Mr. MURRAY. I believe it was occupied during the administration of Theodore Roosevelt.

Mr. DORN. I suggest you read your history a little bit.

Mr. MUMMA. One more question I am going to ask you. You are an authority on everything else here that you are speaking about, but you don't know the local rate down there, about what they are getting down there, if they are employed in Panama?

Mr. MURRAY. I made no study of that, sir.

Mr. MUMMA. It seems to me to make your own argument good here you would have that basic information.

Mr. MURRAY. I am arguing in behalf of employees of the United States Government-that is directly or indirectly, employees.

Mr. MUMMA. There are a lot of people down there that would work for the United States Government if they got the chance.

Mr. MURRAY. I think there are quite a few.

Mr. MUMMA. Even though your members have dropped off, the number of local rate people haven't dropped off in the same proportion. You said that yourself.

Mr. MURRAY. No.

Mr. MUMMA. There is a lot of interesting stuff here, but I just can't imagine when you are selling goods you usually know what the other fellow's price is. That is one of the most essential things.

Mr. MURRAY. Well, it is my conscience, sir, and if my philosophy would permit me to sell the same bill of goods that the Communist Party is selling with these people, I would have a pretty good selling job. I would have 10,000 members down there rather than the job I am doing.

Mr. MUMMA. Everybody who wants to put a point over drags the Communists in.

Mr. MURRAY. They dragged us in.

Mr. MUMMA. That is all.

Mr. DORN. I just want to make a statement along the lines of what you were saying. I first do really want to recommend that you read the history of Panama and the history of the United States and the canal.

Mr. MURRAY. Perhaps my reading mixed up with Richard Harding Davis.

Mr. DORN. Secondly, I do want to congratulate you on bringing in the name of the Panama President Remon, who has done so much to cement the relationships of the United States and Panama and who is probably one of the greatest Presidents that Panama has ever had and is doing not only a great deal for the poor and middle class of Panama, but is really putting the nation on a firm economic basis.

Mr. MURRAY. He is doing a tremendous job.

Mr. DORN. I do want to congratulate you for bringing his name before the committee today, because I think there is no question but that the future of the Canal Zone is in large measure dependent on the fine relationship between Panama and the Canal Zone that now exists. Mr. MURRAY. I think he wants to maintain that relationship, sir, working toward it.

Mr. ALLEN. Thank you very much, Mr. Murray.

Mr. MURRAY. Thank you.

Mr. ALLEN. Mr. Tyson, did you want to testify?

STATEMENT OF WILLIAM S. TYSON, ATTORNEY, LOCAL 30, CANAL ZONE PILOTS OF THE NATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF MASTERS, MATES, AND PILOTS, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR

Mr. ALLEN. Would you answer three questions for me?

Mr. TYSON. I will try.

Mr. ALLEN. Would you identify yourself first for the record?

Mr. TYSON. My name is William S. Tyson. I am attorney in Washington, counsel for the Master Mates and Pilots Local in the Canal Zone.

Mr. ALLEN. Will you tell us how many pilots there are in the Canal Zone?

Mr. TYSON. Ninety-three, as I understand at the present time. Mr. ALLEN. Do you know the annual salary?

Mr. TYSON. Mr. Chairman, I have that schedule, but I didn't bring it with me, because I didn't know I would testify, but I think it runs from about $6,500 to around $13,000, I think. I can furnish that

to you.

(The information was later furnished by Mr. Tyson:)

Representative JOHN J. ALLEN, Jr.,

WASHINGTON 5, D. C., July 9, 1954.

Chairman, Panama Canal Subcommittee,

Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries,

House of Representatives, Washington, D. C.

DEAR REPRESENTATIVE ALLEN: In my testimony before your subcommittee on Wednesday, July 7, I was asked for the basic rates of pay for Canal Zone pilots. At that time I gave the committee the approximate wage rates but I did not have with me the exact monetary schedule.

I have secured the exact basic pay scale of Canal Zone pilots which is as follows:

I believe this is the information which you requested.

I wish to take this opportunity to thank you for giving me a chance to present information to the subcommittee with respect to the Canal Zone pilots.

Yours very truly,

WILLIAM S. TYSON.

