REPORT OF THE STATE SHIP AND WATER TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION1924
REPORT OF THE STATE SHIP AND WATER TRANSPORTATION COMMISSIONAuthorized by the General Assembly of North Carolina Chapter 94 of the Public Laws of 1923 THE GREAT SEAL OF THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA.
RALEIGH, MAY 23, 1924RALEIGHEDWARDS & BROUGHTON PRINTING COMPANY1924
THE COMMISSION
R. M. MILLER, JR., Chairman, Charlotte
Banker and Manufacturer
D. D. CARROLL, Secretary, Chapel Hill
Dean of the School of Commerce, University of North Carolina
EMMETT H. BELLAMY, Wilmington
State Senator and Attorney at Law
JOSEPH A. BROWN, Chadbourn
Manufacturer, Farmer and State Senator
W. A. HART, Tarboro
Cotton Manufacturer, Farmer, Member State Highway Commission
J. Y. JOYNER, Raleigh
Farmer, Educator, and Director Tobacco Growers’ Coöperative Association
A. M. SCALES, Greensboro
Attorney at Law
CHARLES E. WADDELL, Asheville
Consulting Engineer, Mem. Am. Soc. C. E.
CHARLES S. WALLACE, Morehead City
Manufacturer of Ice and Fertilizer
SUMMARY INDEX| Page | |
| PART I | 7 |
| The Report | |
| PART II | 23 |
| Existing Situation with regard to North Carolina's Ports and Waterways | |
| PART III | 97 |
| Railway Discriminations Against North Carolina | |
| PART IV | 123 |
| A Review of What is Being Done in Other States | |
| APPENDIX | 141 |
| A. Chapter 94, Public Laws 1923, Creating the State Ship and Water Transportation Commission | |
| B. Chronology of the Activities of the Commission. |
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
To His Excellency, GOVERNOR CAMERON MORRISON, and THE COUNCIL OF STATE.
SIRS:—In accordance with chapter 94, Public Laws of 1923, I have the honor to transmit herewith the report of the State Ship and Water Transportation Commission.
Respectfully,
R. M. MILLER, JR.
Chairman.
RALEIGH, May 23, 1924.
PART I
THE REPORT
THE REPORT OF THE STATE SHIP AND WATER
TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
To His Excellency, CAMERON MORRISION, Governor of North Carolina, and THE COUNCIL OF STATE:
Under the authority of chapter 94 of the Public Laws of North Carolina of 1923, the State Ship and Water Transportation Commission was duly organized on March 27, 1923, after each member had taken the oath prescribed by the statute.
R. M. Miller, Jr., of Charlotte, N. C., was elected chairman, and D. D. Carroll, of Chapel Hill, N. C., was elected secretary. The Commission at once entered upon its duties, and for more than a year has devoted its best thought and much of its time to an exhaustive study of the economic conditions of North Carolina, of the transportation problems confronting her, and of the solution of these problems.
The Commission made an inspection of the navigable waters of the state and of the sites suggested for ports and terminal facilities. A Revenue Cutter of the United States and the boat of the North Carolina Fish Commission were tendered and were used for this purpose.
Public hearings were held at all cities and towns where such hearings were desired and all persons wishing a public hearing were given an attentive audience.
Questionnaires were sent to various persons and organizations to elicit information and many valuable letters and briefs were received, considered and filed.
The Commission invited many leading citizens of this and other states, including rate, transportation and port experts, to address it, and in this way received many valuable suggestions.
It conferred freely with the Corporation Commission and other public officials.
Through the active interest of Senator Simmons, the War Department of the United States assigned Major Oscar O. Keuntz, of the Corps of Engineers of the United States Army, as advisor to the Commission, and his services to the Commission were of great value.
To all who have thus helped in this arduous undertaking the Commission desires to render its thanks and, as far as it may, the thanks of North Carolina.
In his message to the General Assembly on the matter under consideration the Governor said that this state has more miles of navigable inland sounds and rivers than any other state in the union, and Major Keuntz says: “The State of North Carolina is peculiarly adapted by
nature to the development of a system of water ways as is no other state on the Atlantic seaboard.” Upon actual inspection of these, however, the Commission found that the use of these God-given water ways was almost negligible and that as far as their usefulness in building a greater, richer and more powerful state is concerned, it would have been almost as well for North Carolina to have been an inland state.
This, however, has not always been true. There was a time when our waterways were considerable factors in the life of the state. By reason of our failure to provide proper facilities for docking, loading and unloading; by reason of the hostility of the railroads who determined to build up ports in other states; and by reason of the dismemberment of our railroad running from Wilmington through the Cape Fear valley to the west, the use of our water ways has been discontinued and we have sat upon the shores and watched our commerce driven from the waters. The state has become transportation “territory” of Norfolk and sea ports in other states, and it is small wonder that we have been exploited. In transportation circles we have become “the Congo” of the states.
THE PROBLEMLet us consider the problem that confronts us.
The rate situation is one that concerns every citizen of North Carolina whether he dwell on the seaboard, in the Piedmont or in the mountains. It is a state issue. We made no progress in the building of roads until we realized that it was a state function, and so with education and so with public health and public welfare. When we broke the bonds of a narrow provincialism and thought in terms of the state, the whole state, all for one and one for all, we progressed and began to attain our destined greatness.
RATE DISCRIMINATIONSNorth Carolina has made such remarkable strides in agriculture and in manufacture that it is hard for us to realize the great injury done to the state by the rate discriminations against her. We have prospered notwithstanding our handicaps, but let us not hug the delusion that this will always be the case. We have progressed largely because of our natural resources and endowments and the indomitable will and courage of our people. The day will come when we will face the law of diminishing returns. The margin of advantage in natural endowments in manufacture and agriculture is rapidly being reduced as we exhaust our richest resources or, through growth in industry, are forced to utilize less productive elements. For example, we have already probably used our best water power sites and from now on will be forced to make use of inferior sites and naturally will be forced to pay higher rates.
As we approach this condition in agriculture and manufacture a very small margin of unfairness in freight rates may become the determining factor in settling the fate of our industries. When our natural advantage is thus reduced to a parity with that of the manufacturers and farmers in other states, their advantage in freight rates and service will then appear even deadlier than it is now. These discriminations against us will then be a veritable mill stone about our necks. These discriminations have built up the Virginia cities at the expense of the North Carolina cities. Yet, notwithstanding this, in the last few years we have begun to build some cities in North Carolina. This is partly due to our natural resources and to our grim determination to succeed in spite of the discriminations. But we have for over a half-century been paying a tremendous tribute to other states, and the time will certainly come in the history of the state when we will carry these burdens less jauntily.
The real test of a state's position is seen in her commerce and trade in which natural endowments play little part and right here is our weakest point. We have progressed marvelously in agriculture, in manufactures, in insurance, but our trade and commerce have languished. We have built up no great wholesale distributing centers, and this is due not to the lack of ability on the part of our people, but to the deadly incubus of freight rate discriminations.
What could be more iniquitous than that a shipment from an outside state should be carried entirely through our State to Virginia and reshipped to a North Carolina city at a cheaper rate than if it had been stopped in North Carolina? Yet we have endured that humiliation for many years.
North Carolina is a long state running east and west, and our trunk line railroads run north and south. It would be a misnomer to call them “our” trunk lines—we have no part or parcel in them for they have consistently built up the cities and commerce of other states at our expense and they have robbed and stripped naked the only railroad we had that gave promise of affording an east to west trunk line.
Because of this radical defect in our transportation system, North Carolina is in a tragic condition of being itself dismembered and of having most of the communications of its people north and south instead of east and west, and it has been made as difficult as possible for the people of the east and the people of the west to trade with each other. And thus it is that we have “lost provinces” in the west and “lost provinces” in the east. The great state highway system has already been of much service in mitigating these conditions, but North Carolina will never really come into its own, in the opinion of this Commission, until we have a trunk-line railroad running from the Cape Fear basin to the coal fields of the west and the transportation gateways
of the middle west coupled with up-to-date and adequate water competition. In the supporting documents will be found instances and details of the discriminations practiced upon North Carolina by the railroads and the existence of these discriminations and their baleful influence will be confirmed to you by the wholesalers and other shippers of the State.
The treatment of this sovereign State by the railroads is in the opinion of the Commission not only a deadly blow to our economic life but an offense and an affront to our just pride.
TIDEWATER NORTH CAROLINAThe navigable inland water ways of North Carolina pass directly through or lap twenty-eight counties—more than one-fourth the total number in the state. Some of the rate experts claim that the effects of water competition on freight rates would be felt only about seventy miles inland. Granting for the moment that this would be true, we ask you to consider the twenty-eight counties above spoken of and those other counties contiguous to them and in easy reach of them by truck—the great eastern section of the State. Considering the natural advantages of this section, it is notoriously backward in its economic life. There are few sections, in the world that compare with it in natural endowments—a rich soil easily tillable, a bountiful rainfall, a long growing season, a mild and equable climate, waterways penetrating it in every direction, a section that could almost feed and clothe the nation.
This portion of the state is wonderfully adapted to the growing of truck, and yet we found that this promising industry in this section had actually decreased and the Commission finds as a fact that this decrease was largely due to unfavorable freight rates and a deficiency of facilities for shipping perishable freight.
Instead of a great trucking industry, rivaling that of California, Florida, Idaho, and other states, we found the whole business sick and declining.
A great agricultural, industrial and commercial advance in this section of the State would be felt throughout the Piedmont and the mountains. The whole body economic would profit thereby.
If, however we should agree that water competition with freight rates would be felt only in this great eastern section, the state should proceed to unshackle it and give it a chance. The few million dollars expended would bring large returns.
OUR PROBLEM WILL GROW WORSELet no one think that time will heal our troubles in the matters under consideration. Time is indeed a great healer in many things, but in this matter unless we take heroic action our condition will grow steadily
worse. The longer the remedy is delayed the harder it will be to apply. Trade channels will become fixed; the more we feed our rivals the more powerful and exacting they will become.
Access to markets through cheap transportation channels become more vital as specialized and large scale industries develop.
North Carolina grew a million bales of cotton last year and will manufacture over a million, having more textile mills than any state in the Union; she grew the second largest amount of tobacco of any state and manufactured more than she raised; she stood fourth among the states in the value of the leading crops of the United States; she had about as many laborers employed in manufactures as Virginia and South Carolina combined, and the value of her manufactures was equal to the combined manufactures of both of those states. And with all this and ranking thirteenth in manufactures in the United States, yet she does not export a dollar's worth of finished products through her own ports.
If we are to pay an unjust freight rate tribute of ten or fifteen million dollars per annum now, what will we pay ten years hence? Great as has been our progress while in commercial bondage, it would have been far greater had we been free from injustice.
Specialized agriculture, fruit growing, as well as the growing of staples, creating an ever growing surplus, demand ready access to markets at rates which will allow farmers to compete with those of other states. Expanding industries will stagnate unless freight rates will allow their products to flow to the outside world in fair competition with those of other states.
Cheap transportation is usually the deciding factor in commercial development; the location of a new industry is frequently determined by the matter of freight rates and transportation service.
THE SOLUTION OF THE PROBLEMAfter considering these questions from every angle, the Commission unhesitatingly declares that we should begin at once the construction of modern terminals so that we may get the benefits of the vast water ways of the state. We have a long ocean front, two spacious inland seas, thirteen hundred miles of navigable rivers, and the inland water way which connects with Hampton Roads, the Chesapeake Bay and the Delaware River.
The proper terminals and port facilities for a great sea port for ocean traffic should be provided in the Cape Fear basin. This port should be modern and so constructed as to appeal not only to the coastwise traffic but to sea going ships.
The ocean lanes swing in nearer the coast just off the mouth of the Cape Fear River than at any other port, and this should make this port an attractive fueling station and encourage making it a port of call for
the vast amount of shipping which passes that point from the Panama Canal and the Gulf ports to Europe and return. This traffic is very large and is growing every year. The tonnage through the Panama Canal has multiplied ten times in the last four years and Wilmington and Southport are nearer the canal than any other Atlantic port.
Smaller ports and terminal facilities should be constructed at other points in the state for coastwise traffic. Sites have been offered for these structures at Southport, Wilmington, Morehead City, New Bern, and a number of other ports, and ample land suitable for the purpose will be available at all of them.
The Commission does not at this time express any preference as to the sites for these ports, but feels that this matter should be left to the Port Commission recommended herein and the engineers whom they would employ to build and operate them if the General Assembly should adopt these recommendations.
WATER RATESEvery one admits that water transportation is much cheaper than rail. In fact, experts estimate that the cost is less than one-half.
Water transportation is the one outstanding competitive factor recognized by the rate regulating authorities as justifying an equalization of rail rates, and this competition, together with volume of traffic, is the only combination which will compel a reduction of rates.
As to the second reason North Carolina can more than qualify. Her volume of traffic is greater than that of any of her neighbors. We must create a condition which will compel a proper rate structure, and in the opinion of the Commission we will never obtain justice until we build our own ports and have a trunk line railroad connecting our leading port with the great middle west.
In the opinion of the Commission North Carolina will continue to beg for crumbs from the rate-making authorities until they realize that we are entitled to sit at the table.
