for the Wabash River and tributaries. I am sure that this reservoir can be constructed without serious opposition from local interests. Because of its proximity to the city of Indianapolis, it will have a high recreational value-in fact, at the present time, the area in that vicinity has a small lake for boating and swimming purposes, and there are a great number of small cottages scattered along the shore line.

I am enclosing, as an appendix, the report of the Indiana Flood Control Commission.

Very truly yours,

RALPH F. GATES, Governor of Indiana.

(Representative Charles W. Vursell of the Twenty-third District of Illinois submitted the following statement:)

STATEMENT OF CONGRESSMAN CHARLES W. VURSELL, REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE TWENTY-THIRD DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

Mr. Chairman and members, Flood Control Committee, in your consideration of flood-control projects for the Wabash River, some of which affect the counties of Wabash, Lawrence, and Crawford, Ill., in my congressional district, I first want to point out the danger of damages which may be done to property owners on the Illinois side of the river.

It is the policy of the Government engineers who have studied this project and who have recommended the building of levees generally along the Wabash and its tributaries, I realize, so far as they can, to recommend such projects as will properly channel the water in a manner that will be as fair as it is possible to the property owners on both side of the stream. This, however, cannot always be done.

I call the attention of the committee in particular to project No. 5, a levee recommended for construction on the south side of Patoka Creek, a tributary of the Wabash River. If and when project No. 5 is constructed this levee will narrow the passage of the water at this point from some 4 miles to possibly 1 mile, with a strong possibility of raising the river level at Mount Carmel, Ill., from 26 to 33 feet.

I may be wrong in the approximate figures but at any rate the water level will be raised several feet. This will affect the property of the Mount Carmel Public Utility & Service Co. of Mount Carmel, Ill., which is the sole source of power, furnishing a city of some 10,000 people. It will inundate the foundation work and make it necessary for the power plant to be raised some 7 or 8 feet at a great expense to this particular company.

I want to enter my most emphatic objection to the construction of this levee on the Indiana side opposite Mount Carmel for the reason that it will not only affect the public-utility plant referred to but that the raising of the water level will overflow and damage much farm land north from this water bottleneck which will result from the building of the levee referred to.

It is my understanding that a levee district on the Indiana side, for instance, built in cooperation with the Federal Government or as a levee district private project, may wall in their lands by the use of a levee and cause great volumes of water to be diverted to the opposite side of the stream resulting in serious damages to property owners and that under the courts such property owners are practically without redress for damages.

The Army engineers also inform me that it is very doubtful if the Mount Carmel Public Utility & Service Co. could receive any governmental aid to reimburse them for the lifting or raising of their power plant by reason of the Federal Government and the levee district of Indiana constructing such works as would raise the water level to a point making it necessary for the power-plant building to be raised.

It is doubtful whether any financial relief could be secured through the Appropriations Committees of the Congress.

Taking these factors into account, I desire to call this to the attention of the committee in the hope that they may give further study before they approve project No. 5.

I want to call the particular attention of the committee to the Russell-Allison levee-district proposal opposite Vincennes and affecting a rather large area in Crawford County.

I am not fully conversant with the objections that have been offered to the building of this levee at a meeting held at Vincennes, Ind., in June 1945, at which time Illinois objectors were given an opportunity to state their views. I hope the committee will give most careful attention and study to this particular proposal.

From the engineers' report I also note that the Federal Government is helping to pay the cost to the railroads where changes are necessary by reason of the Wabash Valley project and it would seem to me that if Government money can be expended to help compensate the railroads that it could be expended to help compensate the public-utility power plant referred to at Mount Carmel, and for damages in other cases which may arise by virtue of the completion of such projects as recommended in the engineers' report and which are being considered before this committee.

By reason of levees on the Indiana side and by reason of the lack of levees having been built on the Illinois side of the Wabash touching on Wabash County floodwaters have already been turned from the Indiana side to the Illinois side in such volume as to do great damage to a number of farms. The only relief possible is for those damaged to file a bill before the Claims Committee of the Congress. My experience has been that really no relief can be gotten through such an effort when such claims are filed with the Congress. . For this reason, and for the protection of the property owners of Wabash, Lawrence, and Crawford Counties, I hope the committee, before giving its approval to the projects on either side of the river in this section, will give serious thought in its recommendations to the end that such levee districts on either side of the river which are approved will give the greatest possible balanced protection to the property owners on both sides of the river.