Mr. ALLEN. Do you know what the overtime situation is now as to whether they are still working far in excess of normal hours?

Mr. TYSON. I understand the situation on that is that beginning about January 18, 1953, they began to pay what is called time and a half, or true overtime, and since that time they have put on approximately 20 pilots and are working very little overtime at the present time.

Mr. ALLEN. What is the situation, if you know, with regard to recruiting new pilots? I remember the regulation required that a pilot should have been a master of his own ship at sea and should be under 35 years of age.

Mr. TYSON. I think that is still the rule. I think it is 1 year master of an oceangoing or Great Lakes ship and then 6 years experience otherwise.

Mr. ALLEN. Do they still have an ability to get masters who have had the experience under 35 years of age?

Mr. TYSON. I think from the information that I have on that there is some difficulty in getting people with that experience under the age limit which they have.

Mr. ALLEN. Thank you very much, sir. That is all. Thank you very much, Mr. Tyson.

The phase of the hearings that we have been going through is now concluded. I had overlooked the fact, Mr. Williamson, that you hadn't been cross examined.

Mr. WILLIAMSON. I am not going to insist on it.

Mr. ALLEN. Would you come forward, Mr. Williamson.

STATEMENT OF HUGH WILLIAMSON, VICE PRESIDENT, ASSOCIATION OF AMERICAN SHIPOWNERS-Resumed

Mr. DORN. I wonder, Mr. Williamson, if you would tell us a little about the Panama Railroad, its operations down in Panama and its operations in the docks as placed in the economy and its relationship to the tolls that are charged to the ships running through the Canal Zone.

Mr. WILLIAMSON. Well, the relationship to tolls would only reflect itself in the losses sustained in operating the railroad. As I tried to say the other day, with the advent of the express highway across the isthmus and the constant use of trucks by the armed services, and by the use of ships for tranmitting materials across the isthmus, the railroad which at one time was a monopoly and the only way to transit the isthmus and was a moneymaker, a very substantial one, began to lose money. How much is not quite clear, but I imagine pretty substantial. As I suggested, the services combined needs for the whole year of 1952 was three average freight trains. So one can understand they have virtually quit using the railroad. It does transit, though, a great deal of the other materials and merchandise. Mr. DORN. Would you say the railroad as it exists now is necessary for shipping?

Mr. WILLIAMSON. I would like to answer that, if I might, sir, by reading some testimony of the Governor of the Canal Zone that was given before the Senate Committee on Water Transportation. This is the Governor speaking

It is our planning now, this is not yet developed, but it is our planning, that it appears to be a desirable thing and would be a desirable thing to replace the railroad by a highway entirely within the Canal Zone.

Then he goes on to say

We feel very strongly that a land route within the Canal Zone is an absolute essential for the operation of the civil government and Company. So there we have the problem of the depletion of our railroad rolling stock which is now upon us, and we must maintain this supply route against the building of a rather costly 22 miles of highway.

Question. Well, generally, to what extent would you use the present railroad bed upon which to put a highway?

Answer. Very much the present program would include that. Unfortunately, the fill across the deeper part of the lake is only one track, you might say.

Senator ELLENDER. Yes.

Governor SEYBOLD. It needs greatly to be widened and that is the expensive part.

Question. But you do have trestles there. It has all been elevated with deposits of rock, has it not?

Answer. Yes, it came out of the old Culebra Cut. We would only have to build 22 miles because the rest of it is built, that is to Fort Davis.

Question. What is a rough estimate of the construction cost?

Answer. Somewhere around 7% to 8 million dollars.

Question. Do you mean to complete the route?

Answer. Yes.

Question. Though it would be more than that.

Answer. We would use the old railroad, I understand, but it needs quite a bit of additional fill to widen the base.

Question. You could obtain the fill close by, and it would not be a problem? Answer. Oh, no.

Question. I presume you could use the present tracks to carry it and dump it? Answer. Yes.

Mr. DORN. What testimony is that taken from?

Mr. WILLIAMSON. That is taken from the testimony given before the Senate Civil Functions Committee. All I have is the heading here, "Appropriations," and it is pages 1540 and 1544.

