AMERICAN-HAWAIIAN STEAMSHIP CO., Steamship Kentuckian from Philadelphia July 3. Mr. H. W. WARLEY, Vice President Ore Steamship Corporation, New York. DEAR SIR: Referring to our telephone conversation this morning in which you offered approximately 220 tons of structural steel for Portland per our Steamship Kentuckian, sailing from Philadelphia July 3. We regret exceedingly that our Steamship Kentuckian will not accommodate under deck structural steel in 65- and 70-foot lengths of which a part of this tonnage consists. We thank you very much, however, for offering us this North ports tonnage, and if it develops that one of our later Portland steamers will meet your requirements, we hope you will give us another chance. Yours very truly, WILMER M. WOOD, Agent. CALIFORNIA AND EASTERN STEAMSHIP Co., FD-CTC-Cal. & East. Vice President Ore Steamship Corporation, New York. DEAR SIR: Referring again to your favor of the 5th instant, and confirming our respects of the 4th and 8th instants, we have now had a look at the plans, and same would seem to indicate that the West Montop can take some 60-foot lengths in no. 1 lower hold; allowing for reeving; in no. 1 between decks some 59-foot lengths allowing for reeving space; 57-foot in no. 2, and no. 2 between decks the same, allowing for reeving space, and 51-foot in no. 4 lower hold and no. 4 between decks allowing for reeving space. Steamship West Keats and Steamship West Katan, these being sister vessels allowing for reeving length, apparently they can take some lenghts as follows: No. 1 lower hold, 56-foot; no. 2 lower hold, 55-foot; no. 4 lower hold, 50-foot; no. 5 lower hold, 50-foot; no. 1 between decks, 54-foot; no. 2 between decks, 54-foot; no. 4 between decks, 50-foot; no. 5 between decks, 50-foot. The length, bulkhead to bulkhead in no. 1 hold is about 65 feet, no. 2, 68 feet; no. 4, 59 feet; no. 5, 52 feet. Trusting this may afford you the desired information, we are, Very truly yours, E. L. FINCH. Mr. H. W. WARLEY, AMERICAN-HAWAIIAN STEAMSHIP Co., Vice President Ore Steamship Corporation, New York City. DEAR SIR: Referring to telephone conversation with you today, we having advised you that owing to the American having all the long steel she can accommodate, we are unable to forward cars Rdg.-21645, CNJ-81789, P&LE-43936, and GT-60476. In lieu of this, we are turning documents over to Luckenbach Steamship Co., whom, we understand, are arranging to forward shipments on their sailing of October 3 or October 10. Very truly yours, WILMER M. WOOD, Agent. Per O. S. STERGNER. ORE STEAMSHIP CORPORATION, New York City. MUNSON STEAMSHIP LINE, New York, January 28, 1927. GENTLEMEN: I am returning herewith your booking of January 25 covering approximately 110 tons of structural steel destined Vancouver. Please be advised that this material will be loaded on the steamship Munsomo, which we expect to sail from Philadelphia on February 4, and is accepted with the understanding that the long lengths will be loaded on deck. Yours very truly, MUNSON STEAMSHIP LINE, Mr. H. W. WARLEY, LUCKENBACH STEAMSHIP Co., INC., Vice President Ore Steamship Corporation, New York City, N. Y. DEAR SIR: Confirming our telephone conversation of even date. We will arrange to phone you every Wednesday morning about 10 o'clock and notify you whether or not we will be in a position to clear all of the double loads you have en route for our steamer scheduled to sail the following Sunday, and in the event that there are more loads of long steel offered than we can accommodate, you will then tell us which are to be given preference, and also advise us as to whether or not you wish any of these cars diverted. As explained to you we can only load from 11 to 15 double loads on our steamers and our inability to clear more than this number is the only reason why you have experienced any shut-outs of your long steel. We feel the above arrangement will work out satisfactorily to both of us and avoid the troubles we have been experiencing. Yours very truly, ROBERT W. GARROW, District Manager. Mr. H. W. WARLEY, AMERICAN-HAWAIIAN STEAMSHIP CO., [PRIVATE] Vice President Ore Steamship Corporation, New York, N. Y. DEAR MR. WARLEY: You will recall that our S. S. Virginian, which sailed from here yesterday, cannot accommodate any steel over 40 feet. Captain Green, who has been master of this steamer for a great many years, told me yesterday that he has often seen Quaker and Luckenbach steamers carrying some of your long steel on deck, and gave me quite a friendly dig because I would not take up with you for authority to give him a deck load." The Virginian is one of our largest steamers and could easily carry 500 tons on deck, but I have rigidly adhered to your instructions to load no steel on deck without your specific authority. Of course, I am taking Captain Green's word for what he has said he has seen Luckenbach and Quaker doing, as you know our steamers are meeting up with Luckenbach, Quaker, etc., in every port. I