Mr. FERRIS. I would like to know, Mr. Randolph, whether you want to go on record as saying that Canada is diverting 9.000 cubic feet above the 36.000 second-feet which she is authorized to divert, or whether you base your statement on hearsay.

The CHAIRMAN. He bases it on a report made by Colonel Warren, who made a report in 1919 on "Diversion of water from the Great Lakes." He was at that time resident engineer at Buffalo.

The CHAIRMAN. He does not profess to make a statement of his own, but he refers to a report which will be before us.

Mr. RANDOLPH. I do not profess to have made these measurements. Mr. FERRIS. I would like to know now whether Mr. Randolph proposes to go on record as saying that Canada is taking 9,000 second-feet more than she is entitled to under the treaty, or whether he is basing it on hearsay, or whether he is basing it on actual records.

Mr. RANDOLPH. Actual records taken by the Government and reported in the Warren report.

Mr. FERRIS. But the Queenstown project was not in operation then.

Mr. RANDOLPH. But it is in operation now, with six wheels.

Mr. FERRIS. That is true; but do you know how much water, based upon any authoritative measurements, Canada is diverting to-day? We are interested in knowing whether Canada is violating the terms of the treaty.

Mr. RANDOLPH. And that is why commissioners have been appointed to find out.

Mr. FERRIS. I know; but you are making the assertion that this is being done.

Mr. RANDOLPH. I am making the assertion on information and belief.

The CHAIRMAN. I want to make one brief statement. I do not think there could be any misunderstanding between the gentleman from New York and Mr. Randolph. I think the thing has cleared itself up. Of course there could not be diverted more than 9,000 cubic feet through the plant which they had at the time of the Warren report. They did not have the plant capacity to use more than their 36,000 cubic feet; I don't think they had the plant capacity to develop 36,000 cubic feet. That is my understanding. So Colonel Warren could not have reported on an increased diversion. What he must have reported is that if they did continue to utilize the old plants and then put the new plant in full commission that the sum of the three plants-there are two on the Canadian side-would amount to more than 36,000 cubic feet per second. That is as far as he could have gone.

Mr. A. V. WHITE. Mr. Chairman

The CHAIRMAN. Whom do you represent?

Mr. WHITE. Whom do you represent?

Mr. WHITE. I represent the Hydroelectric Power Commission, of Ontario. My instructions were to take no part in the discussion here, it being recognized that the matter of the bills under discussion is of a national or domestic nature. However, inasmuch as the commission has suffered a good deal of injustice through misrepresenta

tion made in the public press of this country, which has been copied into our press, I was asked, if a statement should be made such as has now been made by Mr. Randolph, to absolutely controvert it.

Up to the present time there have not been sufficient physical facilities to permit an aggregate diversion above the falls of an amount equal to the 36,000 second-feet of the treaty, so that if Mr. Randolph, as I understand he has stated in the record, says that Canada has diverted 9,000 feet to-day

Mr. RANDOLPH (interposing). On information and belief.

The CHAIRMAN. Nine thousand in excess?

Mr. WHITE. Yes; and an excess of 9,000 second-feet over the 36.000 second-feet; my instructions are absolutely to controvert that statement.

Mr. KEEFER. How much power is being turned over to the United States at that point by the Canadian development, turned over to consumers in the State of New York?

Mr. WHITE. I have not the exact figures, but it would be somewhere in the neighborhood of 150,000 or 160,000 horsepower years. Mr. RANDOLPH. May I ask whether or not you are going to be paid for that power, and whether it will not be a source of revenue to the Ontario Power Co.?

Mr. WHITE. That is true. The Power Commission derives that revenue now by virtue of having purchased the entire Ontario Power Co., which was built with United States capital, and the original company had these arrangements which have been taken over and are being carried out by the present possessor. In this connection I would say that, up to the present time, there have only been five units in operation at Queenstown. A sixth unit is installed but not ready to deliver its full output.

Mr. RANDOLPH. Is it not a fact that you have an installed capacity in the plants at the Falls and in the Queenstown-Chippewa plant to operate which would require more than 36,000 cubic second-feet allotted to Canada?

Mr. WHITE. I am instructed not. I would like to ask you, Mr. Randolph, whether the Sanitary District of Chicago is deriving any profit from the water power it is developing from its 10,000 secondfeet?