PUBLIC TERMINALS NECESSARYSome profess to think that terminals should be provided by private interests. The Commission finds that the whole trend of the times is the other way. States and cities are feverishly constructing public ports and facilities for shipping. One port—that of Portland, Oregon—has been built 113 miles from the sea; and Los Angeles, California, has gone twenty-five or thirty miles to the sea and built a port, and the port of Houston, Texas, is being built fifty miles from the gulf at an expense of more than thirty millions of dollars. If we expect to have our ports and water ways improved by the United States Government we must have public terminals.
For your information we quote the United States law on this subject:
“Every United States Port should own its own water front, and this should be controlled by a port authority composed of business men who have an excellent grasp of the export and import business and who are willing to devote sufficient time to the subject. These should be appointed without regard to political affiliations, and should take the broad view that the port is the property of the people at large, and that the provision of the best facilities will promote quicker ship dispatch, attract more ships, and thus enlarge the commerce of the port; that while the port terminal should be self supporting, the charges should be adjusted to produce this result, without injury to business, and that the growth of the port will mean the growth of the city and increased material prosperity to the individuals of the city and state. THOSE STATES WHICH HAVE ONLY ONE MAN PORTS SHOULD IN PARTICULAR EXERT THEMSELVES TO DEVELOP IT ALONG THE MOST MODERN LINES. AND THE FIRST STEP IN THIS DIRECTION IS THE APPOINTMENT OF A COMPETENT PORT AUTHORITY.”
And further, in the River and Harbor act of March 2, 1919, appears the following:
“It is hereby declared to be the policy of Congress that water terminals are essential to all cities and towns located upon harbors or navigable waterways, and that at least one public terminal should exist, constructed, owned and regulated by the municipality, or other public agency of the State, and open to the use of all upon equal terms, and with the view of carrying out the policy to the fullest possible extent, the Secretary of War is hereby vested with the discretion to withhold, unless the public interests would seriously suffer by delay, moneys appropriated in this act for new projects adopted herein, or for the further improvement of existing projects, if, in his opinion, no water terminals exist adequate for the traffic, and open to all on equal terms, or unless satisfactory assurances are received that local or other interests will provide such adequate terminal or terminals.”
What is the use of the United States Government expending millions of dollars on our channels and harbors if we allow them to remain unused? If we use them the Government will improve them.
Then, too, it must be a public port because private enterprises cannot be expected to finance so great an undertaking. The initial expense in constructing terminals is so large that few private organizations can afford to undertake it. Small boat owners are certainly not able to do it and their competition is very necessary.
Then, too, it has been learned that when large interests develop a port they frequently make terminal charges and transfer rates so high as to give them a monopoly. Ships usually go, other things being equal, where they have the lowest charges and the best facilities, and public ownership of port facilities is the only guarantee of equal and just treatment to all.
STATE TERMINALSThere is no city in the state able to build, equip and maintain proper port facilities. If there were such a city it would scarcely be just to
expect her to make such expenditures for the public good. We have waited over a hundred years for some city or some person or corporation to build us a port and as a consequence we have fallen into commercial slavery to the trunk line railroads.
The Commission believes, also, that it is better for the State to build, own, equip, and operate its own terminals, for the reason that the State is powerful enough to protect herself from hostile railroads and rich enough, if necessary, to buy the Cape Fear and Yadkin Valley Railroad or otherwise provide a western outlet.
Some have thought that such a program would be socialistic, but the Commission does not believe that there is any merit in such contentions. Putting our waterways in condition to be used by the citizens of the state would be but a continuation of our highway system. We would link the two together. The highway beginning at an inland town would run to the port and thence to the ends of the earth.
The state saw no objection when it built the North Carolina Railroad and helped to build the Atlantic and North Carolina, the Cape Fear and Yadkin Valley and Western North Carolina railroads.
Almost every state and country that has an ocean port, or that can connect in any way with an ocean port is doing so regardless of the cost. These states deem no expense unreasonable if thereby they may gain access to the ocean, and shall not North Carolina, with its wonderful opportunity for building a great port and subsidiary ports, spend the few millions of dollars necessary to this end, thanking God meanwhile that it does not have to spend ten or twenty times as much, as is the case with some other states?
The public ports throughout the United States are uniformly successful and are not only self-supporting but are remunerative.
BENEFIT TO THE WHOLE STATEThe Commission has purposely refrained from the use of technical language and from the intricacies of rate structures. A volume could be written on the subject of gateways, differentials, short hauls, long hauls and water hauls; on parity rates and proportional rates and combination rates; on zones and on basing points, but in the language of the street they would not get us anywhere. If language was given to man in order that he might conceal his thoughts, so freight rate terminology was invented by the railroads to conceal their acts. The rate structure seems to us a wonderful machine, well oiled and smooth running, built in order that the railroads may get all the traffic will bear, and in some cases a little more.
Some experts insist that the benefits of water competition will be evident only seventy miles from the coast. The Commission believes they are mistaken and that the benefits, direct and indirect, will be felt all over North Carolina. One of the experts admitted that the benefits
of the Virginia ports extended even into West Virginia, a distance of some 400 or more miles, but we are told that seventy miles is about the limit in North Carolina. A majority of the Commission resides inland and more than seventy miles from the water and they are willing to take the chance.
In this connection, let us call attention to the fact that we are fortunate in having the Cape Fear River run inland from the port for over one hundred miles, and that when the third lock projected in that river is completed we will have a depth of eight feet as far as Fayetteville all the year round.
The Commission would also call your attention to the great importance of a coaling station in the Cape Fear basin. Not only would this be a great factor in making our port a port of call for ships passing near the Cape Fear basin needing coal but it would cause a great lowering in our rates on coal for domestic consumption. It is estimated that rate reductions resulting therefrom on this commodity alone would amount to more than $400,000 a year; enough to pay the interest on the total bond issue recommended to carry out the far-reaching constructive purposes provided for in this report. This lower coal rate would be the very tonic required to maintain and stimulate our industries as our other advantages become equalized with those of other states. It would give us what Virginia and many of the other states already have.
MAGNITUDE OF THE PROJECTThe proposition is a large and important one, but not at all an impossible one. The cost is not as large by any means as that of the highways. When in 1919 the Bill for fifty million dollars for highways was introduced many were they that claimed that it could not be done. But in 1921 the Bill was passed, and it is doubtful if one could find 5% of the people of the State who are not happy and enthusiastic over the highway program. The cost of the waterways program would be infinitesimal compared to its benefits direct and indirect.
The cost of the waterways, even if the state is obliged to operate ships, will be very small in comparison with the highways, and yet the waterways program will probably mean more in the long run in economic savings than the highways.
OPERATION OF SHIPSThe Commission does not believe that it will be necessary to operate ships, but unquestionably it should do so if others will not. The railroads have discouraged by every means in their power the operation of boats in our waters. On occasions they have even bought up stock in ship companies and then discontinued operation of the boats. These are serious charges, but such is the evidence before the Commission.
We believe that when the State provides safe and proper and adequate terminal facilities at our ports, with suitable loading and unloading devices, shipping companies will be glad to make use of our ports.
There is now great congestion in many of the larger ports, in the country, and, therefore, there is more room for new ports. The United States has fewer developed ports considering its trade than has western Europe.
If North Carolina is ever to act, now is the accepted time.
Increasing congestion at the great ports makes new ones necessary, and as a nation becomes a greater exporter and importer of raw materials and manufactured products, the need for other ports will be accentuated.
As the volume of our produce in North Carolina increases, so also, should our water borne traffic increase and we should be ready in order that this traffic may flow through our own ports.
We have carefully investigated this phase of the subject and we are satisfied that there will be no lack of ships run by private companies to make our ports successful. But if private companies will not run ships, then the state should do so and could, we believe, do so at a profit.
TRUNK LINE RAILROADA hundred years ago our fathers were dreaming of and laboring for a railroad connecting the west with tide-water. Several efforts were made to achieve this purpose, but all were frustrated. Finally this great vision culminated in the construction of the Cape Fear and Yadkin Valley Railroad. The crying need of a trunk line from the sea coast to the great middle west could no longer be denied. By the aid of the State, counties and cities along the route, they built the Cape Fear and Yadkin Valley Railroad from Wilmington to Mt. Airy, with certain branches. Before the great plan of building it far into the middle west or securing connections with the middle west could be consummated, the road was forced into bankruptcy by interested parties, was bought in and dismembered. This road could still be used to materialize the great vision of our fathers. It already touches the Norfolk & Western, and it is said in the public prints that the Pennsylvania Railroad, probably the greatest road in America is considering the absorption of the Norfolk & Western. If this plan is successful so much better for North Carolina, and so much more important is it for the state to have this road as a trunk line. The Commission believes it would pay the state, if it is necessary, to purchase this road and thus provide such a trunk line from our State port to the west. In time we believe this road would become a most valuable property and prove a good investment for North Carolina in addition to the indirect benefits that would accrue in the
saving of freight rates and the building up of the sections through which it runs. This road would furnish the shortest route from the middle west to the Atlantic.
CONCLUSIONSTherefore, having considered these matters fully and to the best of our ability, the Commission would respectfully answer the questions propounded in the act constituting the Commission, as follows:
1. “If it is feasible and will be reasonably profitable to operate, freight rates and other advantages considered, one or more lines of ship and water transportation on the navigable rivers, sounds, and other navigable waters within the boundaries of the State and between the towns located on such navigable waters and towns and cities located beyond the boundaries of the State to the north and to the south along the Atlantic Seaboard and elsewhere.”
The Commission believes that it is imperative for the good of the State that a maritime industry be created on the waters of the State, and that said industry will be both profitable in itself and will tend to reduce the freight rates throughout the State and place said freight rates on a parity with those of other states and localities. The Commission believes that this can be accomplished without the State embarking upon the shipping business.
2. “The cost of purchasing suitable and adequate boats and ships and the cost of maintaining and operating the same.”
The Commission finds that coastwise ships and inland freight boats of varying types can, at this time, be purchased at very reasonable prices, and believes that, if private enterprise does not provide adequate shipping service, the State could undertake such purchase and operation to the great advantage of the people and eventually on a profitable basis.
3. “The practicability of obtaining docks, wharves and other landing places along the banks of said navigable rivers, and towns located thereon within the State and the possibility of obtaining terminal facilities at towns or cities without the boundaries of the State and the cost of building, buying or renting the same.”
Docks, wharves, and landing places are available at some 25 or 30 towns within the State and the Commission has been tendered sites through gift at Southport, Wilmington, New Bern, Morehead City, and Manteo, and others are promised. Docks and wharves are available in ports outside of the State on equal terms for all shipping interests.
4. “The reasonable estimate of the earnings of said one or more lines of water transportation to be operated and maintained by said Commission.”
We find that at this time boats suitable for inland traffic can be purchased at prices ranging from $75,000 to $150,000 each, and operated at costs from 50 to $100 per day. Ships for coastwise traffic can be purchased for prices from $150,000 to $300,000 each, and operated at costs from $100 to $250 per day. The purchase prices and costs of operation vary, as to type and tonnage of boats and ships.
As a further answer to the questions submitted to the Commission, the Commission finds that—
Without exception State-owned terminals have been self-supporting in every State where they have been built. That such terminals have not only been self-supporting but have paid off their bonded indebtedness and have effected a reduction in freight rates to the interior of the States that built them.
In the opinion of the Commission, the remedy for the present freight rate situation and the serious conditions that are likely to confront the State in the future can be obtained by the people only through definite and positive action by their General Assembly, and without such united action and patriotic endeavor our situation will continue to grow worse as compared to other sections of the country, and owing to the lack of port facilities of our own, we will be compelled to pay tribute to the upbuilding and enriching of other localities.
RECOMMENDATIONSFurther responding to the spirit of the act, the Commission would make the following recommendations:
1. That the General Assembly create a Port Commission of five members, vested with full authority to select sites, construct port terminals with all necessary equipment, and that the said Port Commission be given full power to establish a traffic organization, to enter and prosecute complaints, either through the Corporation Commission or otherwise, in connection with rates and traffic regulations, and to do all things necessary to carry out the purposes of its creation and to bring relief in freight and traffic matters to the citizens of the State.
2. That $7,000,000.00 be appropriated for the use of said Port Commission, or so much thereof as may be necessary, for the purposes enumerated above.
3. That the Port Commission be authorized to purchase or lease ships and operate the same, if in its opinion adequate shipping is not provided by private enterprise and that $1,500,000.00 additional be appropriated for this purpose, or so much thereof as may be necessary.
4. That the State acquire the Cape Fear and Yadkin Valley Railroad as a basis for a trunk-line railway from the Cape Fear basin to the Middle West, or otherwise provide such a trunk line.
The Commission believes and concludes that if the General Assembly will put these recommendations into effect, at a relatively small cost immense relief will be given to the State; that instead of begging for fair rates, we will be in position to demand them; that instead of fearing that we may lose the concessions already grudgingly given, we will be in position to secure as favorable rates as other States that have prospered at our expense.
Up to the time of the Civil War, North Carolina was almost entirely agricultural. She had prospered because of her natural endowments and had built up an economic system based on slave labor. After the war she found this economic system shattered and began laboriously to work out her salvation. The progress at first was slow and disheartening. By the hardest kind of toil she has improved her agriculture so that she now takes high rank among her sister states. She has developed a manufacturing system chiefly in her native products, such as textiles, tobacco manufacturing and furniture making. She has succeeded in these because of her rare advantages in raw material and because of her water power. North Carolina has not prospered adequately in trade and commerce, she has been out-stripped by many of the other states. She has built up no distributing centers. North Carolina has made all of this progress notwithstanding the most flagrant discrimination against her in freight rates; she has become a commercial territory of other states; she holds the remedy in her own hands; the remedy is at least one trunk line railway running east and west in addition to the trunk lines now running north and south across the State; and these roads should connect with a great port adequately equipped for sea-going ships with a system of smaller ports at suitable places along the coast and the sounds and rivers of the State for coastwise connections.
