TABLE 3.-Statement showing comparison of estimated barge-lot tonnage shown in the Red River survey with the actual movement of the same commodities via the American Barge Line, the Mississippi Valley Barge Line, and the Federal Barge Line for the years 1939-41 1 Includes rye. 2 Includes feed. 3 Includes fuel, road oil. TABLE 3. Statement showing comparison of estimated barge-lot tonnage shown in the Red River survey with the actual movement of the same commodities via the American Barge Line, the Mississippi Valley Barge Line, and the Federal Barge Line for the years 1939-41-Continued American Barge Line 1941 1939 1940 Total movement via American Barge Lines, Mississippi Valley Barge Line, and Federal Barge Line: 1939, 1,888,714; 1940, 2,170,116; 1941, 1,871,288. Authority: American Barge Line exhibit No. 1345 in I. C. C. Docket 26712; Mississippi Valley Barge Line exhibit No. 1422 in I. C. C. Docket 26712; Federal Barge Line exhibit No. 1355 in I. C. C. Docket 26712. Senator OVERTON. What organization did you say you particularly represented? Mr. ROBERTS. I get my pay check from the Texas- Louisiana Freight Bureau at Dallas, Tex. That is composed of the 28 principal railroads in Texas and Louisiana. Senator OVERTON. Is that an organization that is now under investigation by the Department of Justice for violation of the antitrust laws? Mr. ROBERTS. We are one of the bureaus; yes, sir. Senator OVERTON. Very well. That represents your analysis. You don't know anything about the benefits from the reclamation of lands? Mr. ROBERTS. We are not in opposition in any way to a proposition to reclaim lands and control floods. That is as much to the interest of the railroads as it is any other group of citizens in that vicinity. Senator OVERTON. So you have made no study of that feature of this project? Mr. ROBERTS. No, sir. Senator OVERTON. Or of anything else outside of the rates? Senator OVERTON. Navigation is right. Mr. ROBERTS. We have no objection to that if it is economically justified. We don't think this one is and we think a study of our presentation might serve to have some effect on the committee. Senator OVERTON. Who represented the Association of American Railways when you were considering the rivers and harbors bill during 1944 that was approved March 22, 1945, do you know? Mr. ROBERTS. No. I expect it was someone at the Washington office. Senator OVERTON. Mr. Fort. Mr. ROBERTS. No doubt. Senator OVERTON. He appeared here with an argument similar to yours. He appeared in opposition to several projects. It is my recollection-the members of this committee can confirm that recollection he stated that he was going to appear in opposition to all rivers and harbors, that is, they were opposed to them whether they appeared or not, they were in opposition to all of them. Mr. ROBERTS. Well, I can't say as much for our own group of workers down our way. We have active files now, sir, on 34 projects, and we are only in opposition to four of them. Senator OVERTON. I may be mistaken but the record of the hearings will show. Mr. ROBERTS. I think the great difference between our viewpoints, sir-we will take the Board of Engineers or the proponents of any project we are very realistic at getting facts. Two and two is four with us. Senator OVERTON. And not so with the Board? Mr. ROBERTS. Well, we don't reach up in the air and get figures and say they represent actual facts. Senator OVERTON. The Board reaches up in the air? Mr. ROBERTS. In my opinion, it does, sir. When people take 1 day's billing out of each month, and that may be the only shipment that moves during the year and multiply that by some fictitious figure and say there is going to be that much tonnage available to the proposed canal, it is reaching up in the air. Private enterprise could not survive under such a system. It is like taking your street number and dividing it by your telephone number and getting your age. Senator OVERTON. Do you take the position that navigation projects are helpful or injurious to railroads? Mr. ROBERTS. It all depends on where they are located. We don't think there is a river or stream in Texas, and very few of them in Louisiana that can be made to pay, because all of the so-called savings-or, rather, the cost of the transportation, I should say, is not in evidence there. In other words, we take the position, and it is based on facts, based on the record, that waterway transportation is one of the highest forms of transportation we have got in this country, and there are few people who benefit by it, and the subsidy is paid for by the dear public. Senator OVERTON. Well, you