 It's time for the Lawn Jean Chronoscope, a television journal of the important issues of the hour brought to you every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, a presentation of the Lawn Jean Wittner Watch Company, maker of Lawn Jean, the world's most honored watch, and Wittner, distinguished companion to the world-honored Lawn Jean. Good evening. This is Frank Knight. May I introduce our co-editors for this edition of the Lawn Jean Chronoscope? Larry Lasser from the CBS television news staff and Kenneth Crawford, national affairs editor of Newsweek magazine. Our distinguished guest for this evening is the Honorable George A. Dondaro, United States representative from Michigan. In this reporter's opinion, if this 83rd Congress goes down in history for nothing else, it will be known as the Congress which passed the St. Lawrence Seaway Bill. A bill, a measure which opens up a 2,500 mile waterway through the heart of the United States. Now our guest tonight is the chairman of the House Public Works Committee and therefore was highly instrumental in the passage of that measure. Representative Dondaro, you've been a champion of the St. Lawrence Seaway for 20 years. That's correct. Now, why do you think it's a good thing for our country? Because it provides a new avenue or highway of water transportation and water transportation in the Great Lakes area is the cheapest transportation in this world. Well, do you feel it's a purely regional measure that it will help the Great Lakes cities and do harm to the other seaports in the United States, the Atlantic seaports like Philadelphia and New York? No, sir. I do not. I look upon it as a national measure of national benefit to all of our people. And I do not think that the eastern seaboard and the port that you've named will be affected adversely to any extent that they will even notice. Mr. Dondaro, this has always been so in your opinion, I know. Why was it held up so long? Where did this opposition come from? Well, it came from three sources. The coal industry fought it, the railroads fought it, and also the seaports along the Atlantic and the Gulf of Mexico. What in your opinion was the consideration that finally put it over, got around this opposition? Two things. The determination on the part of Canada to build it alone, in case we did not care to participate with it. And secondly, the discovery of what may be the largest deposit of iron ore in the world in the wilds of Labrador and Quebec. Well, that brings me to this point, Mr. Congressman. A lot of congressional critics say that the reason the administration has been so favorable towards the Seaway is because two of the most potent friends of President Eisenhower are members of the steel industry, and one of them is, as you know, Mr. Humphrey in the cabinet. Now, how much weight would that interest of the steel industries have because we know now that iron ore must come from elsewhere than the Masabi range in your part of the country? It had nothing to do with it. Whatever. The iron ore question did, because we have to admit that the iron ore deposits of the United States are diminishing rapidly. Because we're using a hundred million tons a year, and witnesses before my committee testified that by 1960, which is only six years away, we will use a hundred and fifty million tons. Our ore perhaps will vanish in the next ten to fifteen years, and it had to be provided from some other source. Well, this is actually true that there's a lot of ore in Latin America that we can get a hold of, and a lot of it is coming right into Philadelphia right now. That's true, and it comes into the port of Baltimore. But in case of war, or trouble with a foreign foe, we become a very vulnerable nation when we are compelled to bring that ore across the water. Just as what happened in the last war, when six out of eight ships were bringing ore from Chile, to the United States were sunk by the German submarines in the Gulf of Mexico. Mr. Don Darrow, I was going to ask you. Do you feel that President Eisenhower's insistence that this was necessary as a measure of preparation for war had something to do with overcoming the opposition ultimately? I think it was a major reason added to the other fact that raw materials in greater amount are coming to the United States from Canada every year. This provides one way to bring them cheaper and in larger quantities. Well, Representative Don Darrow, Mr. Humphrey, the present Secretary of the Treasury, was once against the Seaway until 1949 it was discovered that these tremendous ore bodies lay up in Labrador. And it's also true that the Hanna Company, which he represents, which controls national steel, has spent about $200,000 in lobbying since 1949. You mean against the Seaway? For the Seaway when he changed his mind. No doubt the discovery of ore in Labrador and their interest. They're one of the companies that are exploring and developing the ore in Labrador and Quebec. However, I don't think that entered into it very much. The steel companies of the United States are searching this world for new deposits of iron ore. Not alone the republic steel that's represented by the Hanna people, or George Humphrey, who was interested in it, but all the steel companies of this country have been looking all over this world in Africa for a new deposits of iron ore because we're using it in such increased quantities. The steel industry's expanded data. Mr. Don Darrow, the Masaba range is about worn out, is that true? Well, the best figure we get it'll last maybe 10 to 15 years. That's the open pit, rich iron ore. Then Labrador will become the principal source. It will become a source added with that ore before that time because the estimate is that we'll bring in 20 million tons of ore as soon as the new canal of the St. Lawrence Seaway is open from Labrador. Representative Don Darrow, one of the arguments against the Seaway has always been that it's closed up for three or four months of the year when the Great Lakes freeze over. Now what are we going to do when those lakes freeze over and we have no iron ore to get across? We've answered that for 75 years in the Great Lakes area by bringing down the ore that is required for the steel industry and stockpiling it in the eight months when navigation is open. We have no trouble whatever in regard to that and the same rule that applied in bringing ore from Duluth, Minnesota will apply to bringing it up the St. Lawrence with the same ships and using the same machinery. Speaking of Duluth, it seems to me that when Herbert Hoover first proposed Seaway a long time ago, he wanted it to run right up to Duluth. Now this isn't the same Seaway, it just goes as far as really as Lake Erie, doesn't