out of an American port, and what kind of life-saving appliances they were going to permit to go out from an American port with,

Senator CLARK. If I understand you correctly, the United States has a right, by the control of clearance from our ports and entry into our ports, to control the character of crews and the character of live-saving appliances on which American citizens may travel? Mr. FURUSETH. That was the essence of the Seamen's Act, in sections 13 and 14, if those sections had been carried out as they were in the first few years, and there would have been absolute equalization of the wage cost, which carried with it an equalization of every cost of operation except that the cost that came from the difference in the cost of building.

Section 13 provided a special kind of crew of American ships applicable to all foreign ships leaving the United States. Section 14 specifically provided that in a proviso, which it was thought there was no way of getting around, but they simply threw it all overboard.

Senator CLARK. That law is still on the statute books?

Mr. FURUSETH. It is still on the statute books, but rulings have killed it, and it does not exist so far as practical operation is concerned.

Senator CLARK. I understand your contention to be that while the law was still on the statute books, the law has been emasculated by rulings of the courts?

Mr. FURUSETH. Yes; and if we could get the Seamen's Act restored there would be no need of any operating subsidy because in the report that is made by Mr. Bass in 1918 he proves beyond peradventure of doubt that the Seamen's Act as it then operated was equalizing the wage cost, or the cost of operation in the wage question and the sustenance question, and all of the rest depends upon that, except such differential in cost as exists in the difference in the cost of building.

If a vessel cost a million dollars in an American yard and $600,000 in a British yard, the difference in the insurance and the investment money and wear and tear on the $400,000 necessarily is made up somewhere and somehow, and the vessel going to sea in that condítion with a $400,000 handicap has got to earn the depreciation and insurance on that before she gets on an equality with a vessel built at the rate of $600,000.

The CHAIRMAN. And they take that out of the labor-out of the seamen?

Mr. FURUSETH. Well, they have got that out of the seamen, and they are continuing to get more.

Senator CLARK. Let me ask this question. I do not wish to interrupt your statement, but let me ask you if you have seen any provision in either the existing law or the proposed law, either the Copeland bill, the Gibson bill, or the Guffey bill, that provides that the money which is to be paid out of the pockets of the taxpayers of the United States, as the differential for labor, shall actually go to the labor; is there anything set up in any of these bills to insure that the people who work in the construction or operation of ships shall actually get that differential?

Mr. FURUSETH. Not so far as I can find out.

Senator CLARK. Is there anything to keep the shipowner from taking the money and putting it in his pocket?

Mr. FURUSETH. No; there is nothing to keep him from putting it in his pocket; but, on the contrary, bill 3500, on page 12, provides that the Authority could sit down with the shipowners and the shipbuilders to find out how to decrease costs and increase income.

Senator CLARK. As far as labor is concerned, that is kind of like a tiger sitting down with a lady, is it?

Mr. FURUSETH. Rather. What I was going to say, to begin with, prior to the passage of the Seamen's Act, there were different kinds of discussions about subsidies, as there are now, furiously conducted at times, but constantly going on before the public and before congressional committees; and we seamen proposed that the seamen should first be liberated, and the seamen would, as the result of being liberated and made free, equalize the wage cost, and that is the only cost outside of the building cost that needed equalization.

But here is a document called "Some Reasons Why the Seamen's Act Was Passed", and it contains the appeal of the seamen of the world for freedom.

Second, it deals with the question of construction of the thirteenth amendment when the Supreme Court decided that the laws of the State of Alabama had to go into the wastebasket, because it was denying a Negro his freedom. Bailey v. Alabama is the name of that case, and we used that in the appeal.

Then third in this book is the subject of decay of seamanship in Europe and America.

Mr. Sutherland, who was then Senator from Utah, made that into a Senate document.

Then the next thing we have here is the Supreme Court decision in the case of Patterson v. Bark "Eudora."

The CHAIRMAN. If you will pardon me for interrupting you, I want to call your attention to the fact I am afraid you have not read S. 3550; and I take some pride in it, because it is in a part of the bill I put in, on page 53, line 12, where appears the following language [reading]:

The amount of the operating differential subsidy shall not exceed the excess of the fair and reasonable cost of insurance, maintenance, repair, wages, and subsistence of officers and crews.

What have you to say to that?

Mr. FURUSETH. I have got this to say: The way to find all of those things out that the Authority has got to find out, what the differences are and they can only get it from the shipowners of America and of England, and of Europe generally-they are to sit down and discuss those questions with them, and I do not see how they are going to get anything out of that.