Again may I urge the committee to give particular attention and further study to project No. 5, hereinabove referred to, opposite the city of Mount Carmel.

The CHAIRMAN. You heard the statement previously made by the president of the Chicago and Eastern Illinois Railroad that the railways were required to make certain adjustments in the Vincennes area. What do you have to say with respect to that?

Colonel WEST. As I understand the report, the Federal Government will bear all the cost that will be incurred by the railroads if alteration of the railroads is necessary.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Stover, you say you are opposed to the Federal Government paying the cost?

Mr. STOVER. I would like for our chief engineer, Mr. McBride, to explain briefly the program outlined by the Army on the so-called gates at certain flood stage.

The CHAIRMAN. I understood you to say, and I want to get it straight for the record, when you made your initial statement, that you were opposed to the plan of the Chief of Engineers for those projects in the Vincennes area.

Mr. STOVER. That is all.

The CHAIRMAN. By opposing the plan, do you oppose the plan for the Federal Government to bear the cost of the railroad relocation? Mr. STOVER. NO; they do not propose to relocate the railroad. They do propose to put floodgates across the main line of the railroad, which will shut off the transportation.

The CHAIRMAN. Let us get this straight about the railroad. I thought you told me a minute ago that the railroad changes were to be borne by the Federal Government.

Colonel WEST. Yes, sir; wherever any changes are necessary. In place of relocating them at considerable expense at a higher level, so they could operate during flood periods, we propose a gate similar to those used throughout the lower Mississippi and Ohio Rivers. The CHAIRMAN. There are levees along there.

Colonel WEST. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. And the railroad crosses the river?

Colonel WEST. No, sir; it does not cross the river. It runs parallel to the river.

The CHAIRMAN. Does it run between the levee and the river?

Colonel WEST. There is a proposed back levee where there is a creek that comes in just above Vincennes, and there is another proposed back levee below.

The CHAIRMAN. Anyway, is the railroad between the levee and the river?

Colonel WEST. The railroad crosses the proposed back levees, sir. The CHAIRMAN. The railroad crosses the back levee?

Colonel WEST. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. And where it crosses the back levee, the levee is cut and at high flood you propose to put a gate there?

Colonel WEST. Yes, sir.

As I understand it, there are other portions of the track flooded, anyway, and the trains could not operate.

The CHAIRMAN. What do you say, Mr. Stover, about that?

Mr. STOVER. The Chicago and Eastern Illinois Railroad has never been completely shut out. It is the main artery from Chicago all through that area to the South. We feel that it is unnecessary to shut off transportation at any time during any flood season that they have down there.

We have been working on this for some time. The only thing we are opposed to is this floodgate they propose to put across the main line of transportation.

The CHAIRMAN. I can understand how you feel, and generally we want to encourage transportation, but I repeat the question. The engineer states, as you have just heard, that if a gate is constructed across this road, that it would not impede transportation more than would otherwise be impeded, because other parts of your road are not protected.

Now, is that statement true or not?

Mr. STOVER. I will let our chief engineer answer that. His name is J. S. McBride.

STATEMENT OF J. S. MCBRIDE, CHIEF ENGINEER, CHICAGO AND EASTERN ILLINOIS RAILROAD

Mr. MCBRIDE. That is true to this extent, Mr. Chairman. We are gradually raising our railroad above the flood stage. As an example of that, in the 1930 flood we had 3 feet of water over our tracks, and our track has been raised above the 1930 flood. The 1943 flood exceeded the 1930 flood and we did have water over our track then. But we are continuing to raise that track and going above the 1943 flood. If we are shut off with these gates, then, what we are doing north of Vincennes will be lost.

The CHAIRMAN. Is that backwater levee intended to provide against a 1943 flood?

Mr. MCBRIDE. As I understand it, it is to provide against any flood. Colonel WEST. That is correct. The protective work will provide protection against floods with an average frequency of once in each 100-year period.

The CHAIRMAN. Then, if you have raised your railroad at that point, there will not be any occasion for any gates?

Mr. MCBRIDE. We have not raised any tracks there.

The CHAIRMAN. You say you are in the process of raising them? Mr. MCBRIDE. North of Vincennes.

The CHAIRMAN. You admit the statement that he has made, that if this gate is operated at present, and until you finish your process of raising, there would be flooding north of Vincennes?

