and warehouses, connecting all the trunk lines entering the city with all the principal river wharves and many industries. This belt line is operated by a public body, the municipal belt railroad commission, while the wharves are built and maintained by another public body, the state board of commissioners of the port of New Orleans. Such public ownership and management has been found helpful in preventing railroad control of the terminal situation. It "gives to the municipality the control over freight transfers and means equal treatment to all shippers," said the Commissioner of Corporations in the report previously referred to.

San Francisco has a publicly-owned railroad, operated by the state board of harbor commissioners, connecting with the tracks of manufacturers and trunk lines. At Buffalo there is a privately-owned belt line leased by one of the railroad companies.

Chicago has a number of belt and switching railroads, including several at South Chicago and along the Calumet River, but there is no single unified and adequate belt line system.

What can be accomplished by a thorough plan of coördinated water-and-rail terminals may be judged somewhat from the Bush Terminal in Brooklyn, where piers, switching tracks, storage sheds and manufacturing structures have all been located in the same vicinity and are operated as part of a single system. To these 1300-foot piers may come the largest ocean steamers, unload from all hatches at once, quickly receive their return cargoes and make way for other vessels. Back of the piers are warehouses, where there is ample room to store in-coming and out-going freight; close at hand are switch tracks where hundreds of freight cars may be held or switched; and behind them are manufacturing buildings, the products of which may be readily transferred to pier and vessel hold. The efficient terminal unit, for industrial purposes, is undoubtedly a combination of factory, freight tracks and pier. The Bush Terminal has been called the only modern port terminal in the United States. One or two similar developments are already being planned for the harbor of New York.

Control of Water Frontage by Railroads.-A large share of the most available water frontage of our ports is, at present, controlled by railroads. While it is essential that there should be portions of harbors occupied by railroads for tracks and switching yards, in order to make successful transshipment from water to rail, it is doubtful whether railroads should be permitted to own or control so large a share of the water frontage as they now have in some cities. Such ownership

may prevent the development, for pier purposes, of the land bordering the harbor. It may discourage water traffic by high charges for the lease of water frontage; it may afford unequal facilities to water carriers affiliated with railroads or with some particular railroad. In New York harbor, for example, below West Sixtieth street, on the Hudson River, railroads occupy more than 30 piers for freight purposes, besides those for their many ferries. All the space along the river from West 60th street to 72d street is occupied by a single railroad company. Many of the East River piers are occupied by railroads. Though the city of New York owns a large portion of the river frontage on both rivers, its system of long-term leases has resulted in a considerable degree of control by the lessees. Almost the entire active water front of Jersey City is occupied, and most of it is owned, by railroads.

A large section of the harbor fronts at Boston, Philadelphia, Baltimore and Norfolk is owned or substantially controlled by railroads. At Pittsburg, 10 miles of river frontage is similarly controlled. "Manufacturing plants, and especially railroads along the banks of the river," stated the report of the United States Chief of Engineers, as far back as 1903, "have rendered useless for general harborage purposes a large portion of the harbor" (of Pittsburg.) Much of the river port is occupied by railroad tracks and filled in steeply to the water's edge, precluding any possible use of the frontage for steamer landings. At Louisville a railroad runs for several blocks along the banks so closely to the river for part of the distance beyond the paved wharf that it would be impossible to use the shore for unloading cargoes. At Cincinnati, a railroad attempted to build its viaduct across the public wharf, in order to connect its bridge across the river with its new terminal station, and the completion of the trestle was prevented only by the united protest of the citizens of Cincinnati, that the viaduct would effectively obstruct the use of the public landing. At St. Louis, railroad tracks occupy the river front for five miles; at East St. Louis, the entire river frontage. Railroad tracks at Memphis run along the wharf for a considerable distance. At Seattle, and Portland, Oregon, railroads control or own a large share of the best harbor frontage.

In fairness to the railroads it must be said that in many cities the reason for the railroad occupying water or river shore was convenience and ease of grading rather than any intention to obstruct water front development. On the other hand it is only proper at a

time when account is being taken of the available public resources, to understand fully the extent of control by railroads, or by water lines controlled by railroads, in order to determine what should be the proper policy of our cities in the future.

Unloading Machinery.—It is not possible within the small space here available to present any adequate discussion of the loading and unloading machinery now in use at American ports. Suffice it to say that at the harbors on the Great Lakes, machinery for handling ore and coal and grain is in use and permits the transfer of bulk cargoes expeditiously. There are also good coal handling facilities at several points on the Mississippi River. The absence of mechanical conveniences for the swift and easy handling of bulk and package freight at Atlantic and Gulf ports is very marked, and particularly surprising at New York.

Terminal Charges.-The relation to traffic terminals of terminal charges, wharfage, dockage, towage, lighterage and other charges, also cannot be treated here. The topic does not lend itself readily to generalization. These charges are of many kinds and descriptions, and differ greatly at various ports. It can be said only that further scientific study is needed to determine what sort of terminal charges should be imposed and how high or how low they may be placed without discouraging the passage of goods through the ports.