Senator CLARK. I come back to my question of a few minutes ago. While the act sets up a yardstick in the difference of costs of operation at home and abroad, is there anything in that act that insures that the seaman and ship officers, which are included as well as the enlisted men, get the subsidy the taxpayers of the United States are putting up?

Mr. FURUSETH. No; there is not.

Senator CLARK. Is there anything to prevent the shipowner from getting the subsidy on the basis of the differential in operations at

home and abroad, then cutting down his crew and putting on Chinese or anything else, and putting the difference in his pocket?

Mr. FURUSETH. The only thing against it is that 75 percent of the crew of those who receive subsidies must be citizens of the United States and that the other 25 percent must be capable of becoming citizens.

Senator CLARK. You know, as a matter of fact, that a large number of these shipowners do employ a Chinese crew?

Mr. FURUSETH. At the present time they employ 662% percent of the entire crew of Chinese, and when they are in port keep them on board whether they like it or not, and then they go back to China and pay them off.

Senator CLARK. In other words, they do that in plain defiance of the law or courts?

Senator FURUSETH. Yes; that is what we think; and we have been trying to do something with it, but cannot reach it.

Senator CLARK. That law is administered by duly constituted authorities?

Mr. FURUSETH. Yes.

Senator CLARK. Do you have any reason to believe a new maritime authority would enforce the law in any greater degree than the present constituted authorities?

Mr. FURUSETH. None whatsoever. I was going to tell you there is much said about safety, and I want to say that safety cannot exist with an inefficient crew. I do not care how you undertake to build ships, the world has never been able to build a ship that would not sink and would not burn. They have spent lots of money and brain. power trying to do it and never have been able to do it.

We have here in this document a statement of fact about the disasters at sea, which begins in 1860 and ends with 1915 and contains a constantly rising number of people lost at sea as every 5 years go by. One of the things that is shown here is the loss of the Empress of Ireland. There was at the time a discussion before Congress as to permitting vessels that did not go more than 20 miles offshore to have lifesaving appliances and less efficient crew, and the answer came from God Himself on that question when the Empress of Ireland was rammed in the Quebec River and sixteen-hundredodd people in less than half an hour were dead and floating about, and they were not a mile offshore.

The CHAIRMAN. Was that a British ship?

Mr. FURUSETH. It was a British ship rammed by a Norwegian ship. I want to give you this statement for your benefit.

The CHAIRMAN. Let me ask you a question about this. Did you put this in the record when you were here before?

Mr. FURUSETH. No.

The CHAIRMAN. Then, we will let this be marked an exhibit to the hearings.

Mr. FURUSETH. Now, I have the wages here. The Authority is to ascertain the wages, and here I have the wages as reported by the

seamen.

The CHAIRMAN. That is a comparison of the wages paid by different countries, is it?

Mr. FURUSETH. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. You gave that fully in your testimony last year. Mr. FURUSETH. Did I

The CHAIRMAN. Yes.

Mr. FURUSETH. If I did, then there is no need of giving it now. Senator CLARK. I think it is extremely material to this investigation, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Let me say I would like to have Mr. Furuseth's testimony of last year inserted in the record here, because he did cover all of these matters last year.

Senator CLARK. Mr. Chairman, I am not a member of this subcommittee, and am here by sufferance, but I think that is extremely important.

The CHAIRMAN. You may not be a member of the subcommittee, but you are a member of the Commerce Committee, and you are entitled to be here.

Mr. Furuseth, we are going to insert in the record at this point your pamphlet as given to us last year, so that it will appear in this testimony; therefore, that comparison of wages will be included. (The pamphlet referred to is as follows:)

PETITION AND MEMORANDUM

To the Honorable the Members of Congress in the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States:

(RE: S. 2582 as reported to the Senate on May 24, 1935)

We most respectfully submit this our humble petition that title VIII of this bill be stricken out with the exception of section 805 and that in lieu thereof the following substitutes be inserted

"SECTION 801:

"SHIPPING COMMISSIONERS-THEIR APPOINTMENT AND DUTIES

"(a) That the first sentence of section 4501 of the Revised Statutes, as amended, is amended to read as follows: "The Secretary of Commerce shall appoint a commissioner, to be known as a shipping commissioner, for each port of ocean navigation which is a port of entry, and for each port of navigation on the Great Lakes which, in his judgment, may require the same; and the Secretary of Commerce may, from time to time, remove from office any such commissioner whom he may have reason to believe does not properly perform his duties, and shall then provide for the proper performance of the duties of such commissioner until another person is duly appointed in his place.'