The CHAIRMAN. That appeared from the reel yesterday; the statement was a million dollars a year. That was thrown on the screen yesterday. That is aside from the business use of the power. They save that much in municipal use, and then they sell a certain amount for business purposes. That amount did not appear. I understand it is something like $100,000.

Mr. KEEFER. You asked for the information and we are here desirous to give you any information we can. Mr. White can tell you what this 10.000 would represent divided between Niagara and the St. Lawrence. As an engineer, let him answer that question. The CHAIRMAN. I would be glad to have that in the record. Mr. WHITE. The figures amount to about 500,000 horsepower, that is the power that could be developed at Niagara and on the St. Lawrence River. Of that amount about 100,000 would appertain to the section of the river which flows wholly in Canadian territory. The CHAIRMAN. And the balance the international boundary?

Mr. WHITE. Yes. You have about the same, about 100,000, on the St. Lawrence and 300,000 at the Falls.

Mr. KEEFER. So relatively it is 200,000-300,000 at Niagara and of the 200,000 the United States has a half interest in 100,000.

Mr. SWEET. I am informed that the State of New York keep an hourly record of the discharge of the American power development at the Falls. Does the Canadian commission keep such a record? Mr. WHITE. They have similar records-that is, computations could be made with respect to the corresponding diversions required to develop the power; and it is upon an examination of those records. I understand, that I have been authorized to make the statement just made.

The CHAIRMAN. Now if the committee and those interested please, I will spread upon the record something that I think will be of interest in this connection. We are talking here about physical capacity to develop power. It will be interesting to see what that means. It means simply this-that the state of the art, the development of power from water, has improved vastly in the last few years. We had a plant at Niagara Falls which used 10,000 cubic feet and it developed only 10 horsepower per cubic foot. Of course, at the Falls the art progressed so we could develop 20,000 cubic feet; by carrying it to Lewiston we could develop 33 horsepower per cubic foot or we can develop the remaining 10 horsepower in the bed of the river on the fall between the rapids and the Devils Hole.

Now there came along a time when we passed the general waterpower bill, under the terms of that bill all water-power developments were required to be efficient-that is, to develop the most, the greatest horsepower which was possible under the state of the art at the time-and no company or individual could procure a license under the general water power act unless he would give the Governrent assurance in legal form that he would make efficient develop

ment.

The Niagara Falls Co. applied for a license and they had to comply with those terms. So they are abandoning their old plant, one of their old plants, which produced only 10 horsepower, and they are making an entirely new installation, which will give them 20 horsepower.

Now, the same way on the Canadian side. While I do not understand the situation as to the legislation, as I do here, they had plants which were inefficient, right at the Falls, and producing. I take it, probably about the same horsepower as we produced on the American

side.

They have installed at great expense a new plant at Queenstown, which will be efficient, and which will produce the maximum of power from a cubic foot of water.

Now, that is what we mean by physical capacity. Of course you can take and add the physical capacity of both sides of these old plants to that of the new plant and you will produce a generating capacity for more water than the 56.000 cubic feet-20,000 on one side and 36,000 on the other-but that does not mean anything except the old plant stands there, as far as our side is concerned, unused, and it is my understanding that that is the situation on their side.

Mr. WHITE. The comment you have just made is one I was going to offer in explanation.

Mr. DEAL. What is the amount of water allotted to the American side?

The CHAIRMAN. Twenty thousand second-feet.

Mr. HULL. What is supposed to be the total flow at Niagara?
The CHAIRMAN. Two hundred and ten thousand.

Mr. HULL. They are contending that 20,000 is alloted to Niagara and it is also contended that 10.000 is allowed to Chicago, with reference to the 36,000.

Mr. KEEFER. That is a question that will be dealt with; that is the contention.

The CHAIRMAN. I do not know about that, I am frank to say. I know we got the worst of it, and how it was I don't know.

Mr. RANDOLPH. I can tell you where the other 6.000 came from; the other 6,000 is to compensate for this that Mr. White is shipping into the United States, and for which they get revenue. That was the basis of that. This is a highly controversial question, and a great deal of time could be spent on it. I am satisfied to let my statement stand in the record, and I am glad to have Mr. White's statement about it. We will get authoritative information from our own commissioner, I think, in a short time.