The Commission believes and so finds that this program is a necessary part of the great program of development undertaken by the State. This program consists of improvements in public health, in public welfare, in the education of all the people of the State, in the great highway system joining our people together in a homogeneous whole, and in the solution of our transportation problems.
If we have expressed ourselves in strong language at times, it is because we feel deeply the importance of this subject and are convinced that this program will give us relief in our transportation problems and that, instead of an unbalanced and possibly temporary progress, we will put our State on the road to an abounding, well balanced, permanent, and until now undreamed of prosperity, and in this faith and deep conviction we unhesitatingly and unanimously recommend that the General Assembly adopt and carry out these recommendations.
Respectfully submitted,
Chairman
Secretary
RALEIGH, N. C.
PART IIEXISTING SITUATION WITH REGARD TO
NORTH CAROLINA'S PORTS AND
WATERWAYS
EXISTING SITUATION WITH REGARD TO NORTH
CAROLINA'S PORTS AND WATERWAYS
| 1. | The Vision of the Fathers | |
| 2. | Governor Morrison's Message of 1923. | |
| 3. | Deliveries from North Carolina Territory to Water Carriers in Norfolk in 1922. | |
| 4. | The Panama Canal as a Factor. | |
| 5. | Statement of Senator Simmons. | |
| 6. | Analysis of North Carolina Ports. | |
| a. Southport | e. Cape Lookout Harbor of Refuge | |
| b. Wilmington | f. New Bern | |
| c. Fayetteville | g. Manteo | |
| d. Morehead City | h. Winton | |
| i. Beaufort | ||
| 7. | Waterways within the State of North Carolina. | |
| Cape Fear River. | Trent River. | |
| Neuse River. | Channel connecting ThoroughfareBay with Cedar Bay. | |
| Pamlico and Tar Rivers. | ||
| Roanoke River. | Beaufort Harbor. | |
| Waterway Norfolk to Beaufort Inlet | Waterway connecting Core Sound and Beaufort Harbor. | |
| Waterway Beaufort toJacksonville, N. C. | Harbor at Morehead City. | |
| Beaufort Inlet. | ||
| Scuppernong River. | Cape Lookout Harbor of Refuge | |
| Manteo Bay. | Northeast Cape Fear River. | |
| Swan Quarter and Deep River Waterway. | Black River. | |
| Shallotte River. | ||
| South River. | Meherrin River. | |
| Bay River. | Newbegun Creek. | |
| Swift Creek. | Edenton. | |
| Contentnea Creek. | Elizabeth City. | |
| 8. | Brief of the Fayetteville Chamber of Commerce concerning Third Lock in Cape Fear River. | |
| 9. | Statistics on Improvement of Rivers and Harbors in the Wilmington District. | |
| 10. | Abstract of Mr. C. S. Wallace on Coastwise Steamers. | |
| 11. | Depth of Water in the Cape Fear Basin, and Draft of Vessels Engaged in Ocean Shipping. | |
| 12. | Statistics of North Carolina's Trade and Industry. |
THE VISION OF THE FATHERS
WISDOM OF DEVELOPMENT RECOMMENDED TO THE LEGISLATURE
ONE HUNDRED YEARS AGO
(QUOTATION FROM REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON INLAND NAVIGATION, DECEMBER, 1815)
(From Senate Journal, December 6, 1815)
The Committee to whom was referred the resolution on Inland Navigation and so much of the message of his excellency the governor as relates to the same subject, Report, that the time has come when it behooves the legislature of North Carolina to provide efficiently for the improvement of the inland navigation of the State. To delay this provision, is to postpone that national wealth, respectability and importance which follow only in the train of great internal improvements. With an extent of territory sufficient to maintain more than ten millions of inhabitants, under a system which would develop the possible resources of our agriculture, we can only boast of a population something less than six hundred thousand; and it is but too obvious that this population, under the present state of things, already approaches its maximum.
We have as good a soil as any of the southern Atlantic States can boast of—fine rivers intersect our State in different directions, furnishing superior means and facilities for an extensive internal commerce, to those enjoyed by any of our neighboring States; but hitherto we have not availed ourselves of the means which Providence has thrown in our way—We have suffered year after year to pass by without seizing opportunities to improve our condition; and whilst we admit that internal improvements are essential to our prosperity, we seem to act upon a contrary principle, and to expect that national prosperity will come without national labor. It is surely worse than folly to expect the rewards of industry without its toils, or national prosperity without exertion; and we ought always to bear in mind, that it is the duty of the government to aid the enterprise of its citizens, and to afford to them facilities of disposing, to advantage, of the products of their industry.
It is real economy to expend the public money upon these objects. The blessings of the government are thereby brought home to every man's door—the comforts, the conveniences of life are increased—the public labor is rewarded, and the wealth of the State keeps pace with the wealth of its citizens.
The growth of our commercial towns is of peculiar importance to the character of the State. Whilst we continue to send our products to the markets of other States, we shall be destitute of that independence of character which it should be the pride of our citizens to cherish. One
species of dependence begets another; and having hitherto been dependent upon Virginia and South Carolina, for markets for the greatest part of our produce, we have in some measure become dependent upon those States for our opinions and our prejudices. It is the duty of the legislature to contribute as far as possible to break the spell that binds us to this dependence, and so to change the political orb of North Carolina, that she shall move as a primary and not a secondary State in the system of the confederacy.
Your committee can see no reason why this great work should be any longer delayed; it is a duty which the members of the legislature owe to the State, to themselves, their children, and to future generations, to delay it no longer. Upon this subject let party spirit be hushed into silence; and uniting together in one feeling for North Carolina, let us all aspire to the honor of laying the foundations of her glory and her prosperity. Your committee therefore recommend to the two houses the adoption of the following resolution:
“Resolved, that it is expedient to provide by law for carrying into effect the plan proposed in this report, for improving the internal navigation of the state.”
Respectfully submitted,
A. D. MURPHY, Chairman.
(QUOTATION FROM REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON INLAND NAVIGATION, DECEMBER, 1816)
That having commenced the great work of Internal Improvements, it is the duty of the Legislature to persevere until the whole shall be accomplished. No consideration of local policy, no paltry considerations of expense, should divert our views for one moment from the destiny to which we are aspiring, and to which we shall certainly attain, if we cease not our efforts. Rising above the influence of little passions, let us devote our labours to the honor and glory of the State in which we live, by establishing and giving effect to a system of policy which shall develop her physical resources, draw forth her normal and intellectual energies, give facilities to her industry, and encouragement to her enterprise. It is only by persevering in a systematic course of elevated policy that the prosperity of the State can be reared up and be made stable. Isolated measures, without plan and without system, have never yet made a State great, nor a people happy: They baffle the efforts of honest industry by often giving to them a wrong direction; they disappoint the expectations of enterprise by their frequent abortion. The true foundations of national prosperity and of national glory, must be laid in a liberal system of Internal Improvements, and of Public Education; in a system which shall give force to the faculties of the mind, and establish over the heart the empire of a sound morality. It does not fall
within the province of the duties assigned to your committee to submit their views upon any parts of this general system, except those which relate to the Inland Navigation of the State.
A CENTRAL RAILROAD CONNECTING THE INTERIOR OF THE STATEWITH AN OCEAN PORT AS CONCEIVED IN 1827-’28.
(The following extracts were taken from a series of anonymous articles supposed to have been written by Dr. Joseph Caldwell under the curious title “The Numbers of Carlton.” These articles appeared in the newspapers of the state beginning September 1, 1827 and continuing at intervals for about a year. They set forth the vital importance of an east and west railroad through the state connecting with an ocean port in achieving the fundamental proposition that “The Rights of freemen is an open trade,” which was the text of the series.)
“The rights and opportunities of unimpeded commerce we have always esteemed essential to a high degree of prosperity. The past history of our country has shown that we have not been mistaken. North Carolina, in her natural state, is shut up by obstructions, altogether unexampled in other parts of the union. It is mortifying, but certainly undeniable, that a corresponding humiliation and impoverishment in comparison with other States, has continued to be our lot to the present moment. The companionship of these facts, furnishes evidence too striking to be evaded in confirmation of the principle, that without an open commerce, we cannot flourish in enterprise and wealth. It is corroborated no less by the universal opinion of the world, and above all by the efficacy of every experiment already made by others, in bursting the shackles that restrained their commercial privileges. We should proclaim it an oppression to be deprived of them by any human power that should keep us under a perpetual embargo, prohibiting a market for almost every article we can produce.
We are no less the authors of oppression to ourselves, if we continue enchained by restrictions that would fall off at our bidding. There is no difference between privations, sufferings, degradation and misery, arising from restrictions, which it is perfectly easy to remove, and an infliction of them by the edicts of an enemy. . . . .
“Not a State in the union has suffered detriment from the cost of transportation in comparison with our own . . . . So ardent has been the spirit of South Carolina on one side, and of Virginia on the other, that they have scarcely been withheld from extending their public works into our own State. How is it with us? . . . . It seems as if we stood, and looked on with listless gaze, while our neighbors, after their wonted manner, are scrambling for our spoils. We hear a bustle around us, we start up with sudden amazement, we look for the movement that has disturbed our repose, we see that provision is already
commenced and almost completed for the appropriation of our goods. It is too late, say we; we cannot help it; and again compose ourselves to our accustomed tranquility. We might have a commercial city. But how shall it spring into existence, so long as the site of it, upon one of the best harbors, is inaccessible from the interior country? .... The contrast then is complete, between the commercial opportunities of other states, and the destitution of them in our own.....
“That the farmer of North Carolina is laboring under disadvantages in comparison with the farmer of other States, is not imaginary, but an unqestionable truth.
“In what our disadvantages consist, and whether it is in our power to remove them, are questions of the weightiest import. That we are almost totally abridged of the intercourse of trade, is notorious to ourselves and to the world. In this is the primary cause of our straits and sufferings. Other things may and certainly do contribute to them, but if we would begin well, here we must commence the application of a healing hand. All other disorders, as physicians express themselves, are but symptomatic, and will give way, when a healthful action is effected in this originally diseased part. No foreign enemy invades, no domestic tyranny of government oppresses us. No climate is genial to a greater variety of productions than ours. Where is our best commercial port? Open it to us. Let our distance from it be annihilated. Let it cost us nothing to send every production of our farms into the market of the world. Let it cost as little to import every thing we want from abroad. Let the time, labour and expense now wasted and sunk in marketing, be frugally devoted to the improvement of our lands, the preparation of our crops, and the multiplicity of our productions. Let it be in our power to obtain a profit upon every thing, instead of one or two articles only. Place us in full possession of these privileges from the sea to the mountains, and a vivifying power will be put into action, which from the lowest depression will, in a few years, raise us to an elevated and brilliant prosperity.
“The happiness of a people, next to public and private virtue, consists in a perpetual growth into better circumstances. This happiness is eminently in our power, in proportion as we have been subjected to long and great privations. We may turn that which has hitherto continued our heaviest curse, into the occasion of a copious and quick succession of the richest blessings. But it will be impossible to realize all at once the effects of this great and mighty change, and if no unforseen reverse befall, which may a gracious God forefend, we shall advance in perpetuated vigorous growth to greater maturity and perfection.”
[Extract from an address issued by a mass meeting held in Chatham County on August 1, 1828. The same theme of the need of a Central Railroad to the coast, and its relation to state prosperity was urged. James Mebane presided, and Dennis Heartt served as secretary.]
“Fellow-citizens: These things, and others also which it were easy to suggest, have occurred to our reflection, and they intimate to us the operation of a cause different in its nature from any which we have mentioned. While other States of this union have for many years actively and successfully exerted themselves in opening the opportunities of commerce to their people, North Carolina has unhappily languished under a spirit of despondency in regard to the possibility of ever attaining to similar privileges. Time was when a vast portion of the interior settlers of other States were in a situation similar to our own. They were intercepted from the market of the world by immense distances, and almost insuperable obstacles. So long as this continued to be the case, they and we went into that market upon some terms of equality. If we had to overcome difficulties, it was in a greater or less degree necessary to them also. The labour and expense of transportation were alike to them and to us, and so also were the profits by which they were remunerated. But this no longer continues to be the case. The different States of the union have for many years augmented their population, and while they extended their settlements far into their interior territories, two consequences have resulted which it is important to distinguish. One is the vast abundance of agricultural productions of every description which have been thrown into the market, and the other, a prevention of increased expense and labour in transportation, by making the improvement of their roads and rivers, and the opening of canals keep pace with the extension of their settlements. In our State these improvements have never been realized. The consequence is at length experienced by us to be such as naturally results from such a change of circumstances. We must now continue to carry through all the original difficulties of transportation, every article we produce, into a market that is stocked and glutted with the same articles, transported with no more difficulty than if the market were within a few miles of their own doors. Efforts, it is true, have been sometimes made by ourselves to obtain the same facilities of conveyance, but they have failed for want of concentrated and well directed application. Our resources and exertions have been limited in supply, inefficient by dispersion, and we are left to contend with all the primitive obstructions of a natural state. Others have been rapidly advancing, but we have continued stationary. They in throngs, with their lands improved by every stimilus to industry, carry their exports into the general market with little cost, while under every discouragement, with our lands impoverished for want of excitement to the cultivator, to us it remains to sustain the same labour and the same burthen as at the first.