am sure you will quite willingly give us the same latitude and privilege you are giving the other lines, and if, on the other hand, they are loading your long steel on deck without your authority, you will, no doubt, want to look into the matter. I am looking forward to the pleasure of calling upon you the early part of next week and would like to discuss this matter with you. With kindest personal regards, I am, Yours very truly, WILMER M. WOOD, Agent. QUAKER LINE, INTEROCEAN STEAMSHIP CORPORATION, S. S. Orleans ORE STEAMSHIP CORPORATION, 25 Broadway, New York City, N. Y. GENTLEMEN: In reference to conversation had with your Mr. Bruswitz, we are pleased to advise that on the above steamer we are in a position to lift 100 tons of 60-foot steel Los Angeles discharge and up to 1,000 tons 45-foot lengths San Francisco, Oakland, and/or Portland. We exceedingly regret that we are not in position to carry a larger amount of the 60-foot lengths, but it is due to the construction of the steamer. Trusting that you will avail yourselves of this space, and assuring you of our cooperation, we are Yours very truly, INTEROCEAN STEAMSHIP CORPORATION, Mr. WARLEY. So-called "water industrial carriers" represent in many cases vessels of a very special type or arrangement not suitable for general trading but specially designed or altered to meet the shipping requirements of the industry with which they are affiliated. Experience has shown that investment in ships has been necessary by industries to meet special cargo requirements, such as bulk oil, fruit, refrigeration, bulky or unwieldy materials, and so forth, as independent companies owning vessels exclusively and operating as contract or common carriers would not incur the expenditures necessary to make vessels suitable for such cargo but less suitable for general trading. I might say that it cost us $400,000 to alter and fit up the Calmar Line ships to carry these large sections and long lengths. In many instances the tonnage would not be moved without industrial ownership or control, nor would the one-way industrial tonnage of itself provide sufficient revenue without other cargo to make feasible the movement of such products on any commercially competitive basis. Industrially owned vessels of special design and construction provide a flexibility due to the ability to transfer the ships from one trade to another, domestic and foreign, to take care of the special requirements, which flexibility could not be obtained unless common carrier vessels in all trades, domestic and foreign alike, were altered in sufficient numbers to meet the fluctuating peak requirements of industry--a wholly impractical proposition. With some of the commodities carried by industrially controlled vessels operated as common carriers, it is necessary in order to make a proper balance and diversity of cargo to insure seaworthiness of the vessel that other classes of cargo not controlled by the industry owning the vessel be carried. Outside capital cannot be secured to build special types of vessels without any guaranty of tonnage to fill them or with the probability that they will have to be laid up from time to time. In normal times such commodities cannot be accommodated by the regular lines and the lumber companies and manufacturers must build or operate their own boats in order to transport their materials both to domestic and foreign markets. Prohibiting or restricting this traffic in any respect whatsoever would tend to destroy the domestic and foreign commerce of the country. Prohibiting from engaging in shipping those who have the greatest financial resources and ability to do so would work irreparable injury and be contrary to public interest. The report then goes into detail and lists the lines and the tonnage taken from Mr. Eastman's report, the compilation being based on the lines named in Mr. Eastman's report, Senate document 152. It shows that there would be adversely affected in the intercoastal trade alone 100 vessels of 868,775 tons dead-weight capacity, representing 50.28 percent of the tonnage now employed in that trade. With regard to the section dealing with the regulation of rates in foreign commerce, the committee was of the opinion that the provisions of this section are unworkable as applied to foreign trade, particularly with respect to attempting to apply it to the foreign flag vessels. The committee recognizes, however, a situation that has been stated to exist by which foreign trades have been disrupted by the action of certain carriers in undercutting the rates of the conference lines. It does not know, however, of any means by which control can be exercised over foreign shipping in this respect and believes it is encroaching upon a matter of jurisdiction of the State Department involving treaties with foreign countries. Much as the committee felt it desirable to see that situation corrected, it knows of no way in which rates in foreign commerce can be controlled without