Изображения страниц

The CHAIRMAN. The hearings on the bill I referred to show that Mr. Davis, who was then chairman of this committee, stated:

I wish to state that in 1874 a provision of the character in question was enacted, the exact purpose of which I have never been able to learn. But, at any rate, that was subsequently repealed.

Then on the last page of those hearings there is a reference to the act of March 3, 1813.

Captain Tomb. Is that that alien seaman law?

(The following statement was submitted by Captain Tomb for the record :)


New York City, May 3, 1935.
Chairman House Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries,

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. BLAND: Referring to H. R. 7521, a bill to develop a strong American merchant marine, section 802 (b), I would like to extend my testimony concerning a national merchant marine academy by answering in advance the following arguments of opponents to this essential step.

(a) Education is a state function and should not be undertaken by the Federal Government.—The Navy and the merchant marine are vital factors of our national defense. One provides military security and the other economic security in our overseas trade, and consequently a national merchant marine academy comes under the same category as the United States Naval Academy.

Moreover, inland States are not in a position to establish such academies, and if all the 'seaboard States desiring such an academy were enabled to do so through Federal aid, there would be so large a number of graduates that our licensed grades in the Merchant Marine would be flooded. Also these schools would adopt the 2-year course, bringing our efforts to increase the standard of merchant Marine officers to naught, and only those boys residing in the States supporting such schools, except of course New York State, would be able to obtain this education.

During the World War and the Spanish-American War about 85 percent of our naval leaders came from inland States. Dewey and Mayo were from Vermont, Rodman from Kentucky, and Gleaves from Tennessee. Only a few of our naval leaders were from seaboard States, and these were not the most prom. inent. This shows that we have splendid sea-minded material inland, which if developed, would go far toward gaining the support of inland States for our merchant marine.

(b) If other States desire this education, they should establish their own schools."This argument is frequently heard, but the reply to it is contained in the statement above, which refutes the idea that education in this field is a State function.

(c) "Seamanship cannot be taught on shore.”—This argument was first brought by the Navy in 1845 when the United States Naval Academy was established at Annapolis, and the naval profession was practically unanimous in holding to this idea. A few years after the establishment of the academy on shore, the error of that argument was exposed, and the Navy was unanimous in favor of the academy, and has been ever since.

An academy based on shore not only would have the facilities for learning knotting and splicing, wire splicing, canvass work, and steering, but the cadets would obtain a thorough knowledge of lifeboat handling, both as lifeboatmen and as coxswain, and, moreover, would be drilled in handling tugs. On shipboard the seaman would never obtain such experience, nor would the licensed officer obtain any experience in ship handling until he actually fills the grade of master. More experience would be gained by the senior class student in the handling of ships than would be gained by the officer at sea after years of experience.

On practice cruises while in the academy, the cadets are charged with far greater responsibilities than a third mate or third assistant engineer, in order to learn the art of handling men. The young man going direct to sea has great difficulty in obtaining this fundamental training. Boats on merchant ships are never lowered except in an emergency, as the ship cannot stop at sea to hold such drills, and while in port alongside the dock the ship is busy on both sides receiving or discharging cargo. Moreover, in port, most of the personnel on deck and in the engine room is laid off immediately after the arrival of the ship, to be reemployed a few hours before the ship's departure, while the stevedores carry on the work of loading and discharging cargo.

If training in the merchant marine profession were limited to the man's experience on board ship, he would probably receive training in only one type of machinery on the ship on which he may serve, whereas in the academy, with machinery halls equipped with diversified marine machinery, he would be able to learn all types. The same is true with regard to electrical machinery, with the equipment on the bridge, and with the latest safety devices. If he should serve his time on an antiquated ship, he could not obtain experience with modern equipment.

In every profession, such as law, medicine, etc., the student must obtain the groundwork covering the whole field of the profession before he is permitted to specialize. The reverse is the case in the merchant marine at the present time.

The young man selects deck or engineering upon entering the merchant marine and sticks only to that branch. The deck officer takes pride in the fact that he does not understand engineering, yet he is charged with the operation of much deck machinery. The engineer officer takes pride in the fact that he does not understand deck duties, and yet he may be in charge of a lifeboat, may become separated, and must navigate the boat. Neither the deck nor the engineer officer understands the economics of ship operation and overseas trade, as that function is left to those in the executive offices in the home port and to the agents aboard. A national merchant marine academy, with a course of 4 years would enable the graduate to have knowledge of the whole marine profession and become invauable in attaining greater economy and efficiency in ship operation both afloat and ashore.

At the present time outstanding officers like Captain Fried, Captain Grening, Captain Cummings, Captain Stedman, and others cannot be promoted to the executive offices on shore due to their lack of knowledge in the economics involved. With such knowledge and training they would be invaluable as home executives to ship operators, as very few operators have any knowledge whatsoever of conditions existing on board ship through personal experience as ships' officers. The office boy has a better opportunity of becoming president of the line than any ship's officer, although this condition was directly the reverse prior to the Civil War and before the cable and the radio, when the ship's captain had to be a business man in addition to being a sailor man. It was the ship's captain who later became the ship's operator. It is true that Captain Grening is a European representative of the United States Shipping Board and has accomplished wonderful results and should be engaged in ship operation, but owing to his lack of contact with the financial world, is not so employed. Captain Fried is supervising inspector of the Steamboat Inspection Service, and is not concerned with the economics of ship operation.