. . . . . . . . .
“And is this a time, fellow-citizens, for us to continue in supineness and inaction, when even the last remaining prop of our interest in the market of the world is ready to be undermined, and to leave us prostrate in the dust? It is to no purpose to raise our voice in outcries against the odious subject of internal improvement, as that which our neighbors have practised to our mischief and overthrow. It may be, nay, it certainly is, the grand cause of all our evils, in comparison with which all other causes and evils are of little moment. But though it brings these consequences upon us, it is the source of prosperity to them, and they are unquestionably at liberty to carry it on to the uttermost of their discretion and ability, notwithstanding all its consequences to us in cheapening and destroying our market. The only method we can now take, and it is happily a sure one, is to shake off the lethargy that locks up our senses and our powers in listlessness and languor; to cast away our apprehensions and our disheartening fears; to gird ourselves with strength, and arm with a resolution and perseverance worthy of the elevated rank we hold in population and power in this distinguished confederation of republican states. No sooner shall we open a grand central thoroughfare, annihilating distance, and bringing the sea into a proximity to every man's dwelling, than we shall realize that we are upon a level with the rest of the union and of the world, in all the immunities of commerce, and in the means of individual and national prosperity. Then a spirit of activity and elastic force will be breathed into the bosoms of our desponding and helpless people. Then will every man see, that instead of its being useless to produce more than a bare sufficiency for his subsistence, every supernumerary article he can accumulate by his industry, his frugality and his skill, will multiply his riches, and swell the means of knowledge, enjoyment, usefulness, and respectability to himself, his children, and to society.
“By constituting this great artery for circulating the vital principles of commerce through the State, it is not to the western and interior parts of the country only that these and similar effects are likely to be produced. The eastern and western counties have their peculiar productions, by the easy and costless transmission of which, each will reciprocate benefits equivalent to such as it will receive. Even the maritime commerce created to the State, would soon promote into quickened action and profitable employment a large portion of the population around the waters of our coast, and through the counties bordering on the sea. They would grow into a body of seamen, manning our numerous ships, and rivaling the north and east in outriding the billows of the ocean. Multitudes that now languish without occupation or interest would then find both, on an element for which they are fitted by all their early habits and pursuits. By concentrating the commerce of the east and west, such a commerce as would result from the exports and imports of half a million of people, upon a single seaport on our
coast, a maritime city must speedily spring into existence, inspiring with new enterprise, and with energies unfelt before, the bosoms of all, but especially of numbers that now linger without motive, and drag out a life of pining penury.”
(2)GOVERNOR MORRISON'S MESSAGE OF 1923
Water transportation is cheaper than rail transportation. This is recognized by the Interstate Commerce Commission, and most basic freight-rate points are water towns where rail meets water competition. From such basic points the freight rate is radiated to the interior points by a combination of the rate to the basic point plus the local rate from the basic point to the destination of the freight. Under the law the interstate rate cannot exceed the combination to the basic point plus the rate from there to the destination of the freight. So, water transportation is desirable to any state, not because of its own cheapness alone, but because it makes cheaper rail freight rates to all the towns with water transportation and to all towns nearer to them than to any other basic freight rate or water transportation town.
Our freight rates are nearly all based on the rates to the Virginia cities plus the rates from the Virginia cities to our towns. This results in a high freight rate from and to North Carolina, and in our being commercially handcuffed by Virginia cities, because we cannot get freight from or to anywhere without paying the rate to the Virginia cities plus the rate from such Virginia city to the North Carolina town to or from which the freight moves. We are allowed a certain deduction called a “differential”, that is a small crumb thrown to us in recognition of our enslaved condition. Through this system we have largely builded the Virginia cities and in commercial life they call us, and we are known as, “Their territory.”
We have no basic freight-rate points in North Carolina. All rates are hoisted to us from some other more fortunate state. So we must do business necessarily as the bondmen of the states where the base of our freight rates is situated.
We have no water transportation worthy of the name. So we have no basic freight rate towns, because there is no water competition.
When we demand equality we are told conditions are different and that we have all we are entitled to under the law; that our water transportation is merely potential and not actual; that there is no water transportation for the railroads to meet, and therefore they have not asked for cheap rates to any North Carolina city; that the cheapest basic rates near us are the Virginia cities rates, and, therefore, they
base our rates on them, which is all we are entitled to. They give us a little “tip” called a “differential”, and tell us to get out.
We are helpless, and will be forever unless we make our water competition actual instead of merely potential.
What are we going to do about it—remain Virginia territory, or become free and independent? I am for freedom. The reactionary and the railroad lobbyist will whisper you cannot achieve it; you have always been slaves commercially and must remain so.
The railroads doing business in North Carolina could not help us if they desired to, because they would be stopped as Henry Ford was by the Interstate Commerce Commission when he tried to cut rates on his own railroad. But we can produce such a change in our basic condition that the railroads doing business in our State will beg the Interstate Commerce Commission to let them reduce rates on the Hornet's Nest State to save them from destruction, and they will tell the Commission that conditions are such that they are entitled to the relief. They will be, and they will get it.
How can we do this? By establishing water competition in the towns and cities of our State situated where it can be established, of a character so dangerous that the railroads will ask the Interstate Commerce Commission to let them meet it. This is exactly the way the Virginia cities acquired the rates with which they long ago “handcuffed” us.
Suppose we establish water transportation from Wilmington, Fayetteville, New Bern, Washington, Edenton, Elizabeth City, Belhaven, Morehead City, Beaufort, Southport and other water towns with barges and small boats feeding them from twenty-five counties situated on navigable waters. What would happen? The water rates would be very much cheaper than railroad rates. The Interstate Commerce Commission could not help it, and would not desire to. The boats would take the freight cheap to the water towns, and it would go out over our good roads on trucks for seventy-five miles around. The incoming freight would land on the cheap water rates in the town, and for a radius of seventy-five miles our people on our own good roads with trucks would go in and get it.
About this time our railroad friends would commence to “holler for help”. We need not worry about the freight rates. They would go to the Interstate Commerce Commission with great lamentations, crying out that the good roads and trucks and water competition were ruining them; that they must be allowed to lower rates and treat their former slaves like free men and the equal of Virginians and Marylanders. I hope the Commission will have mercy on them and give them their legal rights to meet competition and fight for their lives. When the cheap rail rates are established they will, as a matter of law, radiate to every point nearer to them than the Virginia cities.
I urge this General Assembly to set up for all the people of the State water competition with the railroads. This is the way all cheap rail rates have been obtained. We can do it. We must do it, if we are to have an equal chance with the other seaboard states in commerce.
We create on our farms and in our factories more tonnage than any state from Pennsylvania going south, to Texas. We move less of our tonnage to market from our own waters than any seaboard state. We have a long seaboard front, and more miles of navigable inland sounds and rivers than any other state in the union. Why not use them?
Along these waters are the finest farms in the Union, paying $5.00 per bale to get cotton to Boston or New York, from where it can be sent to France, Germany or England for less than $1.25 per bale. Capable of producing enough foodstuff to feed Massachusetts, but unable to move it on account of heavy freight rates and sorry rail service.
We must strike. The times are propitious for heroic action. The world, for the first time, is full of cheap ships. The dangers of old Hatteras are destroyed by the completion of the Inland Canal from Boston to Morehead City. Our tonnage is immense, in spite of all our difficulties. The railroads are trying now to raise rates on us to an amount vaulting into the millions annually. The danger is ominous. Maxwell and the other members of the Corporation Commission, with Judge Clark, formerly of the Interstate Commerce Commission, as chief counsel, are making a great fight, but the issue is in doubt. We are fortunate in having the brilliant Maxwell to lead this fight.
Eastern North Carolina is an agricultural and commercial section. It is handcuffed commercially.
Give me, gentlemen, two millions of dollars to establish some North Carolina State-owned terminal facilities, and to purchase a fleet of ships; then give me the authority to operate them, and I promise you to save the State more money annually than it costs to run the State Government now, and to make it commercially free and independent.
I appeal to you to create the North Carolina Ship and Port Commission, with appropriate and ample powers to acquire terminals by lease or purchase, and to acquire and operate a fleet of passenger and commerce-carrying ships.
We should act without delay. The cheap ships can be had now, and it is important to act promptly.
Let me appoint the commissioners, and the Senate confirm them. I promise you a great Commission.
Let the bonds issue when the Commission say in writing to the Governor and Council of State that they are ready to proceed.
If you think caution requires it, insert a provision that if the Commission finds it cannot arrange the practical details in a way their judgment approves, they may report their findings to the Governor and
Council of State, and they may, if they think wise, suspend further action until the next meeting of your Honorable Body.
They say “Give us the details.” We are ready to place them before your committee, when appointed, through practical men acquainted with the situation, the waters, the ships, and freight rates.
Water transportation and good roads and truck transportation, competing with rail transportation, will save this State more money before the first serial bond is due, ten years from their issue, than both the roads and ship company will cost the State, and, in addition, build ten cities in the eastern and Cape Fear section of the State.
You hazard little, and the possibilities are immense. The hazard is two millions, and the prospect ten millions profit annually. But we could not lose anything like two millions before we quit.
I am satisfied the boat line would pay in its direct operating account, and I know it would if the North Carolina Corporation Commission will use its undoubted power in making rail rates from the water towns into the State.
The Interstate Commerce Commission, if it will, can force through joint bills of lading to be issued, and if they did, as I believe they would, the boat line would make more money until the railroads gave us justice in freight than any corporation of like size in the State.
Gentlemen of the General Assembly, we can win with the boat line and State-owned port facilities, and I beg your prompt consideration of the whole subject.
If we can find relief through this plan, then I urge you to evolve from your own councils a plan through which we can be relieved from the difficulties I have mentioned. The duty of finding a remedy is yours, not mine. I offer my best thought on the subject. If you do not approve my recommendations, then I beg you to give the State a better one.
Our commerce must not forever languish. We must not forever remain Virginia territory commercially.
(3)DELIVERIES TO WATER CARRIERS AT NORFOLK
IN 1922
| Norfolk-Southern | 442,112 tons |
| Atlantic Coast Line | 120,448 tons |
| Southern Railway | 378,245 tons |
| Seaboard Air Line | 155,992 tons |
An interesting feature of the above statistics, taken from the paper of Charles Churchill read before the American Society of Civil Engineers’
Convention held in Richmond, Va., October, 1923, is that the Norfolk-Southern Railroad, whose territory is confined to eastern North Carolina, with its line to Charlotte, receives from and delivers to water carriers at Norfolk more freight than the Southern, Atlantic Coast Line or Seaboard Air Line. Owing to the limited territory of the Norfolk-Southern it is naturally assumed that the great bulk of this traffic comes from eastern North Carolina and perhaps its single Piedmont connection.
(4)THE PANAMA CANAL AS A FACTOR
The transportation of commodities between the Atlantic and Pacific coasts is increasing at an unusually rapid rate. The cheapness of this method of shipment as compared with the trans-continental rail haul is demonstrated by the fact that commodities are being shipped through Baltimore via the Panama Canal to the Pacific coast from as far inland as St. Louis and Minneapolis. In other words, the cost of shipping by water a much longer distance is so much less, that the traffic can afford to move by rail almost half way across the continent, and thence by boat over the longer distance through the canal. The efficacy of water competition in creating a desire among railway officials to reduce their rates, is seen in the plea of the trans-continental lines to the Interstate Commerce Commission to be allowed to lower their charges on coast-to-coast shipments to meet this water competition.
The growing demand of North Carolina for lumber and shingles, canned goods, citrus fruit, oil and other products from the Pacific coast, and of crude rubber, nitrates, coffee, molasses, sugar etc. from South America and the West Indies will create an increasing volume of traffic which should flow into this State through our own port in the Cape Fear basin. All natural advantages operate in our favor in this important trade as compared with the ports further north. And likewise of course, an equally favorable set of circumstances would favor the development in the opposite direction of an export trade from our industries. It is in such a period of changing trade currents that new ports have their best chance of development. A few years of neglect will see this growing volume of traffic, a large share of which we will ultimately consume, flowing through other ports and enriching them at our expense.
The suddenness of this trade development through the Panama Canal which is passing right by our doors to other ports, was recorded in the recent announcement that during last year (1923) more tonnage passed through the Panama Canal than through the Suez Canal, the figures being as follows:
| No. of Vessels | Net Tonnage | |
| Suez Canal | 4621 | 22,730,162 |
| Panama Canal | 5037 | 24,737,437 |
The growth of coast-to-coast traffic through the Panama Canal during the last three years is indicated below:
| Cargo Tons | |
| 1921 | 1,793,524 |
| 1922 | 4,032,369 |
| 1923 | 13,061,382 |
These figures do not include the trade between the east coast of the United States and the west coast of South America, which increased from 793,123 tons in 1922 to 2,054,523 in 1923. Chilean nitrates, iron ore and Peruvian oil were the most important items in this traffic and all of these are of growing importance to North Carolina.