Transportation a Unit; Necessity of Public Control.-As water traffic increases in volume and the need for terminal facilities becomes more urgent, it must be increasingly evident that all the elements in transportation-steam roads, electric railways and water lines-are part of one transportation whole-the unit being not railroads alone, nor water carriers only, but all together as a single system of freight and passenger transport. It is a question how far competition between rail and water lines should be depended on to provide proper rates and service. There is much discussion whether it would not be of advantage for state or city to own all water terminals, thus insuring equal treatment to all vessel or steamboat carriers. Public control is clearly necessary to prevent discriminations; whether or not public ownership will be required, remains to be seen Unity of operation of all transportation-the coordination of rail and water transport facilities and public control of such unified transportation, are two of the needs of the present, concerning which there is almost no difference of opinion.

Appendices

APPENDIX I

ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF SHIPPING CONFERENCES AND AGREEMENTS IN THE AMERICAN FOREIGN TRADE

(Reprinted from pp. 295–307 of the Report on "Steamship Agreements and Affiliations in the American Foreign and Domestic Trade," prepared by S. S. Huebner.)

ADVANTAGES OF SHIPPING CONFERENCES AND AGREEMENTS

Practically all steamship representatives who testified before the Committee, as well as a majority of the leading American exporting and importing firms who expressed their views on the subject to the Committee, contended that shipping agreements, conference relations, or oral understandings which steamship lines have effected among themselves in nearly every branch of our foreign trade are a natural evolution and are necessary if shippers are at all times to enjoy ample tonnage and efficient, frequent, and regular service at reasonable rates. Such agreements, it is contended, are a protection to both shipper and shipowner. To the shipper they insure desired stability of rates and the elimination of secret arrangements with competitors. To the shipowner they tend to secure a dependable return on the investment, thus enabling the lines to provide new facilities for the development of the trade. Furthermore such agreements are held to furnish the means for taking care of the disabilities of the weaker lines, whereas unrestricted competition, based on the survival of the fittest, tends to restrict the development of the lines and in the end must result in monopoly. Briefly outlined, the advantages secured through agreements and coöperative understandings, as presented to the Committee, are the following:

I. Improvement in service:

1. Regularity of service, resulting in the following advantages:

(a) Opportunities to merchants for shipping are increased, resulting in a much greater increase in the volume of trade, especially to new or remote markets, than would be the case if goods could be supplied only at irregular intervals.

(b) Fixed dates of sailings at regular intervals enable shippers to work with smaller stocks than they otherwise could, thus reducing unnecessary risks, as well as storage charges.

(c) Makes unnecessary the engaging of cargo space considerably in advance, and shippers incur no penalty or other inconvenience if unable or unwilling to ship goods at the last moment.

(d) Merchants are enabled to make forward contracts for the delivery of goods at a definite date. This factor is important in connection with sta

bility and uniformity of rates. In view of both factors merchants can make contracts for forward delivery at a definite date and price, including cost, freight, and insurance. Such contracts are of vital importance in the trade of today, which is largely conducted in large quantities and on the basis of orders placed months ahead and calculated on a small margin of profit.

(e) Without regularity of service in the long-distance voyages, or in the new and undeveloped services, American merchants and manufacturers would be operating at a great disadvantage as compared with European merchants, who now have the benefit of a more highly developed service from European ports to foreign markets.

(f) A better distribution of sailings is secured. Under unrestricted competition a number of vessels may sail from the same port within a day or week, resulting in no sailings from that port for a considerable period thereafter. Under a system of coöperation, however, both the time and ports of sailings are agreed upon, thus "avoiding the waste involved in several ships calling at ports which require only one and giving an excess tonnage on one date and a corresponding lack of tonnage at other times."

(g) A large portion of American exports coming from the interior, it follows that, with regular sailings, goods arriving late and missing one steamer may be dispatched by the next steamer of another line, thus causing only a short period of waiting, with the result that unnecessary port charges are avoided, the accumulation of goods is prevented, and the loading and delivery of cargo are facilitated.

2. Greater security is given to capital invested in the steamship business and because of this greater security shipowners are enabled to supply an adequate number of vessels of a higher class and greater speed than the ordinary tramp. Moreover, conditions surrounding most trades are dissimilar as regard the depth of water at the ports, the nature of the cargo offered, and the quantity of freight moving during certain seasons. By giving vessel owners a dependable return on the investment they are enabled to provide new facilities for the development of the trade and adequately to adapt the sailings, speed, and equipment to the particular trade. To many merchants the adaptability of the service to the requirements of the trade is highly essential, because of the nature of their exports and imports. The benefits claimed for this advantage are the following:

(a) Cargo is delivered in better order and with greater dispatch and regularity.

(b) Insurance premiums on cargo are reduced, and the rate of insurance many be counted upon as more uniform and stable, thus again favoring merchants in making contracts for the forward delivery of goods.

(c) Loss of interest on the cargo while in transit is reduced.

(d) Shippers are relieved of anxiety as to the class of vessel by which their freight will be shipped.

II. Stability of rates over long periods of time:

1. Removes the inconvenience which would exist if merchants and shippers were obliged to quote different propositions on nearly every consignment, thus eliminating what was formerly an undesirable speculative risk