Mr. DORN. Well, is it my understanding, too, that the Army no longer uses this railroad to any extent.

Mr. WILLIAMSON. I am only giving you the figures compiled by the General Accounting Office for the year 1952. The 1953 figures aren't available, but those figures showed it transported about 7,000 tons on the railroad throughout the year. You take a car in our country will carry about 40 tons and a train will haul about 60 cars, and they will haul a great many more, I notice. They would require three freight trains in a whole year to carry what the armed services put aboard a railroad car.

Mr. DORN. And the reason, I understand, the railroad is being maintained is because the Army considers it should be maintained.

Mr. WILLIAMSON. They consider it might be a defense essential or have usefulness in time of emergency, and my point, as I was trying to make it, was if that be true, then let it be met out of defense appropriations and not be as a constant drain on the tolls.

Mr. DORN. How about the operation of the docks in Panama? The operation of those docks down there, is that commensurate with the operation of the docks in other parts of the world?

Mr. WILLIAMSON. I would say they are considerably different. I am one of the experts who have never been to the Canal Zone and I am simply relying on the literature in this case, but I think it is pretty reliable. No, they are peculiar in this respect, it seems to me. The railroad runs right out on the apron of the dock and cargoes can be unloaded directly from the ship right to the railroad car. I think we can say from our own experience that has not been a common or usual sight certainly around New York Harbor.

Then when it comes to smaller shipments to scattered points, it would seem the cargo is moved to nearby warehouses or sorting sheds, if you will, and some of that moves in by rail and some by trucks and there is a charge for that handling of cargo of some $2.50 a ton. So that where materials must move by truck there is that penalty payment of necessity because the trucks can't very well go onto the docks to take the cargo as it is unloaded as the railroad cars can and do.

48155-54--17

Mr. DORN. How about the operation of the docks? Is it an economical operation?

Mr. WILLIAMSON. Well, I would say not. We would say any private operator of vessels who tried to operate in the manner they operate in the Canal Zone would have quickly gone bankrupt.

Mr. DORN. Why is that?

Mr. WILLIAMSON. Well, one of the important reasons is you have an expensive ship sitting dockside, and they only work 40 hours a week. There is no attempt apparently made to put on overtime or second-shift crews and get that valuable ship out of there in shorter turn-around.

Mr. MUMMA. Isn't that due somewhat to their schedule of the length of time it takes back and forward?

Mr. WILLIAMSON. Well, we would urge that in a normal operation the turnaround time is everything. The costs of delay in harbors is something every operator dreads. If we would just move those boats faster and we had the same schedule and probably could deliver 2 boats instead of 3 or maybe 1, but we would get her in and out of harbor.

Mr. DORN. Have the shipping operators ever brought that to the attention of the Governor or those in charge there in order to change this situation?

Mr. WILLIAMSON. To my knowledge, no ship operator has ever been consulted or asked a question by any Governor at any time in the history of the zone.

Mr. DORN. Are there any ship operators on the Board?

Mr. WILLIAMSON. Never has been to my knowledge. There isn't

now.

Mr. DORN. Well, then you feel from the point of view of the railroad that the railroad should not be part of the accounting under which the tolls are figured?

Mr. WILLIAMSON. Well, I would suggest the losses of that railroad, certainly if it is a defense feature and isn't going to be used and play a normal role in the transportation system, shouldn't be a charge against tolls. It is a defense feature, if we are to accept the Army's word for it.

Mr. DORN. And if the shipping companies had any voice down there, they would want a change in the way the docks are managed? Mr. WILLIAMSON. I would say if the shipping industry bad a voice in what goes on in the Canal Zone they would probably want to make fairly important changes in all its operations, including the handling of the ship dockside.

Mr. DORN. What other operation changes would they suggest? Mr. WILLIAMSON. Well, they would go in for a high degree, I think, of economy. We mentioned railroads and steamship lines. We mentioned 57 commissaries, when we are told by pretty good authority that 14 at the most would do. One could go on about bakeries. One bakery has produced as many loaves of bread as are consumed in the whole zone, but there are three others operating. We would go through the whole list.

Mr. DORN. I am really discussing things that the shipping companies are affected by, not things that really are indirect results in the increase or decrease of tolls.