"JUST AND FAIR"

Evening Post, Volume CXV, Issue 24, 30 January 1933, Page 5

"JUST AND FAIR"

ST. LAWRENCE WATERWAY

TREATY -DEFENDED.

Defending the St. Lawrence Waterway Treaty: as ':'_ust; and fair to both tho'United States and' Canada," James Grafton Rogers, Assistant Secretary "of State, told the Senate Foreign Eolations subcommittee, which re-opened hearings on ratification, that in his belief > the- treaty ultimately would be, ratified, says the "New, York Times.",-' ■Mr. Epgers-wa-s the only..witness, the fir.t time proponents of the project have had an opportunity to testify. He said "he had been' charged with the negotiations, and he denied that Canada would get the sole benefit of 42,000,000 dollars of Arherican money., Most of the afternoon session was consumed- with a review of previous treaties concerning1 the use of water for sewage and other piirposos from the Grea^ Lakes,' rji.rticularly>in;Ghieagq. Mr. Eogers denied that the' Treaty would impose a hardship upon Chicago or any other of the Great Lakes cities. "I would hot have drafted'or approved a Treaty-containing such: provisions, ".-he. replied to Senator, ; Glenn, of Illinois. ' -... :'-,. ."_ '.Just -before he left-the. stand Mr.. Rogers . was . asked by-Senator .* .Walsh if he agreed with opposition testimony that Canada would, deny the U.STA.. the use of the St. Lawrence in time !of war. Mr.' Eogers admitted that in, case of war between the:"United: States and Canada or Great Britain' the; Treaty would not .be effective, biit ho insisted that the United States would have perpetual use of the canal for com-' merce of all kinds.. • Criticising previous testimony that the United States . would suffer through heavier contributions to the St. Lawrence project, Mr. Rogers said '' there is no ground whatever for statements that the "United States is making contributions for which it is getting no credit. "He insisted that/present .estimates; of costs ".would stand iip," and cited cases where expenditures actually had been reduced because, of present conditions.; ... . - ;;,'.?,., He reviewed the methdd.g'ifoilowed to arrive :at 'a fair, and. just,■.division of costs 'and -allowances for, work both nations had done pi-evibuslyj but said that much of .'.fie. work had beOn done without 'Contemplation, of the St;- Lawrence waterways' route and 'these'""credits had been thrcyvn out. Ho said this "method would have allowed Canada 115,010,731 dollars and the Ui\ited States .50,348,000 dollars". ;■ Uneler the revised appraisal, he' declared, Canada was, allowed 772,000 dollars for deepening the St. Lawrence' and,12_,000,000. dollars for construction of the Welland Canal, which ,was built in contemplation of completion of the St. Lawrence work. The United States received a credit of 461,000 dollars for completed improvements in the Thousand Islands region and ab0ut.14,000,000 dollars for deepening channels from twenty-four to twenty-seven feet in the upper" lake canals. - - - Mr. Eogers asserted that the "whole .fight" was' against the allowance for the Welland Canal. "Biit I will justify the credit," he said. "-' -;'•'■ The new expenditure necessary, ho declared, would be 257,990,000 dollars on behalf of the ' United '.- States and 142,204,000 dollars for Canada's part of the work." He said 36,9.1,000 dollars additional would be spe^it "jointly" under the direction of the International Commission.- Part of this would be for two dams running from one country to the other and some fori power houses and equipment."-. ... > .• Referring to. the charge that Canada would have to spend less than 40,000,000 dollars to-complete lier end of the work, Mr. Rogers later explained that the Ontario Government had sold power rights for 104,000,000 dollars, which could be deducted., from the total, expenditure. The United States,' he said, also could dispose of" power rights in the same way and-thus reduce its expenditures. ' Senator Borah said representatives of the Department of Commerce, United States .Shipping Board, and army engineers- would be heard later. After proponents of the Treaty have concluded, he said, opponents of ratification would have a chance to present additional testimony.