was nothing to stop the deluge. He was talking about the delta lands which lie on both sides of the great river from Cairo on south. Since that day great levees have been built on both sides of the river from Cairo to the Gulf of Mexico, high enough and strong enough to withstand the mightiest of the floods. No longer can the flood waters, pouring down on this delta area from 34 States, drained by this great river and its tributaries, flood these areas. All these areas are safe and secure-all except one. The backwater areas have been forgotten. We feel that these areas should be fully protected by the building of a proper levee, same as the main river, so that the people of this area may enjoy the same protection and feel the same security for themselves and their property as those people who live behind the levees above the backwater areas.

Mr. DRIVER. Mr. Burke, would you care to make a statement in connection with this situation on the backwater area?

STATEMENT OF F. N. BURKE, OF MARIANNA, ARK.

Mr. BURKE. Mr. Chairman, I am not going to impose upon the committee at this late hour with any very extended statement of our views. I am a neighbor of Dr. Williamson, who has stated the situation in the backwater area very excellently and most conclusively as we believe it to be.

We have lived down there in that country all of our lives. We lived there when they began constructing these levees in years gone. by, 42 years ago in the St. Francis levee district. I did, at any rate. I was born and reared on the banks of the St. Francis River, 4 miles north of the mouth, where it flows into the Mississippi. Í own a farm today. I believe I made the statement once before to the Flood Control Committee up here-however, it will bear repeating that when I was a boy living on that farm-I still own it for sentimental reasons. It has been in my family for 75 years, purchased by my grandfather in the woods in the fall of 1860.

The question arises in all of these hearings, What has been the influence and the effect of the construction of the front-line levees upon the areas in the so-called "backwater " sections? I merely speak from my experience when I say to you that as a boy the greatest floods that we had then rarely ever covered, in fact, I do not recall any flood ever covering all of our land. The place where our house stood was never covered. The flowers, the fruit trees, the shrubs in the yard. were never destroyed by the water. I do not remember the water ever getting up in the front yard around our house. The house is built on brick pillars 3 or 4 feet off the ground; I would say 3 feet. The walls are 10 or 11 feet high. The flood of 1927, when it was at its height—I went down there in a boat, and the water then was on top of the house. The only thing you could see of that old house was the top of the chimneys and the roof tree, the top of the roof sticking out. So you can see that something has brought about a tremendous increase in the flood height in that area.

I think Mr. C. N. Houck, who is sitting here beside me, and who has introduced a statement into the record, could give you some very good information concerning that, because he is connected with an institution there and they kept a gage and they have kept records of the floods for many years. They are able to prove, as I understand, from their records, that since the construction of these levees the flood waters have increased in there approximately 9 to 11 feet. Is that correct?

Mr. HOUCK. As much as 11 feet.

Mr. BURKE. That is the damage that has been done to us. It is not a question of what is going to be done to us; it is what has already happened, and it has happened by the construction of these levees.

That brings up the question that Dr. Williamson and Mr. Pharr introduced, that, of course, we feel that if we could be protected we want protection, even at this late date, because we might begin if we had protection, with the fertility of the lands at our command, to reconstruct our shattered fortunes. They are shattered, too, gentlemen, I will tell you that. The farmers are in a bad fix. But we would like to have protection if we could have it. And it would not be only for the benefit of those of us who are living. That territory is in the geographical heart of the United States, that territory up and down the Mississippi River, Mr. Whittington's country, and our country, and the White River, and so forth. This Nation is going to need those lands. Some day it is going to do the very thing we are asking here, there is no question of doubt about that. Other nations go out in the sea and build sea walls and dump soil in there and all that. We have got the soil. All we need is to keep the water off the soil.

As I say, the time is going to come when those lands are going to be needed to furnish food and clothing for the people, and they are going to be protected.

If it is possible while this great program of recovery is under way, while the Government is disposed to spend the money-they are going out searching for projects on which to spend it—if you gentlemen and the Army engineers could see your way to take hold of these things and work them out, very great good would flow to the United States. I do not think there is any question of doubt that the projects would pay. You have always to figure on that, as a business proposition. It would pay in increased living for large numbers of people, better living opportunities, it would increase in the taxes that would be paid, in the profits that would be made by wholesale and retail merchants, in the profits that would accrue to our railroads in hauling the products of the territory, and so forth.

I do not want to continue. I know you gentlemen are tired of listening to these statements that we come up here to make to you. You know a lot about this thing; you know as much about it as we do, because we have been coming here many years. We appreciate the courtesy that is afforded us in permitting us to come here to present our views, and we appreciate the respectful hearing that we are given, whether we say anything worth while or not.

I just want to let the committee know that we hope that we may be able to convince you of the value of this thing that we are asking. If it cannot be done, in the last analysis it comes down to this, that the lands are to be forever condemned to servitude for the surplus waters of the Mississippi River, and our property has to be devoted for the balance of time to taking care of somebody else's property; in that case, as a matter of law and as a matter of right, the question of compensation should be considered.

I thank you.

Mr. FERGUSON. You speak of the backwater area; in all these plans as adopted up and down the Mississippi, where they take the water off of somebody they have to put it on somebody else. Is that correct?

Mr. BURKE. I do not think so. I do not think they have to do that. We do do that.

Mr. FERGUSON. What could you do with that water? Do you think it all could be kept in the main channel of the Mississippi?