Now Mr. Chairman, I think I have covered everything except these Illinois valley claims. The bill provides for arbitration of these claims. I do not propose to go into the merits of any of these claims, but I wish when you gentlemen are considering the poor farmer in connection with these claims that you save a tear for the taxpayer, and the Sanitary District of Chicago, the widow and orphan, the white-collar man, and the poor laboring man, who have to pay these claims. We are willing to have these claims adjudicated on a fair and square basis by any authority you may create to do it.

Unless there are some questions I am through with what I have

to say.

The CHAIRMAN. I have only this to suggest. Let me understand what the claim of the sanitary district is as advanced by you as a witness. My understanding of the claim is that you believe that you have the right to divert 10,000 cubic feet now, and that as population increases each million of inhabitants will require and additional 3,000 cubic feet.

Mr. RANDOLPH. No.

The CHAIRMAN. Is that it?

Mr. RANDOLPH. No, that is not our program at all. The program is predicated upon our right to divert 10,000 cubic feet per second, and we propose to supplement the drainage canal and its dilution capacity by the construction of sewage disposal plants to take care of our present normal population, and to cut down the present load on the main drainage channel by 50 per cent.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, now, let us take that aspect of it. If Congress acted then and granted a license you would be willing to have that amount cut down by 50 per cent

Mr. RANDOLPH. No.

The CHAIRMAN. Within what time?

Mr. RANDOLPH. I would not be willing to have the 10,000 cubic feet cut down by 50 per cent because the rate of dilution is not ade

quate now. At the end of 25 years our program contemplates construction of sufficient sewage disposal plants to reduce the present load upon the drainage canal 50 per cent and to produce a clearer discharge in the Illinois River, and relieve the condition of local nuisance that now obtains.

The CHAIRMAN. What I am trying to get at is this. I want to find out what is asked here. Do you ask for 10,000 in perpetuity? Mr. RANDOLPH. In perpetuity; yes.

The CHAIRMAN. And you have no proposal or suggestion that you will relieve the situation by substituting other means of caring for your discharge there; you simply want that naked grant?

Mr. RANDOLPH. The whole program is predicated upon the grant of 10,000 second-feet in perpetuity.

The CHAIRMAN. Suppose Congress should not care to look at it that way; suppose they should say you have a great city there, and we are not going to permit the health of the inhabitants to be unnecessarily jeopardized, and, on the other hand, you are taking this water not only without authority but contrary to any right you have, and have taken it in excess of the amount permitted, and you should have known that you would be legally enjoined at any time on that, and while we are not going to expose you to the ravages of disease, we are going to insist on your taking care of your sewage in another way at the earliest date possible, and we are going to do that upon the advice of experts as to what can be done and with what rapidity. Now, what would you say to that proposition?

Mr. RANDOLPH. I would say to that proposition, that this program as contemplated, a 25-year program, is the limit of the taxing and bonding resources of the sanitary district, that if we have got to double that program it will take us twice as long, that unless Congress can persuade the State of Illinois to amend the act and increase the tax rate and the bonding power, and impose this heavier burden upon the taxpayers of Chicago, it can not be done in less time.

The CHAIRMAN. It is suggested by those who oppose this grant that the sanitary district has a very persuasive voice in the Illinois Legislature and will probably secure such legislation as is needed.

Mr. BARRETT. It is not a question of legislation entirely. We have been trying since 1870 to get a new constitution, but the people down State do not choose to give Chicago what it wants, and our population in Chicago and in the sanitary district is increasing 70,000 each year. That makes it difficult for us to take care of our troubles. We have provided a program of expenditure of $100.000,000 down to 1945, which will just about take care of our increase. We are hoping that in that 20 years some less expensive method of sewage treatment will develop so that we can do a whole lot more. Nobody can tell what may develop in the next 10 years in that.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, you can very readily understand with six great States, all of them saying that this water should not be taken out, and that it is illegally taken. Congress will naturally pay a great deal of attention, give a good deal of weight to their arguments, and while it naturally wants to be fair and not endanger anybody, it will try to find what can be done.

Mr. BARRETT. We expect the equities of everybody to be considered by the Congress of the United States. We think when our time comes here we will be able to demonstrate not only to this committee