The CHAIRMAN. Have you now completed your list?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. I have completed the list, but there is once in a while

The CHAIRMAN. And you have mentioned 15 ships.

Senator THOMAS. I understood you wanted to add to that answer, Mr. Chamberlain ?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. I say there are occasional voyages. Once in a while even a schooner crosses now. I think cargo is carried occasionally from Maine by sailing ships over to the other side. But they are very rare. Those ships are not engaged in that trade. They are incidents merely.

Senator BRANDEGEE. These 15 ships in the over-seas trade flying the American flag, are they exclusively engaged in the foreign trade? Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Oh, yes; the American Line ships, you know, and ships of that kind.

Senator BRANDEGEE. You spoke of a Spreckels ship. Do you know whether they touch at any other American port than the one they

sail from?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. They do stop at Hawaii.

Senator BRANDEGEE. That would be joint coastwise and foreign trade?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Yes.

Senator BRANDEGEE. Are any of the others in the joint coast and foreign trade?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. The Pacific Mail ships stop at Hawaii for mails and passengers. They do not take on cargo there, I believe.

Senator PERKINS. There are several ships going to the coast of Mexico, are there not?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Yes; but you are speaking of trans-oceanic voyages, as I understood Senator Brandegee.

Senator BRANDEGEE. I am talking about any vessels flying the American flag in the foreign trade or any one that is also stopping at any of our coastwise or domestic ports other than the one from which it has sailed.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. I did not quite catch that. I do not think I gather your meaning.

Senator BRANDEGEE. If we have a vessel in the foreign trade flying the American flag sailing to a foreign port, assume that it sails from New York, is there any such boat that stops at any other American port before it gets to its foreign port?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Some of the American-Hawaiian ships-they are under register-stop at several domestic ports as well as at foreign terminals.

Senator BRANDEGEE. Do you happen to know which ones?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. I could get the sailing lists. I could not name them. There are five or six.

Senator BRANDEGEE. If this subject has any bearing at all on the subject the committee is interested in, I suppose it is as to the possibility of confining an exception from tolls to a vessel engaged exclusively in the coastwise trade, and not mixing it up with the foreign trade. Are there any vessels on the Pacific coast that you know of, and if so, which, after leaving a Pacific coast port of the United States stop at any other port under the United States jurisdiction

that could be classed as a coastwise port en route to and from its foreign port?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Outside of those that stop at Hawaii or those that stop ar British Colombia ports I do not recall any.

Senator BRANDEGEE. How many of the vessels in the foreign trade of the United States flying the American flag from the Pacific coast to over-seas points do stop at any of the Hawaiian Islands, going or coming?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. All those ships that I have named except the Great Northern.

Senator BRANDEGEE. All of which ships that you have named? Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. The three Spreckles ships to Australia, the five Pacific Mail ships to Asia, and sometimes to the Philippines.

Senator BRANDEGEE. Do they do nothing else at any of the Hawaiian ports or other coastwise ports of the United States, if they do stop at any, except take on mail?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Mail and passengers, I think, I said. That is all I know of in the case of the Pacific Mail ships. I do not know as to the Spreckles ships. But they stop but a short time; I know that. They may take express goods or package goods, I think very likely, but I do not know.

Senator BRANDEGEE. But you do not think any of them take cargo off or on, either going or coming?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. The Pacific Mail ships do not, and I do not think the Spreckles ships do, but I would not say positively. They are fast ships. They have to save time.

The CHAIRMAN. What is your question, Senator Simmons?

Senator SIMMONS. My question is this, Mr. Chairman: Under the present navigation laws, assuming that the Panama Canal was now open, could a registered American vessel starting from New York, stop at any or all of the ports on the Atlantic seaboard, foreign ports, pass through the canal, go up the Pacific coast as far as Alaska, stopping at both American and foreign ports, and return to New York under an American register?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Undoubtedly.

Senator SIMMONS. It could stop at every port on the Atlantic and every port on the Pacific under an American register, engaging in foreign and domestic traffic at each of these points, and passing through the canal?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Undoubtedly.

Senator SIMMONS. If it were an enrolled vessel it could not do thatit could only stop at American ports?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. That is right.

Senator SIMMONS. That is the difference?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. It is the difference.

Senator SIMMONS. That is what I was getting at.

The CHAIRMAN. Would it be practicable to confine our so-called coastwise vessels exclusively to coastwise trade?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Why, certainly; that would be quite competent for Congress.

The CHAIRMAN. If I understood you correctly a moment ago, notwithstanding the existence of this right under certain circumstances to touch at foreign ports, as a matter of fact you could recall any

American ship in the coastwise trade availing itself of that privilege on the Atlantic coast?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. I could not recall the name of any one, no; and yet as I say I think there are probably occasionally such vessels. The CHAIRMAN. Occasionally only.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Oh, yes; it is not frequent.

The CHAIRMAN. You think there may be a few on the Pacific coast? Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Those to which my attention was called by Senator Brandegee, which for the moment I had overlooked.

The CHAIRMAN. How many vessels are engaged in what is called the coastwise trade of the United States?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. The coastwise trade, of course, is a very comprehensive term, and, for example, it takes in a ferry boat that goes from here to Alexandria and everything that is big enough to be documented to go into the customhouse.

The CHAIRMAN. It embraces every sort of local and domestic craft; barges, for instance?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Yes

The CHAIRMAN. I think it is a matter of record that they aggregate about 24,000 in number. Is that substantially correct?

Senator THOMAS. That is, including these local crafts?

The CHAIRMAN. Yes; local crafts, steamboats, and barges on rivers and lakes.

Senator SIMMONS. That takes in all above 10 tons register?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. It was 24,765 on June 30, 1913.