Mr. BURKE. The object and purpose of the engineers is, of course, to take it eventually on out. Perhaps they will find ways of retarding some of it in the headwaters. When I was up here a number of years ago I think you had a gentleman on this committee from Nebraska, who was a great advocate of reservoirs.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Sears; yes, sir, at that time.

Mr. BURKE. I remember the gentleman very well. I remember the frequent questions that he asked of us all. From the conversations that I have had here with our representatives on the committee, I know that he subscribes to that same theory. I do not believe it is altogether a theory. I believe it is practical. Of course, it would cost a lot of money, and it would take a lot of time, but retarding the water is something that might be seriously considered. There are sections of the United States today that do not have enough water. If any way could be found to give them some of ours, we would be very glad.

Mr. WHITTINGTON. If you do not have enough, we will be glad to let you have some of ours.

Mr. FERGUSON. The State down there has practically exhausted its resources. You say that levee district has been building that levee for 42 years, and they have been taxed for that purpose?

Mr. BURKE. That is true.

Mr. FERGUSON. Now the Government has to come in-I, too, am an advocate of reservoirs-and they always figure the cost. But do you not think in figuring the additional cost and even the upkeep of reservoirs you must consider the amount of money that your individuals and local interests have spent there over a period of years, and nothing remains to show for it?

Mr. Burke. I would not say nothing remains to show for it. We have a levee over there on the Mississippi River that shows for it. That is where the money went, you understand.

Mr. FERGUSON. I understand that; but you say it is ineffective, it is letting this backwater come in on you.

Mr. BURKE. That is certainly true in the backwater area, but you understand the St. Francis levee district comprises 1,600,000 acres, and about 525,000 of that is in the backwater area. There are some additional lands in our district which are included in the flood area. which the gentlemen talked to you about this evening, and which will be protected by these Missouri and Arkansas levees that the bill under discussion proposes to have built. That territory along the Mississippi River is protected already. The land along that stretch of the Mississippi in Crittenden County is worth $100 an acre. Cities and towns have been built in there, and concrete highways. Judge Driver's county is one of the most wonderful in the world. All of that has taken place as a result of the building of that levee. So it is there to show, and it has been a valuable thing, undoubtedly so.

I would like to add just one thing more about that little old farm that I was born and raised on. I told you gentlemen about it; it is not worth anything now much. But in 1860 my grandfather purchased that land in the woods. I have the deed, of course, written out

in longhand, an old-fashioned deed yellowed with age, 75 years old, in my safe today. That deed recites a cash consideration of $6,000 in gold. Nowadays you could not pay for it that way. But $6,000 in gold was paid by my grandfather for that 400 acres of land in the woods, which is $15 per acre.

We have a submarginal project that the Government is proposing down there, taking in some lands in that section between Helena and Marianna. They have set up an office at Marianna and they have some appraisers down there, and they are going around appraising the land. They had some Federal land bank appraisers in there to make the appraisals. After making the appraisements there they are offering contracts to the landowners to purchase those lands to incorporate in this so-called "park." They came to me the other day with a contract made out and said, "Here is what we will give you for your land." For the land that my grandfather paid $15 an acre for in the woods 75 years ago they offered me $7.43 an acre.

Mr. FERGUSON. That is the land that was ruined by the effect of the levees you built?

Mr. BURKE. That is right.

Mr. WHITTINGTON. We used to raise United States Senators and the President of the Confederacy and Methodist bishops down in my territory 75 years ago.

The CHAIRMAN. If that is all, Mr. Burke, we thank you very much. The committee will adjourn until 10:30 o'clock tomorrow morning. (Whereupon at 11 p. m. a recess was taken until 10:30 o'clock tomorrow morning.)

FLOOD CONTROL IN THE MISSISSIPPI VALLEY

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 10, 1935

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
COMMITTEE ON FLOOD CONTROL,

Washington, D. C.

The committee met at 10:30 a. m., Hon. Riley J. Wilson (chairman) presiding.

ST. FRANCIS BASIN

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Driver, you may proceed and present such other witnesses as you desire the committee to hear this morning. STATEMENT OF HON. WILLIAM J. DRIVER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ARKANSAS

Mr. DRIVER. Mr. Chairman, I would like to present to the committee first, this morning, Mr. Earl E. Jones, of Kennett, Mo.

I call the attention of the committee to the fact that one of the most tireless workers we have had in connection with the project on the St. Francis River is a very distinguished citizen of the same place, and a brother of the witness I am about to present to you. I refer to Mr. Landon R. Jones, who is a member of the State Senate of Missouri and is the author of a revenue bill which is now under consideration by the legislature of the State, and who, at the urgent request of the Governor, has remained at the State capital, notwithstanding his interest in this St. Francis flood-protection program. I desire to make that announcement because of the very intelligent and energetic service Mr. Jones has given to this river problem through his position as president of an organization of the local interests that correlated and delivered to this committee on a former hearing a most thorough and exhaustive investigation into the flood losses in that territory and the damage from the floods on the river. I now take pleasure, Mr. Chairman, in presenting to you Mr. Earl E. Jones, of Kennett, Mo.

STATEMENT OF EARL E. JONES, KENNETT, MO.

Mr. JONES. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I am not going to attempt to go into the matter as thoroughly, perhaps, as my brother would, because I am not as familiar with it as he is.

I might state, however, to show you my connection with the activities along the St. Francis River, that we have four levee districts in the State of Missouri, three of which are in Dunklin County.