it? As to 27 feet. And someday in the future, maybe not for 10 years or 20 years. If they want to deepen the canals, that is they're connecting channels of the Great Lakes like the Detroit River. To 27 feet they can do it. It's 25 feet now and on that 25 feet we have been able to, well we better say we've been able to do about 25% of the water borne commerce of the entire United States. Mr. Don Darrow, how much will this cost and how will it be paid for? It will cost the United States shares $105 million and it is the only project on the North American continent which will be paid for by tolls to be charged against those who use the new canals and the newer canals. And the new locks in the St. Lawrence Seaway. And Canada shares? Canada shares a little less than $200 million because she has four locks to build while we only have three and in addition to that she will be compelled to lower the well and canal by 2 feet. You mean actually the people who are going to use the Seaway will actually pay for its cost over in the long run? They will and the period of amortization is 50 years. Mr. Don Darrow, some people I think think of this as a project designed primarily to make Chicago and Duluth and the middle western cities great seaports that the Queen Mary will sail into Chicago harbor and so on. Well of course that's not true. The Queen Mary and battleships couldn't use the canal. It would take about 73% of the ocean ship if they want to use it. But in my judgment the major part of the commerce of the St. Lawrence Seaway will be domestic commerce. It will not be foreign commerce such as iron ore, wheat shipment, bulk shipment, petroleum and petroleum products. There will be some foreign commerce to be sure. Okay so as a matter of fact you now see a foreign ship in the Great Lakes do you not? Yes sir, the little 14 foot canal that Canada built and she had more vision than we did 55 years ago. Bring in little ships 250 feet long with about 2500 tons capacity. Representative Don Darrow, what ports do you expect on the Great Lakes will benefit most from the sea? There are 16 major ports on the Great Lakes such as Toledo, Cleveland, Ashtabula, Lorraine, Detroit. And then going up around Saginaw, Bay City, Chicago, Milwaukee on the Wisconsin coast, Duluth, Minnesota and so on. Superior Wisconsin. Of course they won't all benefit equally. What do you expect will be the great St. Lawrence port in the future then? I don't think you can say that any one port will be the great St. Lawrence port. All of the ports that wish to can use the St. Lawrence Seaway commerce. Now do you think that the actual passing of the measure under the Eisenhower administration will have a pervasive effect on the coming congressional elections in your part of the world? I doubt it very much. Perhaps those who were for it might gain something by it and I can say to you it's not a partisan measure in the least. It's bipartisan. Both parties supported it. Both in the Middle West, Republican and Democratic congressmen all supported it. Reverend Dondaro, you are very optimistic and you may well be because you have a right to be about the St. Lawrence Seaway. But what about the coming congressional elections? Do you feel quite as optimistic about those as a Republican? That's a political question and perhaps there are many people in the country who are disappointed. Nevertheless, the Eisenhower administration has accomplished some real things and this St. Lawrence Seaway that we're discussing in my judgment is one of the major accomplishments of the president's administration. Representative, when will it be ready? When will we be able to go down to St. Lawrence and go to Duluth? It will take five years to build it. At the end of that time, I hope and I said so to the president that he and I could take a trip on the first ship through it. And who's going to build it? Will it be the private industry or the army? The Corps of Army Engineers of the United States and the Canadian Corps of Engineers will have supervision and control of it. Some of the work will be let out to private contractors. The Army Engineers of the United States do that all over our country. Now, will we be able to get any hydroelectric power out of it or will this hurt the potential of the St. Lawrence to hydroelectric? No, the power and the navigation must be built together because the dams that will furnish the hydroelectric power are also the dams that furnish the water for the country. Well, thank you very much, Representative Dondaro, for some very informative stuff. The opinions expressed on the Laundry and Chronoscope were those of the speakers. The editorial board for this edition of the Laundry and Chronoscope was Larry Lisser and Kenneth Crawford. Our distinguished guest was the Honorable George A. Dondaro, United States Representative from Michigan. They say that everyone sees the watch on your wrist. To be really well-dressed, every detail must conform, including your watch. Now, Laundry makes a watch to fill every need to suit every taste. The choice of models and styles is almost unlimited. For ladies, Laundry creates superb examples of the jeweler's art, exquisite in taste and finish, and literally for every occasion. For men, Laundry produces watches for every requirement. Watches for dress and sport. Laundry automatic watches, the most advanced in the world. Waterproof and shock resistant watches for rugged service. Laundry chronograph watches for sportsmen and for scientists. And every Laundry watch, whether for a lady or for a gentleman, is made to the unique standards of excellence, which have won for Laundry ten World's Fair Grand Prizes. Twenty-eight gold medals, highest honors for accuracy in fields of precise timing. And this statement is true throughout the world. The Laundry watch on your wrist is not only one of the finest watches made anywhere in the world, but equally important, it's the watch of highest prestige. And yet, unbelievably, you may own or proudly give a Laundry watch for as little as seventy-one fifty. Laundry, the world's most honored watch, the world's most honored gift. Premier product of the Laundry Wittner Watch Company. Since 1866, maker of watches of the highest character. We invite you to join us every Monday, Wednesday and Friday evening at this same time for the Laundry Chronoscope, a television journal of the important issues of the hour. Broadcast on behalf of Laundry, the world's most honored watch, and Wittner, distinguished companion to the world honored Laundry. This is Frank Knight reminding you that Laundry and Wittner watches are sold and serviced from coast to coast by more than 4,000 leading jurors who proudly display this emblem. Agency for Laundry Wittner Watches.