(5)STATEMENT OF SENATOR SIMMONS
NOTE—Senator Simmons appeared before the Commission at its meeting in New Bern, expressing in no uncertain terms his views on port and waterway development.
In recent months Senator Simmons has made two speeches, one at New Bern at the hearing held by the State Ship and Water Transportation Commission appointed to consider the question of establishment of terminals and boat lines, and one at Goldsboro at the meeting of the Eastern Carolina Shippers Association.
In both of these speeches Senator Simmons discussed the possibilities of the wonderful inland waterway systems of the State and the feasibility of the establishment within the State of one or more great seaports. He discussed the effect of the development and utilization of these waters both in reducing freight rates and developing resources of the State, as well as what the general government had done in the way of improvement and preparing these waterways for this purpose, and gave assurance that the Federal Government stood ready to make such additional improvements as were found necessary to accommodate developed and potential commerce.
WATER FRONT OF THE PORT OF NEWBERN
He discussed the failure at this time of the State to make anything like adequate use of its navigable waterways and water transportation possibilities. He stressed the inestimble value as an asset of the State of our three thousand miles of navigable inland waterways and our natural ports. He deplored the fact that this great natural asset of the State was now and had for some time been neglected, or only used as local convenience. He insisted that a proper utilization of these waterways would inure as much to the benefit of the interior of the State as to the sections in which they are located and he declared that something should be done to give the people of the State the full benefit of this great asset.
He said that for various reasons, individual initiative had utterly failed to meet the needs of the situation and did not seem to hold out promise of much better accomplishment in the future. In these conditions he said he believed State action was justified, if not imperatively demanded, and that the State-wide interest in the result was so clear that the wisdom of State assistance should appeal to the people of every section of the State. He argued that one of the first essential conditions to the utilization of these waterways was terminal and dock facilities adequate to the requirements of potential commerce and declared that these facilities at the several established shipping points, with few exceptions, were hardly adequate to the requirements of the purely local traffic. He said the situation in this respect was so bad that it could hardly be said, with slight exception, that on this vast stretch of navigable waters there were any transportation facilities worth while, certainly none even in a measurable degree adequate to the requirements for the establishment of a regular waterway transportation system. For these reasons he heartily approved the establishment by State of terminal facilities at leading shipping points upon our waterways. He commended the Governor for his advocacy of this project and expressed the hope that the Commission would report in favor of the construction of these terminals by the State.
Coming to the question of State owned steamboats the Senator said he believed that if the State should take hold of the situation and provide adequate terminal and docking facilities, that it would be a warning to the selfish interests that have exerted such a powerful influence in stifling water transportation in the State, and at the same time such an encouragement to private capital that it would not be necessary for the State to operate ships in order to meet the needs of the situation. He said after the State has provided these facilities, if within reasonable time private capital does not provide the boats necessary to accommodate and develop the traffic, in order that the people of the State may not be denied the inestimable benefits of the full utilization of freight rates, and subserve the demands of commerce; he believed in that event it would be the duty of the State to do whatever was necessary, even to the extent of owning and operating the necessary boat lines.
The Senator said it was inconceivable that a State which was demonstrating its ability to utilize every other natural resource should permit this, one of its greatest assets, to remain unused. He said, “We are developing and utilizing to a notable degree our water power; why not develop and utilize the transportation possibilities of our navigable waterways? We are spending millions in making our public roads suitable mediums of transportation; why not spend what is necessary to bring into use as a medium of transportation our waterways and bring into coördination and coöperation the three great agencies of transportation: namely, rail, highway and waterway? He said he did not wish to see the State engage in operating state-owned boat lines unless it should be necessary to accomplish the great purpose he had outlined, but that he did not hesitate to say that if it could not be accomplished in any other way, it would be the imperative duty of the State to intervene. “If this policy of the State can be made plain and unmistakable,” said Senator Simmons, “many of the obstacles which now exist against private operation of boat lines will disappear. It will be, in my judgment, a convincing warning to selfish interests now under suspicion of repressive interference, not only to desist, but possibly even to encourage such use of our waterways as seems manifestly in the public interest.”
(6)ANALYSIS OF NORTH CAROLINA PORTS
BY LIEUTENANT COMMANDER W. P. WISHAAR, U. S. Coast Guard Service
INTRODUCTION(Adapted from Southport's Brief)
Attention is invited to the maps and charts of the coast of North Carolina, to visualize and retain a mental picture of the physical characteristics of our Atlantic seaboard. Nature has given this State two self-contained systems of waterways consisting of the Cape Fear River basin and the system of sounds and bays to the northward.
The main coast line of the State is separated from the Atlantic ocean by inland waters, i. e., by sounds, bays, and wide river mouths. Commencing on the north we have Currituck, Albemarle, Croatan, Pamlico, Core, and Bogue sounds to Swansboro, with the Chowan, Roanoke, Tar, and Chadwick, and Alligator bays, and Stumps, Topsail, Masonboro, and Myrtle sounds. These sounds, bays and rivers are separated from the ocean by a chain of narrow sand reefs, from which project Capes Hatteras, Lookout, and Fear. Through these reefs or banks as they are called, there are but few and very shallow inlets. The only one of any
value connecting Albemarle and Pamlico sounds with the Atlantic Ocean is Ocracoke Inlet, half way between Cape Hatteras and Cape Lookout. Another outlet of importance with deeper water is that called Beaufort Inlet opening from the northern end of Bogue Sound to the Atlantic Ocean.
Cape Hatteras is everywhere recognized as one of the most dangerous points along the Atlantic coast for shipping of all kinds. It is known as the graveyard of the Atlantic, and fully deserves its reputation. This is due to the fact that ocean lanes converge at this point and the gulf stream almost touches the ends of the shoals. These shoals extend about 8 miles in a southeasterly direction from Cape Hatteras.
Cape Lookout is also a dangerous section, as its shoals extend in a general southerly direction for a distance of about 8 miles. In the shelter of the hook formed by the cape ships of all kinds, particularly sailing vessels, find protection from storms. The Government has built a long breakwater which enlarges this harbor of refuge. Deep water and a great area for anchorage exist at this locality. The harbor is not connected with the mainland, being separated from it by Core Sound. It is about eleven and a half miles by water to Morehead City, the nearest railroad line. As a port of entry, its geographical and physical qualities preclude its consideration.
Cape Fear, the third point of dangerous navigation on the N. C. coast, has shoals extending in a S. S. E. direction for about 12 miles. The Cape Fear River empties into the Atlantic Ocean on the westward side of the Cape, the mouth of the river then gaining protection from all winds except those from S. S. E. to S. W.
The charts show that the only deep water ocean inlet along the N. C. coast that will permit the development of ocean traffic and that will avoid the dangers of the N. C. capes is the Cape Fear River. This river provides a natural, deepwater area that is land-locked, has sufficient anchorage space, good holding ground, and protection from storms from every direction. Ships bound north, taking advantage of the gulf stream, pass about seventy miles from the mouth of this river. Ships bound south inside the gulf stream pass about 35 miles from the mouth of this river. A point to be considered here and which is not shown in these charts is that the Cape Fear River, as a port, is nearer the coal fields of Tennessee, West Virginia and Kentucky, and to the great mid-west traffic than any other South Atlantic port.
The great inland coastal waterway is projected to connect Boston, Mass. with Key West, Fla. The waters of North Carolina form an important link of this waterway system and afford a means for developing water transportation, (the cheapest transportation in the world) which can materially assist in rapidly developing all agricultural and industrial interests of the State. At the present time this waterway has been developed with a 12-foot depth from Norfolk, Va., to Morehead City, N. C. From Morehead City southward the project has not beenBOD
developed. The course of this canal is from Morehead City through Bogue Sound to New River through Marine Marshes without regard to the present depth. From New River it is to cross a narrow neck of land to Chadwick Bay, thence close to the mainland through Alligator Bay, Stump, Topsail, Masonboro, and Myrtle sounds. From the lower end of Myrtle sound it is to cross a narrow, low sand ridge of about one mile into the Cape Fear River about thirteen miles below Wilmington. The Cape Fear River will be its terminus for some time.
From a glance at the map it becomes apparent that, when this canal is finished to the Cape Fear River, it will become at once the natural and economic outlet for all ocean freight originating on all the inland waters and rivers of North Carolina, except those within the immediate sphere of Norfolk. It will likewise become the route for distributing incoming ocean freight to these areas. The shortened distance and the ability to transport goods cheaply in safe waters, irrespective of storms or inclement weather, will result in stimulating trade and will quite likely divert practically all of inland-water freight of North Carolina, now going to Norfolk, to the Cape Fear River.
It can be definitely asserted that the full effect of this inland waterway will not be felt until the section opening into the Cape Fear River is completed, thereby opening up for development the magnificent inland waterways of the entire state.
The navigable inland waterways of North Carolina directly pass through or lap the following counties:
| New Hanover | Jones | Martin |
| Brunswick | Pamlico | Halifax |
| Columbus | Beaufort | Bertie |
| Bladen | Pitt | Hertford |
| Cumberland | Edgecombe | Gates |
| Pender | Hyde | Chowan |
| Onslow | Dare | Perquimans |
| Carteret | Tyrrell | Pasquotank |
| Craven | Washington | Lenoir |
| Camden | Currituck |
Reference to the map of North Carolina, showing roads, rivers, inland waterways, etc., will show beside, the ports mentioned in the following analysis in detail, namely:
Southport, Wilmington, Fayetteville, Morehead City, Cape Lookout, New Bern, Manteo, Beaufort, and Winton.
Other points which would be benefitted by increased service through development of the inland-waterway system to a greater extent in the above mentioned counties, being:
| Aurora | Greenville | Swan Quarter |
| Bayboro | Hamilton | Swansboro |
| Beaufort | Jacksonville | Tarboro |
| Belhaven | Leachville | Washington |
| Camden | Murfreesboro | Elizabeth City |
| Castle Hayne | Oriental | Edenton |
| Columbia | Pollocksville | Bath |
| Creswell | Plymouth | Baunnerman's Bridge |
| Currituck | Snow Hill | (Pender County) |
(The Questionnaire below was sent out and information secured as presented in the following pages.)
| 1. | Type of traffic port will serve—inland waterway, coastal, foreign. |
| 2. | Probable type and draft of vessel that will use the port's terminals. |
| 3. | Geographic and strategic location of port with reference to competition with other U. S. ports in the carrying trade, to its value for inland-waterway transportation, and to its accessibility to any distances from areas to be served, and commerce and tonnage passing through the port. |
| 4. | Depth and width of channel to port as recommended by U. S. War Department and actual controlling depth. |
| 5. | Depth of water and width of channel at location offered to State for site of terminals, and whether extensive dredging necessary. |
| 6. | Dimensions and depth of anchorage basin, and of maneuvering space opposite site. |
| 7. | Mean rise and fall of tide in feet at site. |
| 8. | Maximum and average speeds of ebb and flood currents opposite site. |
| 9. | Protection of port against damage by storms. |
| 10. | Accessibility of port for ships that will be called to it, i. e., distance from sea, relative pilotage consideration, feasibility of entering or leaving port day or night, necessity of waiting favorable tidal currents for docking or undocking, or other possible delays. |
| 11. | Location and description of site offered—length of water frontage, depth of land back of pierhead line for purposes of switching, freight car storage, warehouses, etc., and terms under which site is offered. |
| 12. | Accessibility of site to centers of base-products; population, local markets, distribution, banking, communications, labor, housing, coal, water and food supplies, etc. |
| 13. | Provisions offered as to use and control of belt-line railroad serving the State-port site—whether private owned, by R. R. Co., or whether offered to State at reasonable price. |
| 14. | Summary of railroad lines and facilities entering the city and area these R. R. Lines serve. |
| 15. | Summary of State-developed motor roads entering the city. |
1. Southport can be developed to serve ocean traffic (foreign and coastal) and inland-waterway traffic.
2. Probable types of vessels that will use this port are all vessels generally used for inland-waterway, coastal and foreign service up to and including ocean-going vessels of about 28-feet draught.
3. The geographic and strategic situation of Southport may be estimated as follows:
| (a) | Distance from Norfolk, the nearest great port to northward, 260 miles. |
| (b) | Distance from Charleston, the nearest port to southward, 175 miles. |
| (c) | Looms geographically as a feasible North Carolina location for convergence of foreign, coastal and inland-waterway traffic with traffic of middle west and North Carolina points except those within the immediate sphere of Norfolk. In this connection, the whole lower Cape Fear River from Wilmington to Southport can be visioned as one great port. |
| (d) | It is far enough south of Norfolk to avoid a too-direct competition with that great port, and to effectively serve the developing territory of North Carolina and the far inland areas its routes connect it with. |
| (e) | Comparative distance to areas of northern Europe. Mediterranean, West Indies, South America, and the Orient and west coasts of the Americas represented by the five foreign key ports, are as follows: |
| Boston | New York | Baltimore | Norfolk | Southport | Charleston | Jacksonville | New Orleans | |
| Liverpool | 2,938 | 3,107 | 3,393 | 3,272 | 3,448 | 3,540 | 3,692 | 4,613 |
| Gibraltar | 3,028 | 3,183 | 3,490 | 3,369 | 3,503 | 3,595 | 3,764 | 4,593 |
| Havanna | 1,415 | 1,227 | 1,107 | 985 | 744 | 646 | 528 | 603 |
| Colon | 2,157 | 1,974 | 1,901 | 1,779 | 1,590 | 1,564 | 1,516 | 1,390 |
| Buenos Aires | 5,842 | 5,871 | 5,945 | 5,824 | 5,782 | 5,822 | 5,841 | 6,281 |
| (f) | For traffic with South America, West Indies, and Panama Canal, Southport has a more favorable location, considering distance, than Norfolk. For northern European and Mediterranean traffic, it is from one-half to three-quarters of a day farther than Norfolk. |
SOUTHPORT N.C.
