waterway. We H. H. PEAVEY. work with all parties."

over

I am glad to see that your association has aroused itself to the neces- afraid to compete with water-borne commerce. The progress of sity of putting the national political parties on record as a means of 40,000,000 people is being thwarted to protect a transportation providing support for the waterway before Congress and the people of

monopoly. the United States. I am sure the people of the Northwest will join me Since the above was prepared advance press notice has carin wishing you complete success in getting such a plank adopted at both ried the news that Canada has replied to Secretary Mellon's the Republican and Democratic conventions.

last note of April 7, 1928, stating in substance that they would Replying directly to your letter of the 13th with relation to the not negotiate until the illegal diversion of water at Chicago was attitude of the Republican delegates from the State of Wisconsin on stopped or the principle disavowed by the United States. This this subject, I wish to state that I had the honor of serving as a member correspondence has not been given to the press. of the advisory committee of 11 that formulated the platform on which Twenty-one States and 40,000,000 people are demanding this our Progressive Republican delegates were elected to the national con- waterway. No one has had the temerity to appear in public vention, and included in our recommendations, which were later adopted opposition but a few individual politicians and power repreas our platform, is a St. Lawrence waterway plank, as follows: "No. sentatives from New York. Do you not think it is about time 10. We favor a deep waterway from the Great Lakes to the sea. The

to separate those who really want the waterway built from Government should, in conjunction with Canada, take immediate action those who just talk about it for political reasons? to give the Northwestern States an outlet to the ocean for cargoes The building of the St. Lawrence canal from an engineering without change in bulk, thus making the primary markets on the Great standpoint is mere child's play compared with our undertaking Lakes equal to those of New York.”

in building the Panama Canal. Under President Roosevelt it In this connection I can say to you, Mr. Craig, that I sought the took only two years to survey and seven years to build this adoption of an even stronger and more comprehensive plank on this great engineering enterprise. The Government agencies in subject than the one stated above. In my recommendations to the charge of the St. Lawrence waterway in Washington have spent committee I included tbe proposition of the disappearance of general a million dollars and 19 years to prepare a 60-page commerce from the Great Lakes and how the great natural advantage pamphlet report. which belongs to the people living tributary to the Great Lakes, that Can you, Mr. Wisconsin business man and farmer, content of cheap transportation by water, is being denied them, largely due to the yourself to sit idle in the face of these facts and with the influence of railroad owners in New York, and that this enforced isola- divine patience of Job assuage yourself by saying, “How long, tion of the Northwestern States was costing the people of that territory O Lord, how long?" hundreds of millions of dollars annually, etc.

COLORADO RIVER BASIN The Republican delegates to the Kansas City convention from Wis

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to exconsin are divided as follows: There are 17 Progressive Republicans

tend my remarks in the RECORD on the bill to improve the pledged to the plank quoted above, who, I know, you can depend upon

Colorado River, to vote and work for the adoption by the convention of an indorsement

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the of the St. Lawrence waterway. Of the remaining 9 members of the

gentleman from Idaho? delegation, 2 of these were elected to support Mr. Hoover, who was

There was no objection. represented as a champion of the waterway. Two of the remaining 7 were elected and pledged to the nomination of ex-Governor Lowden, consideration will be given by the House to the legislation pro

Mr. SMITH. Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that early of Illinois, without any reference being made to the waterway. The remaining 5 regular Republicans were elected as uninstructed and with

viding for the protection and development of the Colorado River out any reference or pledge as to the waterway. I trust this infor: Basin, as provided in H. R. 5773, introduced by Mr. SWING, of mation will be of some help to you in securing the adoption of a

California, I gladly avail myself, as chairman of the Committee strong St. Lawrence waterway-development plank at the Republican available to the Members of the House certain facts concerning

on Irrigation and Reclamation, of this opportunity to make National Convention in Kansas City this coming June. Yours very truly,

the importance and urgency of enacting into law this meritoriH. H. PEAVEY.

ous measure.

I doubt if any project ever brought before Congress has been

more thoroughly considered over a long period of time, or one GREAT LAKES-ST. LAWRENCE TIDEWATER ASSOCIATION,

which, when completed, will have more lasting and beneficial Washington, D. O., May 2, 1928.

effects upon a large proportion of the people of the United Hon. H. H. PEAVEY,

States. House Office Building, Washington, D. 0.

There certainly has been no more important measure before MY DEAR MR. PEAVEY : Thank you for your letter of first instant.

this House that has had the support of the Chief Executive The information you convey is explicit and valuable.

and high officials of our Government than the pending legislaSpeaking of efforts to have the Republican Party go on record in

tion. favor of the St. Lawrence waterway, I wish to say that at the last

The President in his message to the Congress of December 6, Republican convention in Cleveland in 1924 a plank was drafted, 1927, stated: approved by President Coolidge, and sent to Cleveland with his personal approval. It went before the resolutions committee with the under

Legislation is desirable for the construction of a dam at Boulder standing that it would be put through, but two Congressmen from New

Canyon on the Colorado River, primarily as a method of flood control York--Dempsey and Sweet-appeared before the committee and were

and irrigation. A secondary result would be a considerable power able to have the committee change the resolution so that it meant development and a of domestic water supply for southern nothing of great value. We did get a declaration--not a strong California. one-in the Democratic platform in 1924.

In his message to the Congress of December 22, 1926, he I note the clause No. 10 in the platform of the Progressive Republican declared : Party of Wisconsin. That is fine, and, as you know, I am in sympathy In previous messages, I have referred to the national importance of with your position with respect to the present restricted use of the the proper development of our water resources. The great project of Great Lakes.

extension of the Mississippi system, the protection and development of I am surprised that the delegates pledged to support Governor

the lower Colorado River, are before Congress, and I have previously Lowden would not have placed the St. Lawrence in their platform commented upon them. I favor the necessary legislation to expedite because Governor Lowden has always been a supporter of the seaway. these projects.

The information is all valuable and may be utilized to very great advantage.

On March 17, 1924, the present Secretary of the Interior, With kind personal regards, I remain

Dr. Hubert Work, in reporting to this committee on legislation Yours sincerely,

similar to the pending bill, said: Chas. P. CRAIG, Executive Director. The Colorado River has been under observation, survey, and study,

and the subject of reports to Congress since the close of the Civil In the light of these facts who will maintain that we are any nearer to success and winning the St. Lawrence waterway Reclamation since the Kinkaid Act of May 18, 1920.

War. More than $350,000 have been expended by the Bureau of

More than now than in 1909. Nineteen wasted years.

$2,000,000 have been expended by other agencies of the Government It is a self-evident deduction from the facts stated above that northwest railroad owners, who live in New York, gauged will proceed to convert this natural menace into a national resource.

The time has arrived when the Government should decide whether it always by hindsight rather than foresight, stand to lose

(Hearings on H. R. 2903, 68th Cong., 1st sess., p. 818.) $125,000,000 a year if the waterway is built, and they are bringing every possible political and financial influence to bear There is attached hereto his report on the proposed legislation on the Government at Washington to prevent it.

dated January 18, 1926, setting forth in detail his views on the The future development and prosperity of Superior, Duluth, | provisions of the bill. Ashland, Washburn, Bayfield, and the other lake cities of the In his latest report of January 4, 1928, printed herewith in Northwest are being sacrificed because railroad owners are the RECORD, he states:

source

« ПретходнаНастави »