The CHAIRMAN. You say all those have a minimum tonnage of 5

tons?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Five tons.

The CHAIRMAN. From 5 tons up?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Five tons up indefinitely.

The CHAIRMAN. What would be the minimum tonnage of a vessel that could use the Panama Canal?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. You mean as a commercial proposition?

The CHAIRMAN. Oh, yes; we are considering that.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Any kind of a boat could go through that.
The CHAIRMAN. Perhaps a rowboat could go through?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Yes; a rowboat could go through; and motor boats, you know, have crossed the Atlantic.

The CHAIRMAN. But for commercial purposes, what would be the tonnage?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. For commercial purposes, considering the length of the voyage and considering the constant tendency of ships to grow larger, which is in the line of the world's industrial development, which can not be stopped, I think, for continuous employment in the canal and this is a mere matter of opinion, of courseI think that a ship of 1,000 net tons would be probably the minimum; that is, for continuous employment. By a net ton, if I could say one word in explanation by a net ton in shipping (it has nothing to do with weight), is meant 100 cubic feet. One hundred cubic feet will hold varying weights, depending on the material, of course. It will hold a little over 2 tons of raw sugar, for example. Of course, it will not hold so many tons weight of oats as it does of wheat. But, roughly speaking, for general purposes you say that a ton of ship

ping would carry somewhere in the neighborhood of 2 tons of cargo, using the word "ton" in the avoirdupois sense.

The CHAIRMAN. But with some commodities it would not exceed more than 1 tons?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Oh, of course not; and even less than that. Senator SIMMONS. What would be the average?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. That question I could not answer, because that would depend on the specific gravity of the article. You see, 100 cubic feet of lead-I do not know how much that would weigh. One hundred cubic feet of feathers would weigh almost nothing, on the other side, but between them there is a whole range of merchandise. I think I could not guess on that.

The CHAIRMAN. How many of the 24,765 vessels engaged in the coastwise trade have a minimum net tonnage of 1,000 tons?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Of ocean-going steam vessels I have prepared a table here, having in view your question and the question of Senator Simmons. That numbers 363 vessels, of 1,442,228 gross tons, 940,285 net tons. The net tonnage of the ships is the part that is available for cargo. To get the gross tonnage you add to that the space occupied by the machinery and the quarters for the crew and the bunkers of coal, and all that part that is not available for carrying passengers and cargo.

Senator PERKINS. That is the displacement tonnage?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. The displacement tonnage is another thing. You are thinking of naval terms for the moment.

The CHAIRMAN. Will you repeat your answer to this question: How many of the coastwise vessels have a net tonnage of 1,000 tons! Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Of coastwise steamers, 363 vessels; net tonnage, 940,285.

The CHAIRMAN. I would rather you would give me a specific answer to these specific questions.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Three hundred and sixty-three.

The CHAIRMAN. Then out of the 24,765 coastwise craft in the United States there are but 363 with the requisite tonnage capacity to commercially use this canal?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Steamers; sail vessels are excluded———
The CHAIRMAN. I do not care about that.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. You put the question so broadly I have got to try to answer it correctly. Sail vessels I have not included because I do not think anybody has an idea that sailing vessels can use the canal.

The CHAIRMAN. It is your impression they can not?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. It is my decided impression they can not. The CHAIRMAN. Of the 363 vessels that in your judgment now engaged in the coastwise trade that may be available for use through the Panama Canal, what proportion of that number represents vessels now engaged on the Great Lakes and vessels that will be confined to that business?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. None; these are seagoing vessels.

Senator SIMMONS. That includes registered and enrolled vessels? Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Yes, sir.

Senator SIMMONS. Both?
Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you know how many ships in the coastwise trade are now prepared for travel through the canal!

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. No, I do not.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you know how many ships Great Britain has in the over-seas trade?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. I can tell you in one minute.

The CHAIRMAN. These are of over 100 tons-- 4,128.

Senator WALSH. The figures you gave the chairman were over a thousand, were they not?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Yes; they were. I will read the complete figures. The number of United Kingdom sailing vessels in the foreign trade is 4,128.

Senator SIMMONS. You excluded sailing vessels in your answer to the question?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. I am speaking of steam vessels now.

Senator SIMMONS. You said, "sailing vessels."

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. I beg your pardon. It is steam vessels, 4,128, with a total tonnage of 10,641,514.

The CHAIRMAN. What is the minimum tonnage of any vessel em braced in that number of 4,128?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Fifteen.

The CHAIRMAN. Fifteen tons?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Fifteen tons, as I recall it.

The CHAIRMAN. I think I asked what number of ships Great Britain had in the foreign trade. Surely she has not a 15-ten ship in the foreign trade.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Across the channel. No; that would not count. They are stated separately over here.

The CHAIRMAN. How many ships has Great Britain in the foreign trade with a minimum capacity of 1,000 net tons!

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. I do not know. I do not recall any figures on that subject.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you the record there showing the number of sailing vessels engaged in the British foreign trade?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Two hundred and forty-two.

The CHAIRMAN. That makes a total of 4,370 vessels engaged in that trade?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. Is it your information that Great Britain controls. more than one-half of the ocean trade of the world?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Just about one-half.

The CHAIRMAN. The other half is divided among all the other nations?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. These are United Kingdom ships that I am speaking of. Of course in addition to that there are British ships that are registered in the British colonies, in Canada, Australia, and in New Zealand. I do not think there are any in South Africa. The CHAIRMAN. Have you the record as to those?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Not separately stated, and in just that form. I have Lloyd's figures here.

Senator PERKINS. Do the colonies exempt them from taxation? Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. I do not know as to that, Senator. I really do not know as to that. The total number of British steamers, counting