Old Dream, New Hope

Every U.S. President since Harding has urged construction of a St. Lawrence Seaway to link the Great Lakes to the Atlantic and open the Midwest to world commerce. But railroads, private power companies, Atlantic ports and Gulf Coast ports have fought the idea with bitterness since its inception. Seaway plans, furthermore, have included a vast public hydroelectric project, which was not only unpopular in many quarters in the past, but brought the cost of construction close to half a billion dollars. Congress has turned down one seaway proposal after another.

Four months ago, Wisconsin's G.O.P. Senator Alexander Wiley sponsored a seaway bill which eliminated some of the earlier objections: it asks only $100 million, calls only for construction (in conjunction with Canada) of new locks and a deeper (27-ft.) ship canal, and temporarily abandons plans for deepening Great Lakes channels to take shipping beyond Toledo. The hydroelectric project is left to the State of New York and the Canadian province of Ontario, both of which have already signified their willingness to take it over.

The Wiley Bill will be debated in a new climate of urgency: a deep seaway would furnish the only submarine-free route for transportation of Labrador iron ore in case of'a war, and Canada has threatened to build it all by herself if the U.S. shillyshallies much longer. Last week the Eisenhower Administration used a new administrative device to demonstrate its backing of the seaway: by formal action, the whole Cabinet unanimously recommended that the U.S. put its weight behind the seaway project.

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