"ADDITIONAL PLACES OF SHIPMENT OF SEAMEN

"(b) That section 4503 of the Revised Statutes is amended by adding at the end theeof new sentence to read as follows: 'Nothing in this section or in section 4507 of the Revised Statutes, as amended, shall be construed to prohibit the shipment or discharge of seamen in a place other than a customhouse or a shipping commissioner's office, and any such place shall be deemed a public office; but no such shipment or discharge shall take place on board a vessel unless it is connected with the shore by a ladder or other safe means of foot passage.'

"UNLAWFUL PERFORMANCE OF DUTIES OF SHIPPING COMMISSIONERS

"(c) That section 4504 of the Revised Statutes is amended to read as follows: "SEC. 4504. Any person, other than a commissioner under this title, who shall perform or attempt to perform, either directly or indirectly, the duties which are by this title set forth as pertaining to a shipping commissioner, shall be liable to a penalty of not less than $100 nor more than $500. Nothing in this

title, however, shall prevent the owner, consignee, or master of any vessel of the burden of less than one hundred tons, or of any vessel engaged in trade between ports within the same States or of a car ferry or ferryboat from performing, himself, so far as his vessel is concerned, the duties of shipping commissioner under this title. Whenever the master of any vessel shall engage his crew, or any part of the same, in any collection district where no shipping commissioner has been appointed he may perform for himself the duties of such commissioner.'

"(d) That section 4508 of the Revised Statutes is amended to read as follows: "SEC. 4508. The general duties of a shipping commissioner shall be "'First. To keep a register of available seamen.

66

"Second. To superintend the selection and the shipment and discharge of seamen on domestic vessels in ports of the United States in the manner prescribed by law.

""Third. To superintend the selection of seamen for foreign vessels in ports of the United States, such seamen to be signed before the consul of the country under whose laws such vessel is registered.

"Fourth. In signing on the crew on a domestic vessel to see that at least 75 per centum of the crew in each department of the vessel, exclusive of licensed officers, are citizens of the United States and that the remainder are eligible for citizenship; and in the selection of a crew for a foreign vessel, to see that preference shall be given to seamen of that nationality of the country under whose laws such foreign vessel is registered.

""Fifth. To facilitate the making of apprenticeships to the sea service. "Sixth. To perform such other duties realting to the merchant seamen and merchant vessels as are required by law.'

"SEAMEN'S AGREEMENTS

"(e) That the first paragraph of section 4511 of the Revised Statutes, as amended, is amended to read as follows:

""The master of every domestic or foreign vessel of the burden of one hundred tons or upward engaged in the foreign or the coast wise trade (except vessels engaged in trade within the same State, and car ferries and ferryboats), shall, before he proceeds on such voyage, make an agreement, in writing or in print, with every seamen whom he carries to sea as one of the crew, in the manner hereinafter mentioned; and every such agreement shall be, as near as may be, in the form given in the table marked "A" in the schedule annexed to this title, and shall be dated at the time of the first signature thereof, and shall be signed by the master before any seaman signs the same, and shall contain the following particulars:'

"EXEMPTION FROM PROVISIONS RELATING TO SHIPPING AGREEMENTS

"(f) That section 4513 of the Revised Statutes, as amended, is amended to read as follows:

""SEC. 4513. Section 4511 of the Revised Statutes, as amended, shall not apply to masters of vessels where the seamen are by custom or agreement entitled to participate in the profits or results of a cruise or voyage; but seamen may, by agreement, serve on board such vessels a definite time, or, on the return of any such vessel to a port in the United States, may reship and sail in the same vessel on another voyage.'

"RESTRICTION ON SHIPMENT OF SEAMEN

"(g) That section 4515 of the Revised Statutes is amended to read as follows: "SEC. 4515. While a vessel of the United States is in a port of the continental United States it shall be unlawful for any master, mate, or any other officer to receive or accept as a seaman, to be entered on board such vessel, any person who is ineligible to become a citizen of the United States. If any master, mate, or other officer knowingly violates the provisions of this section or knowingly receives or accepts, to be entered on board the vessel, any seaman who has been engaged or supplied contrary to the provisions of this title, the vessel on board of which such seaman shall be found shall, for every such seaman, be liable to a penalty of not less than $100 nor more than $200.'

"(h) That the proviso of section 14 of the Seamen's Act of March 4, 1915, is amended by inserting the word 'merchant' after the word 'foreigner.'