AND VICINITY
LOCATING PROPOSED SITE
FOR STATE TERMINALS
| (g) | For southern traffic it offers freedom from the dangers of the shoals of Cape Hatteras and Cape Lookout, with consequent decrease in ocean insurance rates over those on cargoes bound to and from northern U. S. Ports. |
| (h) | The Cape Fear River and Cape Fear River northeast branch afford inland-waterway transportation from Southport to Fayetteville, (Castle Hayne). |
| (j) | The coastal inland-waterway, when completed, will enter the Cape Fear River about 10 miles above Southport to contribute waterborne commodities to and from Albemarle Sound, Pamlico Sound, Pamlico River, Neuse River, Core Sound, Bogue Sound, and New River. |
4. CHANNEL: The recommendations of the U. S. Army Engineers call for a channel 30 feet in depth at mean low water, 400 feet wide, up the Cape Fear River. The present depth is 26 feet at mean low water with a channel width of 125 to 400 feet on the bar, widening to about 1,500 feet off Southport.
5. Opposite the site offered, and distance about 500 feet, 20 feet of water is found deepening rapidly to 32 feet. The channel at this point is about 1,200 feet in width. The amount of dredging to gain depth of water necessary for an ocean ship to lie alongside a pier parallel to the river would not be considerable if long piers were to be built out to the deep water. If piers at right angle to the river front were built, a great amount of dredging would be necessary. No estimate of this has been ascertained.
6. The anchorage and maneuvering basin is directly opposite the site offered and opposite the town of Southport. It is approximately 6,000 feet long, 1,600 feet wide at its southern end and 1,100 feet wide at its northern end.
7. The average rise and fall of tide is 4 feet; the extreme range of tides is 6 1/2 feet.
8. The strength of the ebb current is from 5 to 6 miles per hour, and the flood current from 3 to 4 miles per hour.
9. The port is well protected against damage by the ocean. There is little protection from a full sweep of wind from approximately E. N. E. to S. W.
10. The port is readily accessible at all times of the day and night for ocean vessels drawing 24 feet of water. This assumes tidal and sea conditions such as to allow a vessel of that draught to cross the bar. Vessels of a draught of 26 1/2 feet have entered on a flood tide. In fog, heavy rains, etc., the usual tie-up of navigation would be expected. The river from the sea to Southport is well buoyed, and is marked with a modern system of ranges, beacons and lights. Pilotage fees for a large, well-laden vessel will average about 2 1/2 cents per ton of cargo, or a little more than one-tenth of a cent for each 100 lbs. Docking, undocking, and maneuvering of large ships can be done only near the times of slack water when the current is less than 2 knots per hour.
11. According to our recollection, Mr. Allen, who owns 600 or more acres of land joining the built-up portion of Southport upstream with a river frontage of about one and a half miles tendered to the State of North Carolina free of cost 100 acres of this land and placed no limitation as to the amount of water frontage selected by the State. The remainder of his land or so much thereof as may be desired by the State can be purchased at a reasonable price per acre. The part usually considered as the best of this tract is what is known as Deep Water Point, about opposite to the U. S. Quarantine Station wharves. The shore at this part rises to a height of not less than ten feet and continues to rise gradually to a height of 30 feet less than a mile from the shore line. The soil is sandy but firm.
This tender on the part of Mr. Allen, the owner, was made directly to the Commission by his agent, and was filed with the Commission. This official tender must be consulted and relied on rather than any statement made herein. There was also filed with the Commission at the time of hearing of the Southport brief some blue prints of this property showing its location, etc., and also showing drawings of a port development complete with railroad trackage, etc., etc., which will give desired information far better than we can state same. From the very nature of the case these must be relied on for information, since the transfer of property is involved. (Southport Chamber of Commerce, January 7, 1924.)
12. Accessibility of site to base products, population, local markets, distribution, banking, communications, labor, housing, coal, water and food supplies, etc. Southport does not possess east and west trunk line contact with areas which can ship to it in competition with Norfolk, Savannah, and Jacksonville, the necessary bulk cargo to make it a port of frequent ship-sailings for satisfactory service. It has a railroad which connects it with Navassa. “Bulk cargo” contemplates such commodities as grain, coal, meats, cotton, tobacco, lumber, oil, machinery, and articles of quantity production. Southport's population is about 1,700; local market is practically non existent; distribution, banking, communications, labor, housing, and coal, water and food supplies are such as any small town with little or no commerce can provide.
13. There is no belt line railroad on or serving the site.
14. The Wilmington, Brunswick and Southern Railway is a single-track road 30 miles long from Southport to Navassa, connecting at Navassa with the Atlantic Coast Line Railway leading to the southward. By switching at Wilmington it can be put in physical connection with the Seaboard and Yadkin Valley Railroad belonging to the A. C. L.
15. A State motor road from Southport connects with the road leading westerly from Wilmington to Lumberton, Rockingham, Charlotte, and Asheville.
WILMINGTON
NORTH CAROLINA.
Map of Wilmington
1. Wilmington can serve ocean traffic (foreign and coastal), and inland-waterway traffic.
2. Probable types of vessel that will use this port are all vessels generally used for inland-waterways, coastal, and foreign service up to and including ocean-going vessels of about 28 feet draught.
3. The geographic and strategic situation of Wilmington may be estimated as follows:
| (a) | Distance from Norfolk, the nearest port to northward 290 miles. |
| (b) | Distance from Charleston, the nearest port to southward, 205 miles. |
| (c) | Looms geographically as a very feasible North Carolina location for convergence of foreign, coastal, and inland-waterway traffic with traffic of middle west and North Carolina points except those within the immediate sphere of Norfolk. |
| (d) | It is far enough south of Norfolk to avoid a too-direct competition with that great port, and to effectively serve the developing territory of North Carolina and the far inland areas its routes connect it with. |
| (e) | Comparative distances to areas of northern Europe, Mediterranean, West Indies, South America, and the Orient, or the west coasts of the Americas, represented by the five foreign key ports, are as follows: |
| Boston | New York | Baltimore | Norfolk | Wilmington | Charleston | Jacksonville | New Orleans | |
| Liverpool | 2,938 | 3,107 | 3,393 | 3,272 | 3,471 | 3,540 | 3,692 | 4,613 |
| Gibraltar | 3,028 | 3,183 | 3,490 | 3,369 | 3,526 | 3,595 | 3,764 | 4,593 |
| Havanna | 1,415 | 1,227 | 1,107 | 985 | 767 | 646 | 528 | 603 |
| Colon | 2,157 | 1,974 | 1,901 | 1,779 | 1,613 | 1,564 | 1,516 | 1,390 |
| Buenos Aires | 5,842 | 5,871 | 5,945 | 5,824 | 5,805 | 5,822 | 5,841 | 6,281 |
| (f) | For traffic with South America, West Indies, and Panama Canal, Wilmington has a more favorable location, considering distance, than Norfolk. For Mediterranean and northern European traffic it is from one-half to three-quarters of a day's run farther than Norfolk. A U. S. Customs House is established at this port. |
| (g) | For southern traffic, it offers freedom from the dangers of shoals of Cape Hatteras and Cape Lookout with consequent decrease in ocean insurance rates over those on cargoes bound to and from northern U. S. Ports. |
| (h) | By virtue of an established business community, agencies for ocean trade, and of a feasible location, it provides some of the fundamentals necessary for beginning the development within a reasonable time of satisfactory water service between North Carolina and its contributory areas and New York, Boston, Philadelphia, and Baltimore. |
| (i) | It is 23 miles farther inland toward competitive rail routes than the next best North Carolina location. Rail hauls are consequently shortened by that amount, the water haul being much the cheaper. |
| (j) | The following inland waterways converge at Wilmington: Cape Fear River (to Fayetteville) and Cape Fear River northeast branch (to Castle Hayne and Baunnerman's Bridge). |
| (k) | The coastal inland waterway, when completed, will enter the Cape Fear River 13 miles below Wilmington to contribute waterborne commodities to and from Albemarle Sound, Pamlico Sound, Pamlico River, Neuse River, Core Sound, Bogue Sound, and New River. |
| (l) | The tonnage of commodities shipped to or from Wilmington during the fiscal year 1923 were greater than that of any other North Carolina port, amounting to 714,861 tons, valued at $54,867,080. |
| (m) | It is a fresh water port. |
| (n) | It is closer to the western and middle part of the State, as represented by Greensboro and Salisbury than any other North Carolina seaport. |
4. CHANNEL: The recommendations of the U. S. Army Engineers call for a channel 30 feet in depth at mean low water, 400 feet wide, from the sea to Wilmington. The present actual depth is 26 feet at mean low water, the width of the channel is 300 feet in the river and 125 to 400 feet on the ocean bar.
5. One hundred feet from and opposite the site offered for a State port-terminal, the channel depth is 26 feet rapidly deepening to 28 feet. It is estimated that $20,000 worth of dredging will give a suitable depth along the front of the site to accommodate all types of ships.
6. The anchorage and maneuvering basin is directly opposite the site offered. This basin is 2,000 feet long, 1,100 feet wide at its southern end, and 900 feet wide at its northern end.
7. The average rise and fall of tide is 2.5 feet, the extreme range of tides is 4 feet.
8. The strength of the ebb current is about two miles per hour, and of the flood current 1.5 miles per hour.
9. The port is well protected against damage by storm due to its situation on a river 30 miles from the sea.
10. The port is readily accessible at all times of the day or night for ocean vessels drawing 24 feet of water. This assumes sea and tidal conditions such as to allow a vessel of that draught to cross the bar. Vessels of a draught of 26 1/2 feet have been taken to Wilmington on a flood tide. In fog, heavy rains, etc., the usual tie-up of navigation could be expected. The river from the sea to Wilmington is well buoyed, and is marked with a modern system of ranges, beacons and lights. Pilotage fees for a large, well-laden vessel will average about 4 1/4 cents per ton of cargo, less than one-fifth of a cent for each 100 lbs.
Docking, undocking, and maneuvering of ships can be accomplished at nearly any stage of the tide and with minimum cost for tow-boat assistance due to comparatively low current velocities.
11. Wilmington offers to the State of North Carolina without cost the site of the Liberty Shipyard. The stipulation is that the State shall erect and operate port-terminal facilities. The site is in the southern
part of the city. It comprises 42 1/2 acres with a river frontage of 1,000 feet. Further river-frontage extensions can be made. The land runs back about 1,200 feet from the pier-head line, and offers an area well suited for a moderate-size ocean terminal, affording space for special piers, or one long pier parallel to the river, warehouses, transit sheds, switching, and freight-car yard and other necessary parts of a terminal. A longer river frontage would make this site of more value as an effective State port-terminal.
12. Wilmington does not possess an east and west trunk line contact with areas which can ship to it in competition with Norfolk, Savannah, and Jacksonville the necessary bulk cargo to make it a port of frequent ship-sailings for satisfactory service, although it is more favorably served by rail and motor roads than any other North Carolina coast location. “Bulk cargo” contemplates such commodities as grain, coal, meats, cotton, tobacco, lumber, oil, machinery, and articles of quantity production. Wilmington's population of 44,000, its established banks, communications, Customs House, labor, housing, shipping agencies, local markets, and competing rail routes; and its coal, water and food supplies—all provide the requirements for a co-operative effort to develop a port-of-call at this location at an early date.
13. The belt-line railroad, serving the site offered to the State for port-terminals, is owned by the Tidewater Power Company, leased to the A. C. L. Ry. for 16 years—four years to come. There is no switching charge to and from the site by the owners. Other railroads have use of the belt line, and must absorb a moderate switching charge when using it. The use of this line must be open to all parties on equal terms, and control to that effect be instituted.
14. The following railroad lines converge at Wilmington:
| (a) | Atlantic Coast Line from New Bern, connecting at New Bern with the Norfolk and Southern. |
| (b) | Atlantic Coast Line from Wilson and Goldsboro, connecting at Goldsboro with the Southern (to Raleigh, Durham, Greensboro, Wilkesboro.) |
| (c) | Atlantic Coast Line from Sanford and Fayetteville, connecting at Sanford with the Southern, (to Greensboro, Salisbury, Asheville.) |
| (d) | Atlantic Coast Line from Columbia, S. C., and Florence, S. C. |
| (e) | Wilmington, Brunswick & Southern from Southport and Navassa. |
| (f) | Seaboard Air Line from Bostic and Charlotte, connecting at Bostic with the Carolina, Clinchfield and Ohio Railroad, having direct connection with the coal fields of Tennessee and Kentucky and the industrial and agricultural sections of the middle west. |
15. The following State-developed motor roads radiate from this city:
| (a) | Wilmington to New Bern (northeasterly). |
| (b) | Wilmington to Goldsboro, Wilson, Rocky Mount and Weldon (northerly). |
| (c) | Wilmington to Fayetteville, Raleigh, Greensboro and Winston-Salem (northwesterly). |
| (d) | Wilmington to Lumberton, Rockingham, Charlotte and Asheville (westerly). |
| (e) | Wilmington to Southport (southerly). |
1. Fayetteville can serve inland-waterway traffic.
2. The probable types of vessel that will use this port are all vessels generally used for inland-waterway service up to a draught of 7 feet.