Referring to the employment of cadets on board ship, it should be pointed out that graduates of the State marine schools are far better seamen than the young man who has not had the opportunity to graduate from such school and who is limited in his profession to what he may be able to pick up on board ship. It is suggested that the cadet employment be limited to graduates of the State marine schools, or in case a national merchant marine academy is established, to graduates of the national academy.. The pay for the first 6 months should be the standard pay of able seaman and for the last 6 months should be 15 percent greater. In the last 6 months they should be able to perform efficiently any responsible duties beyond the capacity of able seamen but not as great as officers. Respectfully,

J. Н. Томв. Mr. O'BRIEN. Mr. Chairman, the question was asked as to the number of shipping commissioners that would be required on the lakes. I would say that there would be eight shipping commissioners required on the lakes, and that in Duluth and Conneaut there might have to be a couple of deputy commissioners also.

The CHAIRMAN. All right, that would take in the adjoining ports.

The committee will now adjourn until 10 o'clock tomorrow morning.

(Whereupon, at 5:40 p. m. an adjournment was taken until 10 a. m., May 2, 1935.)





Washington, D. C. The committee met at 10 a. m., Hon. Schuyler 0. Bland (chairman) presiding The CHAIRMAN. We will hear first this morning from Mr. White.


FOR THE AMERICAN COTTON SHIPPERS ASSOCIATION Mr. WHITE. My name is John C. White, 838 Transportation Building. I am counsel for the American Cotton Shippers Association.

The American Cotton Shippers Association is a national organization with which are affiliated six regional associations: The Texas Cotton Association, the California-Arizona Cotton Association, the Oklahoma State Cotton Exchange, the Arkansas Cotton Trade Association, the Southern Cotton Shippers Association, and the Atlantic Cotton Association.

Its members are engaged in the purchase of cotton from farmers and its sale to domestic and foreign mills. I think it is safe to say that practically every exporter of American cotton, with the exception of the American Cotton Cooperative Association, belongs to the American Cotton Shippers' Association or one of its affiliates.

I am also representing here the American Ports Cotton Compress & Warehouse Association. That organization is composed of the cotton facilities, that is, warehouses, compresses, and the attached docks located at the American ports. It has practically every ship or port facility engaged in the handling of cotton in its membership.

I am also presenting the views in certain particulars of the Southern Pine Association, which is an organization of the southern pine mills. Southern pine is the lumber which is produced throughout the entire South.

First of all, I wish to emphasize to the committee the very bad status of the exports of American cotton at the present time. Just today, the New York Times reports that exports for this season are 2,600,000 bales behind that for the previous season. This means 2,600,000 bales behind the average exports. The foreign consump: tion of American cotton is about 1,400,000 bales behind the usual consumption of American cotton abroad; while the consumption of foreign cotton by foreign mills is about 1,500,000 bales greater. In other words, foreign consumption of foreign cotton has just about replaced or a little more than replaced that of the cotton which we have lost.

The country which the American cotton exporters are most worried about at the present moment is Brazil. The cotton production there has gone from 500,000 bales in 1932–33 to 1,000,000 bales the following season and to 1,500,000 bales this season, and there is every expectation that this next year the production there will be about 2,000,000 bales. So that in Brazil, taken with some increases in certain other South American countries, we expect they will in a few years be able to replace a very large part of our cotton exports.

I have just returned from the annual convention of the American Cotton Shippers Association in New Orleans, at which the following resolution was adopted:

Resolved, That this association oppose the enactment of S. 2582 and H. R. 7521 and any other measures providing for the fixing of minimum ocean rates, or for the elimination of tramp competition and urge that any direct subsidy necessary to the operation of American lines be conditioned on the maintenance of competitive rates on agricultural products.

The CHAIRMAN. What do you mean by competitive rates? You simply mean conditions as at present, do you not?

Mr. White. Well, in effect, that means to us rates that are justified by the world charter market; we think that it is in the world charter market you have the real competition so far as ocean rates are concerned. It has been our view that the ocean tramp is the real regulator of ocean rates and if your ocean tramp is put out of business there will not be any effective competition in the determination of rates. Of course we cannot put the ocean tramp out of business so far as the world is concerned; we can eliminate it from our business, as we are afraid certain provisions of this bill would do.

I know certain members of your committee are rather familiar with this cotton situation. Judge Mansfield has introduced bill, H. R. 5066, which requires an immediate reduction of 20 percent in the railroad rates on cotton exports and other agricultural products. It is really a tragic situation and other Departments of the Government and other committees are fully aware of that. The reason we feel we have lost as much in our exports and foreign consumption of American cotton at the present time as we have, is the price parity of our cotton laid down in foreign markets with that of other growths.

The CHAIRMAN. Has the policy of the A. A. A. anything to do with it?

Mr. WHITE. Undoubtedly. We are not quarreling with certain policies of the A. A. A. We cannot condemn them for paying benefits to the southern cotton farmers; because, if there is any group in this country that needs some governmental aid, it is that group and we so stated in our resolution adopted at our recent convention. On the other hand, we do feel that the 12-cent loan has been a very, very damaging factor, and that has been a factor in the determination of the price at which we could lay down our cotton abroad.

The CHAIRMAN. Is or is not the curtailment program driving other countries into the production of cotton?

Mr. WHITE. It certainly gives them a stimulus in that direction. As soon as we advertised we were going to cut our production, certain foreign countries said “we are going to increase ours."

The CHAIRMAN. That is what I have always thought.

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »