Seaway Sighted

After a decade of diplomatic dickering the U. S. and Canada finally came to terms last week on the 1,337-mi. Great Lakes-St. Lawrence seaway. Signed was a treaty covering the details of a transportation project that for size, cost and engineering difficulties exceeds the Panama Canal. The agreement sent a thrill of hope through the Mid-West which already saw its cargoes of grain, coal, metals and machinery steaming away to world markets.

As part of his 1928 campaign President Hoover promised active development of this trade route from Duluth to the Atlantic. The negotiations became deadlocked when Canada insisted upon two dams in the international rapids while the U. S. held out for one. When William Duncan Herridge, convivially energetic brother-in-law of Canada's Premier Bennett, was appointed Canadian Minister to the U. S. last year, diplomatic bargaining began anew. Aware that failure to make good on his four-year-old promise would probably be used against him by Democrats this year, President Hoover lately summoned Secretary of State Stimson, ordered him to speed up negotiations on the St. Lawrence development. Mr. Stimson fortnight ago gave a secret luncheon at Woodley to which Minister Herridge, accompanied by Hanford MacNider, U. S. Minister to Canada, entrained expressly from Ottawa. On hand also was Assistant Secretary of State James Grafton Rogers, U. S. negotiator. Statesman Stimson delivered the White House ultimatum: An agreement must be quickly reached. Before the meal was over an agreement had been reached. Ministers Herridge and MacNider sped back to Ottawa.

A mysterious "leak" from that luncheon informed Governor Roosevelt of New York of the agreement. He immediately asked President Hoover for an interview on the ground that New York was deeply interested in the seaway's by-product of power. The President told him not to interrupt his cruise, that "negotiations . . . are making progress" but "an agreement . . . has not yet been concluded."

The Roosevelt inquiry gave the negotiations just the political push they needed to nail down a settlement. Three days Inter the alert Baltimore Sun, whose smart Drew Pearson knows State Department doings almost as well as Statesman Stimson does, scooped the country with a story that the U. S. and Canada were at last in accord. Next day the White House admitted: "An outline of a treaty was concluded the middle of June; the terms were finally settled yesterday and the treaty is now in process of construction.'. . ."

Specifications. Under the terms of the agreement, a 27-ft. channel will be constructed from Lake Superior to tidewater at Montreal. The 48-mi. stretch of St. Lawrence rapids along the international boundary is to be controlled by two 40-ft. dams. One, east of Ogdensburg, N. Y. on Crysler Island, will have one set of locks, a two-mile canal. The other, spanning the river at Cornwall, Ont. by way of Barnhart Island, will have two sets of locks, a six-mile canal. Two dams were agreed upon after Canada convinced the U. S. that one would cause backwater to overflow towns on the Canadian shore. Together these dams will be capable of producing about 2,200,000 h. p. of electricity, to be divided equally between the U. S. and Canada.

The estimated cost of the whole St. Lawrence project is $800,000,000. also to be divided equally. From each country's share, however, is to be deducted improve ments already made in this waterway. Canada's Welland Canal near Niagara Falls will mean a credit of about $120,000,000 for the Dominion. The U. S. may knock off $26,300,000 spent on the Soo locks and $17.500,000 more for having dredged the Detroit and St. Clair rivers. Engineers estimate that the entire project will require about eight years to com plete. In the meantime a radical change in lake freighters to fit them for salt water will require private millions.

Ratification by the Senate of the treaty will not occur before the next session of Congress. After it is ratified, a mass of domestic legislation will be necessary before work can start. Money must first be appropriated for the U. S. to carry on its share of the navigational development. A major question is New York State's rights to power and the price that State must pay for them.

New York v. U. S. Long and hard looms the controversy between New York and the Federal Government over power. Last year the State Legislature created a Power Authority to produce electricity on the St. Lawrence and distribute it under contract over the lines of Niagara Hudson Power Corp. The Federal Government wants to make the State contribute $150.000,000 toward the cost of the St. Lawrence seaway as its price for this power. The State argues that, since it owns the riparian rights, it will put up only $75,000,000. Therein lies the issue between President Hoover and Governor Roosevelt which will be carried into the campaign, ultimately to the U. S, Supreme Court.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.