take, for instance, one project with which I am familiar, it is not confined to Louisiana, but it goes through Texas, Louisiana, and other States, the Gulf Intercoastal Canal project. Isn't that a paying project? Mr. ROBERTS. In my opinion, it is. Senator OVERTON. That is one. Mr. ROBERTS. However, we have in several instances interposed objections, sir. Senator OVFRTON. Take the deepening of the Lake Charles Channel from Lake Charles to the Gulf, hasn't that been a paying proposition? Mr. ROBERTS. We did not oppose that. Senator OVERTON. But you say that none in Louisiana is paying? Mr. ROBERTS. I am talking about inland waterways. When you opened Lake Charles you opened it to the boats of the seven seas. Senator OVERTON. And so do you with this project. You take shipments that originate in Shreveport and. on down through Alexandria-that whole Red River Valley-you are opening that area to the boats of the seven seas. Of course, they are transported by barge-the freight is-from those ports they are sent by ocean steamers. Mr. ROBERTS. Senator, if this committee, or the Federal Government, or the Board of Engineers can create a deep-water port at Shreveport as a result of this proceeding, deep enough to accommodate foreign vessels from all the countries of the world Senator OVERTON. You mean oceangoing vessels? That is not proposed. Senator OVERTON. Of course, we don't. Mr. ROBERTS. That is what you did at Lake Charles. That is what you did at Houston and other points. Senator OVERTON. That is correct. Mr. ROBERTS. We had no objections, sir. Senator OVERTON. Well, you take the Vermillion project that has just been completed in Louisiana. Do you mean to say that is not a meritorious project? Mr. ROBERTS. I am not familiar with it. I did not object to it, I know. Senator OVERTON. I suppose the engineers can mention quite a few other projects in Louisiana. Mr. ROBERTS. We are not fighting deep waterways, oceangoing waterways. Senator OVERTON. Has anybody else any questions? (There was no response.) Senator OVERTON. Does anybody else appear in opposition to this particular project? (There was no response.) Senator BROOKS. I have a question. Mr. Roberts, you objected to the 1 day a month check. Do you think you have to take every day in every month to arrive at an adequate figure? Mr. ROBERTS. If you wish to get a correct picture of it. We found this: After the Board had given us permission to take those rates and review them, we kept a committee here in Washington for several days doing that, and we extracted from those waybills the information that was needed. Then we went home and we compared the information with the information in the accounting departments of our railroads, where they had nothing on file except shipments that actually moved. We found where there was one car of gasoline moved, we will say, from Shreveport to Alexandria, that was the only car. It was also a fact they claimed there were several hundred tons that would be available. We found that in many instances. That is what I mean when I say you can take 2 and 2 and make 4, but if you do anything else it is not 4, it is something else. Senator OVERTON. Very well. We will have a representative of the Corps of Engineers to testify just exactly what the Board did do, and how they arrived at their conclusions, in reference to this tonnage over this canal, and the saving by using canal as against the railroads. Mr. ROBERTS. I will be glad to have them explain. Senator OVERTON. They did it in the House, and they are going to do it here again. You heard them in the House? Mr. ROBERTS. Yes; as much as they put in, but they didn't put in anything in rebuttal to what I am telling you here. They used erroneous freight rates. Then they got up and said regardless of what I had said the proposition was still sound. Senator OVERTON. Is there anybody else to appear in opposition to this project? (There was no response). Senator OVERTON. Colonel Feringa, will you come forward, please? STATEMENT OF COL. P. A. FERINGA, UNITED STATES ARMY, DIRECTOR OF CIVIL WORKS, OFFICE, CHIEF OF ENGINEERS, UNITED STATES ARMY-Resumed Senator OVERTON. You have listened to the testimony of Mr. Roberts? Colonel FERINGA. Yes, sir; I did, not only this time, but a couple of other times and am glad to hear him again. Senator OVERTON. And his criticism of the method by which the Board of Engineers proceeded in determining the savings to freight transportation through construction of this canal? Colonel FERINGA. Yes. Also one other thing he said, that waterway costs are not low. I have before me, Mr. Chairman-I was on 88555-46- -5 |