NOTE—At the present time the controlling low water depths between Fayetteville and Lock No. 2 is 2½ feet. Until the project of 8 feet is completed vessels drawing only 2 feet can be depended on for all-year navigation.
3. The geographic and strategic situation of Fayetteville may be estimated as follows:
| (a) | Distance from Wilmington, the nearest ocean port, 115 miles by water. |
| (b) | Fayetteville is on the upper Cape Fear River, about 80 miles inland in a straight line from the seacoast. Its water connection with Wilmington is effected by the building of two locks and dams. Lock and dam, No. 1, are located at King's Bluff, 39 miles from Wilmington, its lift being 8 feet. Lock and Dam, No. 2, is situate at Brown's Landing, 71 miles from Wilmington, its lift being 12 feet. The dimensions of these locks are 200 feet by 40 feet with a depth of 9 feet on their sills at low water. |
| (c) | Looms geographically as a very feasible North Carolina location for the convergence of North Carolina traffic from the western and northern and central sections for further transportation by water to North Carolina's ocean port. |
| (d) | It can effectively serve its immediate area by affording cheap water transportation for its own products and for its own imports to North Carolina's ocean port. |
| (e) | Fayetteville is exceptionally well situated stategically for cheap shipments by water to and from the ocean port. For such transportation it has no port within a reasonable distance with which it will have to compete. |
| (f) | By virtue of an established business community and a feasible location it provides some of the essentials necessary for the development within a reasonable time of satisfactory water service between this location with its tributary areas and the desired port of ocean shipment. |
| (g) | The development of this city as an inland-waterway will be dependent primarily on the deepening of the navigable river to a depth of at least 8 feet. Until this be done, no such development can reasonably be expected. |
4. CHANNEL: Recommendations of U. S. Army Engineers call for a channel 8 feet deep at low water from Wilmington to Fayetteville. The controlling low water depths are 7 feet from Wilmington to Lock No. 1, five feet to Lock No. 2, and 2½ feet to Fayetteville.
5. Fayetteville has never offered a site to the State for the development of a State port-terminal. The channel depth and width will be sufficient, however, at or near the foot of Russell street for river steamers to dock at that point, provided the river depth of 8 feet at low water is obtained.
6. Anchorage in the river will be somewhat impracticable. The width of the river is sufficient, however, for river boats to maneuver opposite and near the terminal site.
7. The tide ranges from 2½ feet at Wilmington to one foot at Lock No. 1, King's Bluff. The extreme range of lunar tides is 4.1 foot at Wilmington and 1.5 foot at King's Bluff. The maximum variation due to floods ranges from 70 feet at Fayetteville to 3 feet at Wilmington.
8. From Fayetteville to about 45 miles below, the banks of the stream are high and the stream narrow, causing a very great freshet rise, amounting occasionally to 55 or 60 feet at Fayetteville. Low water stages prevail about three months of the year. The current is very rapid on the upper section and sluggish on the lower section.
9. The port is well protected against damage by storms, being situate well up a river. The port, when deep water is obtained, should be readily accessible at all times of the day or night for inland-waterway vessels drawing 7 feet of water. In fogs, heavy rains, etc., the usual tie-up of navigation would be expected. The river would require some further marking by buoys and lighted beacons. No pilotage fees are charged. Docking and undocking of river vessels could be accomplished at any time except during abnormal stages of freshet water, and it is believed that even this condition will not adversely affect navigation to any serious extent.
10. Fayetteville has not offered to the State any site for a State port-terminal.
11. Fayetteville is well served with rail, water, and road routes, putting it in direct contact with areas which can ship to it its products for further shipment by water to either a consuming area or to the ocean port. Its population of 9,000, its established banks, communications, labor, housing, shipping agencies, local markets, competing rail routes; and its coal, water and food supplies—all provide the requirements for a coöperative effort to develop this port as one of North Carolina's most important inland-waterway ports.
12. There is no belt-line railroad for consideration.
13. The following railroad lines converge at Fayetteville:
| (a) | Atlantic Coast Line from Weldon, Wilson and Selma. |
| (b) | The Norfolk-Southern from Raleigh and Lillington. |
| (c) | Atlantic Coast Line from Sanford connecting with the Southern to Greensboro. |
| (d) | Aberdeen and Rockflsh from Aberdeen and Raeford, connecting |
| with the main line of the Seaboard Air Line at Aberdeen and connecting with the Southern from Charlotte and with the L. & S. railroad at Raeford. | |
| (e) | The Atlantic Coast Line from Bennettsville and Maxton. |
| (f) | The Atlantic Coast Line to Florence, S. C., and Sumter, S. C. |
| (g) | The V. & C. S. from Marion, S. C., and Lumberton, N. C., and branching at St. Pauls to Elizabethtown. |
| (h) | The Atlantic Coast Line to Wilmington. |
The following State-developed motor roads radiate from Fayetteville:
| (a) | Fayetteville to Clinton and Wilmington (easterly). |
| (b) | Fayetteville to Smithfield and Wilson (northeasterly). |
| (c) | Fayetteville to Raleigh (northerly—branching at Lillington to Sanford and Greensboro—northeasterly). |
| (d) | Fayetteville to Raeford, Rockingham, Charlotte and Asheville (westerly). |
| (e) | Fayetteville to Lumberton (southerly). |
| (f) | Fayetteville to Elizabethtown and Whiteville (southerly). |
1. Morehead City can serve inland waterway traffic. It may possibly be developed for ocean, coastal traffic.
2. Probable types of vessels that will use this port are all vessels used for inland waterway traffic up to and including a draught of 9 feet. If this port should ever be developed for ocean, coastal traffic, ocean types of vessels would be used of a draught depending on the depth of water maintained on the bar and in the harbor by the U. S. Army Engineers.
3. Geographic and strategic situation of Morehead City may be estimated as follows:
| (a) | Distance from Norfolk, the nearest large port to northward 210 miles. |
| (b) | Distance from Wilmington, nearest large port to southward 80 miles. |
| (c) | Morehead City is situate at the eastern end of Bogue Sound, opposite Beaufort Inlet, which opens into the Atlantic Ocean. The 12-foot inland waterway canal connecting the Neuse River to Beaufort Inlet terminates at Morehead City. Water connection from this point is also had with Beaufort and Core Sound. |
| (d) | Looms geographically as a very feasible North Carolina location for convergence of inland waterway traffic with traffic from the eastern and south-eastern sections of North Carolina. |
| (e) | It can effectively serve its immediate area by affording cheap water transportation for its products and for its imports to whatever seaport, Wilmington or Norfolk, it is desired to ship through. |
| (f) | By virtue of an established business community, agencies for inland waterway trade, and a feasible location, it provides some of the fundamentals necessary for the development, within a reasonable time, of satisfactory water service between this section of North Carolina and the desired port of ocean shipment. |
MOREHEAD CITY, BEAUFORT
AND
HARBOR OF REFUGE AT CAPE LOOKOUT
| (g) | It is in direct water touch with Norfolk and points on Albemarle Sound and the Chowan River, points on Pamlico Sound, Pamlico River, Tar River and Core and Bogue Sounds. |
| (h) | It now has regular water lines operating between Norfolk, Va. and New Bern, N. C. |
| (i) | For the years 1917 to 1921 inclusive the boat commerce of Morehead City averaged as follows: |
| 1. | General commerce 16,833 tons, valued at $1,305,812. |
| 2. | Passengers carried per year from 1917 to 1921 inclusive 10,800. |
| 3. | Timber rafted and towed in 1921, 3,000 tons, valued at $12,000. |
| (j) | The controlling depth of water connecting the eastern end of Bogue Sound with the Atlantic ocean through Beaufort Inlet is 14 feet which is found on the ocean bar. Just inside the bar and opposite Fort Macon a depth of from 30 to 35 feet is found and opposite the wharf near the railroad draw bridge at Morehead City 23 feet of water is found. |
| (k) | The coastal inland waterway, when completed to Cape Fear River, will place Morehead City in direct water touch with Wilmington or its ocean port and for further inland waterway traffic as far as Fayetteville. |
4. CHANNEL: Recommendations of U. S. Army Engineers call for a channel 10 feet deep at mean low water, beginning at a point 2,000 feet westward of Beaufort harbor and extending to the wharves of Morehead City for a distance of 3,800 feet, the lower 2,800 feet having a width of 100 feet and the upper 1,000 feet a width of 200 feet. The controlling depth at mean low water at present is 10 feet.
5. Opposite the site offered for a State port-terminal the channel depth is 23 feet, the channel width 200 feet. Only slight dredging is necessary.
6. The dimensions and depth of the maneuvering space opposite the site are 500 feet wide by 2,500 feet long, 23 feet to 36 feet in depth. An anchorage basin exists to the southward of this with an average width of 600 feet and a length of 4,500 feet, with depths of from 27 to 29 feet. Opposite Fort Macon there is an anchorage averaging 900 feet wide and approximately 4,500 feet in length, with depths of from 21 to 24 feet.
7. The average rise of tide is 2.5 feet. One year's observations show that the extreme range of tides is greatly affected by winds.
8. Tidal currents in Morehead City harbor are very slight. Just outside the harbor and out to Beaufort Inlet the ebb current will average from 3 to 4 miles per hour and the flood current will average from 2 to 3 miles per hour.
9. The port is well protected against damage by the ocean. There is little protection from a full sweep of wind from approximately E. S. E. through south to W. S. W.
10. The port is readily accessible at all times of the day or night for inland waterway vessels drawing 8 feet of water. Vessels of greater draught can be taken in or out of the harbor under favorable conditions.
In fogs, heavy rains, etc., the usual tie-up of navigation is to be expected. The channel is well marked by buoys and lighted beacons. Pilotage fees are charged only for passage over Beaufort bar. Docking and undocking in Morehead City harbor can be accomplished in any stage of the current due to the low current velocities.
11. A location exists at Morehead City, privately owned, but which, it is stated, can be acquired at a “nominal price,” which would be suitable for an inland waterway terminal. This site has a usable frontage on the Newport River channel of about 500 feet. The land runs back and to the westward to this river frontage for about 1,500 feet and offers an area well suited for a moderate size inland waterway terminal, affording space for piers, warehouses, transit sheds, switching and freight-car yard and other necessary parts of the terminal. The water frontage on Bogue Sound cannot be developed for wharves unless an extensive amount of dredging is done, there being less than one foot of water immediately to the southward of this site for a distance of approximately 600 feet.
12. Morehead City is well served with water routes, putting it in direct contact with areas which can ship to it products for water transportation to either the consuming area or to a point for ocean shipment. Its population of 3,000, its established banks, communications labor, housing, shipping agencies, local markets, rail route; and its coal, water and food supplies—all provide the requirements for developing a major inland waterway port at this location at an early date.
13. No belt line railroad exists at this site.
14. Morehead City is served by a single-track railroad, the Norfolk-Southern Railway, which runs from Beaufort through Morehead City to New Bern, and further connects there as described in the town of New Bern.
15. A State highway, at present not fully developed, connects Morehead City with New Bern.
NOTE—Information is furnished by the Chamber of Commerce that a depth of twenty feet is now authorized, and that the district engineer has indicated that this depth will be provided in case adequate public terminal facilities are provided at Morehead City.
(e) Cape Lookout HARBOR OF REFUGE1. Cape Lookout Harbor of Refuge can serve ocean traffic, foreign and coastal.
2. Probable types of vessels that will use this port are all steam and sail vessels generally used for ocean traffic up to and including a draught of 35 feet.
3. The geographic and strategic situation of Cape Lookout Harbor of Refuge may be estimated as follows:
| (a) | Distance from Norfolk, the nearest port to northward 200 miles. |
| (b) | Distance from Wilmington, the nearest large port to southward, 70 miles. |
| (c) | Looms geographically as a feasible North Carolina location for a harbor of refuge only and for such emergency traffic of coal, water, and shipstores as may be needed by vessels of deep draft which put in there out of their regular routes. |
| (d) | It is far enough south of Norfolk to avoid a too direct competition with that great port were it to be considered for development as a North Carolina ocean traffic port. |
| (e) | Rail hauls from middle west and from the western and central portions of North Carolina would be longer to this location than to any other seaport of North Carolina. |
| (f) | There is no established community at this point except Coast Guard, Naval and Lighthouse stations. |
| (g) | No inland-waterway can be brought to this location without extensive dredging of many miles. Reshipment by rail for one or two miles would be necessary for goods brought to this location or for goods brought to this location by inland-water transportation. |
| (h) | It would be very hard to obtain fresh water in any quantities at this location. |
4. CHANNEL: The Congress of the United States has appropriated moneys for the construction of a breakwater projecting from Cape Lookout in such a way as to increase the size of the harbor of refuge and to give additional protection from the sea. The breakwater is now about 53% completed. There is a depth of 40 feet of water behind this nearly completed section of the breakwater. The approach to the harbor of refuge is deep water of from 45 to 50 feet.