entirely destroying our foreign commerce as exporters. I would like to summarize, Mr. Chairman, on behalf of the Maritime Association. Our recommendations may be summarized as follows: 1. Eliminate H. R. 5379 in its entirety; 2. Extend the Intercoastal Shipping Act of 1933, which includes contract carriers, to cover all interstate commerce; that is, on the assumption that it is desirable to have regulation; 3. Add express power to fix rates at the hearings; 4. Include wharfingers; and 5. Make shippers equally liable with carriers for breaches. The shipping acts will then contain all that in our opinion is necessary to protect the public interest. We further recommend that the regulation of water carriers be left to the division of regulation, Shipping Board Bureau of the Department of Commerce, which is separate and distinct from the operating division which comes under the Merchant Fleet Corporation. In the Senate hearings there were a number of questions asked about, what is the answer if you do not have coordination, and the railroads have regulation while the water carriers are left without regulation? After sitting in those hearings I endeavored to get down some views. My own views are very strongly with those of the Maritime Association that the thing should be left to the Shipping Board Bureau or put under the Maritime Authority, or whatever it is called, but not placed with the I. C. C. I have given considerable thought to the question of what coordination would mean to the several forms of transportation and the form which it should take. I am convinced whatever form it takes should be explicitly laid down in any legislation which may be enacted. 1. I think we can agree that there should be regulation of each form of transportation within itself to prevent rate wars, price cutting, unfair practices, and ruinous competition within that form. 2. It seems apparent from what has already been discussed at the Senate hearings that a coordination of the several forms of transportation under the control of a single body is open to the danger that the welfare of one form of transportation will be sacrificed to the welfare of another form of transportation. For example, the rates of water lines might be raised by the governing body so as to benefit the railroads by attracting traffic to the railroads which would otherwise go by the water lines. 3. On the other hand, it is apparent that a coordination of the several forms of transportation under a single governing body might benefit the water carriers by preventing the railroads from reducing the railroad rates to an extent that would drive traffic from the water carriers. 4. I entertain the firm conviction individually that a coordination of the several forms of transportation under a single governing body will more likely lead to the subjection of the welfare of one form of transportation to the welfare of another, than it will lead to the protection of one form of transportation from encroachment by another form. I therefore lean very strongly to the opinion that in any coordination set-up certain definite principles should be set out in the legislation to govern the action of the coordinating body or bodies; that these principles should be based upon the element of cost inherent in each form of transportation; that there should be a proper method of defining the cost of each form of transportation; and that thereafter no further coordination would be required beyond the governing body or bodies requiring the rates in each form of transportation to conform to the prescribed cost theory and provide rates that will cover cost so determined plus a reasonable profit which should include a suitable allowance for depreciation and replacement; and that the rates of one form of transportation shall not be fixed, or raised, or lowered for the purpose of either benefiting or injuring another form of transportation. That is all, Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. Any questions? Mr. HOFFMAN. The gentleman spoke of building new vessels and their cost being something like $14,000,000. Do those boats, or any of them, get any of that subsidy about which we were talking the other day, if that goes through? Mr. WARLEY. These would be intercoastal ships. They would not get subsidies. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Warley. STATEMENT OF WILLIAM CAPRON, REPRESENTING THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF ONEONTA, N. Y., AND OTHERS Mr. CAPRON. I represent the Chamber of Commerce of Oneonta, N. Y. I also represent the chambers of commerce of 21 cities in central New York; 14 Rotary Clubs; 12 Kiwanis Clubs; the boards of supervisors of 5 counties in the State of New York; and 6 local unions of railroad employees. The cities represented on the list include Schenectady, Binghamton, and many on inland waterways. In fact, the people represented constitute a cross section of the smaller cities and communities throughout the State. |