Mr. MCBRIDE. Yes, sir. We are engaged in that right now.

The CHAIRMAN. If you supplement what you have done, there would be no occasion for gates?

Mr. MCBRIDE. That is what we want the Government to do inside the levee.

The CHAIRMAN. You mean raise the railroad?

Mr. MCBRIDE. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. We will be glad to take your statement up later. All right, Mr. Stover.

Mr. STOVER. If it is agreeable with you, I would like to leave this brief statement.

The CHAIRMAN. As I understand you now, you feel that while you are raising your railroad at other points, the Government ought to raise the railroad where it crosses this back levee?

Mr. STOVER. That is right.

The CHAIRMAN. How do you distinguish? I have high regard for your view, but I cannot figure out why you should raise your railroad at one point and not raise it at another. You may be able to clarify it.

Mr. STOVER. If you left it just as is, it will not interfere with our operations in Vincennes, because we have operated through Vincennes through all these flood periods. It is the other points north of there where we have raised our track and protected ourselves from the floodwaters of the Wabash River.

The CHAIRMAN. If this railroad has never been covered, why do you want to put a gate there?

Colonel WEST. It is largely a matter of providing free board.

The CHAIRMAN. Does this proposed Vincennes levee protect his railroad?

Colonel WEST. Yes, sir; it does within the levee.

The CHAIRMAN. In the Vincennes area?

Colonel WEST. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Without your protection would that railroad be flooded?

Colonel WEST. It would be flooded, and so would Vincennes.
The CHAIRMAN. When was that railroad flooded last?

Colonel WEST. In May 1943, sir.

Mr. STOVER. It did not stop operation.

The CHAIRMAN. How much was your railroad under water?

Mr. MCBRIDE. We have operated through 30 inches of water.

The CHAIRMAN. You mean 30 inches of water over your railroad in Vincennes?

Mr. MCBRIDE. In the city of Vincennes there has been no water over our tracks; that is, in the city limits.

The CHAIRMAN. Was any over the tracks at Vincennes?

Colonel WEST. No, sir. There was some water over the track above and below Vincennes.

The CHAIRMAN. Does this levee give them any protection?

Colonel WEST. It protects their yards and their tracks within the leveed area.

The CHAIRMAN. Have those yards been flooded?

Colonel WEST. No, sir; I do not believe they have, but they would be flooded with the present situation in regard to levees. The 1943 flood was much smaller than the 1913 flood.

The CHAIRMAN. Was that area where the yards are flooded in 1913? Colonel WEST. No, sir; but it would be with a recurrence of the flood.

The CHAIRMAN. The flood level has been raised as you have raised the levees?

Colonel WEST. That is right, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. That is an engineering question.

Mr. STOVER. That is right.

The CHAIRMAN. We will be glad to have your engineer when we reach you. When you come back, Mr. McBride, you bring the maps to show us generally your location.

AFTERNOON SESSION

The CHAIRMAN. We will return for the moment, Colonel West, to the projects along the Wabash, and the objections made by the president of Chicago & Eastern Illinois Railroad and the chief engineer, Mr. McBride.

Mr. McBride, if you will come to the table, please. Do you have a map that you want to show us?

Mr. MCBRIDE. Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman. I would like to file this map supplementing Mr. Stover's statement.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you mean that you would like to file that map in conjunction with the statement of Mr. Stover? If you do, I do not believe it can be printed, but it will be used by the committee.

While you have that map before you there, does that map embrace the Vincennes area?

Mr. MCBRIDE. Yes, sir; this map shows in yellow, the Chicago & Eastern Illinois Railroad, and in red, the Vincennes protection.

The CHAIRMAN. I would like for Mr. McBride and Mr. Adams to come up there and look at that map. I would like for you to point out for them and tell Mr. Allen and myself, the location of your railroad and your yards in Vincennes. Where is the location of the proposed back levee?

Mr. MCBRIDE [indicating]. It comes here, and crosses just north of town, and a 5-foot floodgate is proposed. Again south of town, with a 6-foot floodgate.

The CHAIRMAN. This town, the city of Vincennes, you have calculated and indicated that. Where is the proposed levee; that is in red?

Mr. MCBRIDE. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. What protects your railroad north of Vincennes? What protects your railroad from overflows?

Mr. MCBRIDE. Nothing.