f Commerce, Joint Traffic Bureau, Clearing House
Association, Cotton Exchange, Board of Trade, and Steamship
Association.

There is no use trying to guess at what the policy will be. It is too
big a problem, and must be worked out very carefully, with reference to
a confusing tangle of cross-interests.

Two principles have already been categorically laid down by President
Hudson and endorsed by the Dock Board at an open meeting of April 5,
1921, with the commercial and industrial interests of the city,
planning for the policy of the Canal:

First, that the development of the Canal shall not be at the expense of
the river. Wharf development will be pushed on the river to meet the
legitimate commercial demands of the port. No one is to be forced on
the Canal. That would hurt the port. It is not thought that such forced
development would be necessary, and the Canal will be kept open for the
specialized industries that can best use the co-ordination of the
river, rail and maritime facilities.

Second, that the control of the property along the Canal, owned by the
Dock Board, will not go out of the hands of the Board. There will be
long-term leases--up to ninety-nine years, but no outright sale.
Furthermore, the private land on the other side of the Dock Board's
property will not be allowed to be developed at the expense of the
state's interests. So the frontage on the Canal will be developed
before there is any extensive construction of lateral basins and slips.

What will be the rate charged for a site? Will it be based on the
actual cost of the Canal and its maintenance? Or will the state
consider it a business investment like a road or street, and charge the
property owners thereon less than the cost of construction, collecting
the difference in the general progress? That, too, is a question which
calls for considerable study before it can be answered.

With the Industrial Canal open, sites available on long leases to
business enterprise, and with our tax laws relating to the processes of
industry and commerce revised and made more favorable, New Orleans will
enter a period of expansion and development on a scale hardly yet
dreamed of by her most far-visioned citizens, with enlarged profit and
opportunity for all her people.

New taxable wealth will be created rapidly. New needs for taxable
property will arise. The tax burden on all will be distributed more
widely and when contrasted with the earning power of suc