5. No site has been offered the State for a terminal.
6. The whole of Cape Lookout harbor of refuge is available as an anchorage and maneuvering basin.
7. The mean range of tide is 3.7 feet. Automatic tide gauge readings of over three years show 7.9 feet as the extreme range of tides.
8. Slight wind and tide currents have no appreciable effect on anchorage or maneuvering.
9. The port is well protected against damage by ocean waves due to the form of the land and to the ocean breakwater built by the Army Engineers. It is exposed to the full sweep of winds from nearly all quarters. Holding ground is hard sand with sticky mud in places.
10. The port is readily accessible at all times of the day or night for ocean vessels drawing 35 feet of water or less. In fogs, heavy rains, etc., vessels would be required to navigate very cautiously in attempting to enter the harbor of refuge. There are no pilotage fees. There are no docks for ocean ships.
11. No site has been offered to the State for port terminal.
12. Cape Lookout harbor of refuge is not accessible to centers of base products. It has no population, local markets, banks, labor, housing, coal, water or food supplies.
13. There is no belt line railroad at Cape Lookout.
14. There are no railroad lines or facilities at Cape Lookout or on this strip of land, the nearest railroad being the single-track line of the Norfolk and Southern, which terminates at Beaufort. If Cape Lookout harbor of refuge were ever to be developed as a port of any consequence it would necessitate the extension of this railroad a great distance over the waters and marshes between Beaufort and Shackleford Banks and thence to Cape Lookout.
15. There are no roads at Cape Lookout.
(f) New Bern1. New Bern can serve inland waterway traffic.
2. Probable types of vessel that will use this port are all vessels generally used for inland waterway service up to a draft of 10 feet.
3. The geographic and strategic situation of New Bern may be estimated as follows:
| (a) | Distance from Norfolk, the nearest great port to the northward is 170 miles by rail. |
| (b) | Distance from Wilmington, N. C., the nearest large port to the southward, is 87 miles by rail. |
| (c) | New Bern is on the upper ranges of the Neuse river, which empties into the southern end of Pamlico Sound. A 12-foot inland waterway canal connects it with Morehead City and Beaufort Inlet. |
| (d) | Looms geographically as a very feasible North Carolina location for convergence of inland waterway traffic from the central-eastern sections of North Carolina. |
| (e) | It can effectively serve its immediate area by affording cheap water transportation for its products and for its imports, to whatever seaport, Norfolk or Wilmington, it is desired to ship through. |
| (f) | By virtue of an established business communuity, agencies for inland waterway trade, and feasible location, it provides some of the fundamentals necessary for the development within a reasonable time of satisfactory water service between this section of North Carolina and the desired port of ocean shipment. |
| (g) | It is in direct water touch with Norfolk, all points on Albemarle Sound and the Chowan River, points on Pamlico Sound, Pamlico River, Tar River, and Core and Bogue Sounds. |
| (h) | It now has regular water lines operating between New Bern and North Harlowe, Oriental, Beaufort, Morehead City and Swan Quarter. Eighty-five per cent of the total commerce on the Neuse river is over that portion of the stream below New Bern. Approximately one-third of this commerce is lumber shipped by the inland waterway as far North as Camden, N. J., in barges of 800 tons capacity, with 8 to 10 feet draft. Barges returning from Northern points carry cargoes of fertilizer, materials for manufacture, hard coal, cement, salt, etc. Regular package service of one sailing per week is now in effect between Norfolk, Va. and New Bern and Morehead City, N. C. |
| (i) | For the years 1917 to 1921 inclusive, the commerce on the Neuse river averaged as follows: |
NEW BERN
AND
NEUSE RIVER
| 1. | General commerce 139,465 tons, valued at $6,464,830. |
| 2. | Timber, rafted and towed, 65,280 tons, valued at $446,422. |
| 3. | Passengers carried per year 7,500. |
| (j) | Regular lines using boats from 20 to 50 tons capacity drawing from 3 to 6 feet, make several trips each week from New Bern to Pollocksville and Trenton; from New Bern to Kinston and Seven Springs; from New Bern to Grifton, Hookerton and Snow Hill; and from New Bern to Vanceboro. |
| (k) | The coastal inland waterway, when completed to Cape Fear River, will place New Bern in direct touch with Wilmington for its ocean port and for further inland waterway traffic as far as Fayetteville. |
4. CHANNELS: Recommendations of U. S. Army Engineers call for a channel 12 feet deep at mean low water and 300 feet wide up to and in front of New Bern. The controlling depth at mean low water at present is 11 feet. The channel is 200 feet wide at New Bern at present and 300 feet wide below New Bern.
5. Opposite the site offered for a State port terminal the channel depth is 11 feet, the channel width 200 feet; no dredging necessary.
6. The anchorage and maneuvering basin is in the Neuse river just below New Bern and opposite James City. This basin is approximately 4,000 feet long and 2,000 feet wide and sufficient for vessels of 8 feet draught.
7. The Neuse river is non-tidal. Variations in the water surface at and below New Bern due to prevailing winds, seldom exceed 2 feet above or below mean stage. The tide gauge readings at New Bern, covering four years, show the extreme range of wind tide to be 8.3 feet.
8. The current is rather sluggish in that portion of Neuse river affected by the winds. The maximum outward current is never over three miles per hour and averages about one mile per hour.
9. The port is well protected against damage by storms, being situated well up a river.
10. The port is readily accessible at all times of the day or night for inland waterway vessels drawing 8 feet of water. Vessels of greater draught can be taken to or from New Bern under favorable water conditions. In fogs, heavy rains, etc., the usual tie-up of navigation is to be expected. The river is well marked by buoys and lighted beacons. No pilotage fees are charged. Docking and undocking can be accomplished at any stage of the current due to the low current velocities.
11. New Bern offers to the State of North Carolina, without cost, a plat of land at the southeast corner of the city fronting on the confluence of the Neuse and Trent Rivers. It comprises approximately 7½ acres, and has a river frontage of about 975 feet. The land is roughly in the form of a square about 485 feet to the side. It affords space for piers, warehouses, transit sheds, and to a limited degree space for switching and freight-car handling. The terms on which
the City of New Bern offers this site are that the State operate it as a terminal, the agreement to be in effect only so long as the terminal is maintained and operated by the State. If the State were to fail to maintain the terminal the site would revert back to the City of New Bern. While the river frontage offered is not large, it is of sufficient size to stimulate healthy, competitive, water traffic. If, as anticipated, water traffic were to be greatly increased a much larger area for State terminals would be needed.
12. New Bern is well served with routes, both railroad and water putting it in direct contact with areas which can ship to it its products for water transportation to either a consuming area or to a point for ocean shipment. Its population of 12,000, its established banks, communications, labor, housing, shipping agencies, local markets, rail routes; and its coal, water and food supplies—all provide the requirements for developing a major inland waterway port at this location at an early date.
13. The best line railroad serving the site offered to the State for port terminals, is owned by the Norfolk-Southern Railroad. The use of this must be open to all parties on equal terms, and arrangements to that effect must be instituted.
14. The following railroad lines converge at New Bern:
| (a) | Norfolk-Southern Railway from Goldsboro, connecting at Goldsboro with the Atlantic Coast Line from Wilmington to Weldon and with the Southern Railway to Raleigh, Greensboro, and Charlotte. At Kinston this line connects with the A. C. L. to Weldon and with the K. C. to Pink Hill and Beulaville. At Dover it connects with the Dover and Southbound Railroad to Richlands. |
| (b) | The Norfolk-Southern Railroad direct from Norfolk, Va., serving Plymouth, Washington and Vanceboro. |
| (c) | Norfolk-Southern Railroad from Oriental and Bayboro. |
| (d) | Norfolk-Southern Railroad from Beaufort and Morehead City. |
| (e) | Atlantic Coast Line from Wilmington and Jacksonville. |
| (f) | Rowland Lumber Co. Railroad from Warsaw, Kenansville, and Chinquapin for freight only. |
15. The following State-developed motor roads radiate from this city:
| (a) | New Bern to Kinston and Goldsboro (northwesterly). |
| (b) | New Bern to Pollocksville, Jacksonville and Wilmington (southwesterly). |
| (c) | New Bern to Morehead City and to Beaufort (southeasterly). |
| (d) | New Bern to Bayboro (easterly). |
| (e) | New Bern to Washington and Williamston (northerly). |
1. Manteo can serve inland waterway traffic.
2. Probable types of vessel that will use this port are those generally used for inland waterway service up to a draught of 5 feet.
Map of Bodie Island and Roanoke Island
3. The geographic and strategic situation of Manteo may be estimated as follows:
| (a) | Distance from Norfolk 90 miles, and from Elizabeth City, the nearest town, 45 miles. |
| (b) | Manteo is situate near the northern end of Roanoke Island, between Roanoke and Croatan Sounds and between Pamlico and Albemarle Sounds. A 6-foot channel is dredged into Manteo harbor. |
| (c) | Looms geographically as a very feasible North Carolina point of origin for all manner of sea food products for distribution to North Carolina cities. |
| (d) | By virtue of an established fishing and business community, agencies for inland waterway trade, and a feasible location, it provides some of the fundamentals necessary for the development within a reasonable time of satisfactory water service between this point and points on the mainland of North Carolina. Being on an island, all transportation to and from this location has got to be by water. It now has regular water lines operating between Manteo and points as follows: |
| 1. | Daily between Manteo and Hatteras. |
| 2. | Daily between Manteo and Stumpy Point. |
| 3. | Daily between Manteo and Duck. |
| 4. | Daily between Manteo and East Lake. |
| 5. | Daily between Manteo and Elizabeth City. |
| 6. | Tri-weekly between Manteo and Norfolk. |
| (e) | For the years 1916 to 1921 inclusive, Manteo's commerce averaged each year as follows: 7,463 tons, valued at $983,492. The average number of passengers carried each year during this period was 7,698. |
4. CHANNEL: Recommendations of U. S. Army Engineers provide for a channel 100 feet wide and 6 feet deep at mean low water from the entrance to the town of Manteo, one mile. The controlling depth is now 6 feet.
5. —
6. Anchorage and maneuvering basin.
7. Manteo bay is non-tidal; variations in the water level due to winds, such variations seldom exceeding one or two feet higher or lower than the mean stage. One year's tide guage readings at Manteo show the extreme range of wind tides to be 5.1 feet.
8. There is little or no current in Manteo Bay.
9. The port is fairly protected against water damage. It is somewhat exposed to winds from N.E to S.
10. The port is readily accessible at all times of the day or night for inland waterway vessels drawing 5 feet of water, unless wind tides lower the water level unduly. The channel is well marked by buoys and lighted beacons. No pilotage fees are charged. Docking and undocking can be accomplished at any time.
11. —
NOTE—Manteo's great need is a terminal warehouse, public docks for yachts, as well as commercial boats, and a modern refrigerating plant of such design as to permit of expansion. A 50-ton refrigerating plant is deemed sufficient for present needs.
12. Manteo is well served with water routes putting it in direct contact with points to which it can ship its products, and receive goods in return. Its established business, communications, labor, housing, shipping agencies, local markets, and adequate supplies—all provide the requirements for developing an important inland waterway port at this location at an early date.
13. There is no belt line railroad.
14. There are no railroad lines on Roanoke Island.
15. There is a State-developed motor road running from end to end of Roanoke Island and passing through Manteo.
(h) Winton1. The port will serve inland waterway traffic.
2. Type of vessel: Any type, fifty foot beam, 9½ foot draught.
3. Area of 45 miles from other U. S. ports.
4. Depth and width of channel to port as recommended by U. S. Army Engineers, 23 2/10 feet. Controlling depth 18 feet.
5. Depth of water and location of channel at location offered, 10 feet. No dredging necessary.
6. Dimensions and depth of anchorage basin, and of maneuvering space opposite site, 12 to 20 feet draft, 400 feet width—maneuvering space 2 miles.
7. Mean rise and fall of tide 1 foot.
8. Average speed of ebb and flood currents—maximum 3 miles—average ¼ mile per hour. Tides controlled by wind.
9. Port absolutely safe against damage by storm.
10. Distance from sea, 200 miles. One first class pilot at this point. Leave port at any time.
11. The State of North Carolina is offered a site for $1,500 in town limits, on northeast end, with water frontage of 200 feet by estimate, for terminal.
12. This site is five to ten miles from centers of base-products. The town has a population of 1,000, two banks, and telephone and telegraph facilities.
13. The town is situated 3 miles from the A. C. L. Railway.
14. —
15. Two county roads and two State roads enter the town, one State road crossing the Roanoke river at Williamston, and the other crossing the Roanoke river at Weldon. Both roads cross the Chowan River at Winton.
(i) Beaufort[STATEMENT SUBMITTED BY THE Beaufort CHAMBER OF COMMERCE]
1. Inland waterway and coastal. No foreign business done at this port at this time.
2. Vessels drawing up to 17′ can use the Beaufort Harbor, and vessels drawing up to 12′ can use the Inland Water Way.
3. A port could be developed as a great shipping center, for the reason that adjacent to Beaufort Harbor is Cape Lookout, furnishing a natural basin in which vessels could be moored, drawing as much as 40′ at practically all points in the basin. We have only the Norfolk-Southern Railway serving us, and their interest is to send the export shipments through Norfolk, which cuts out this harbor. Coastwise business brought to this point could be placed on the Norfolk-Southern Ry., for trans-shipment to points west in the State, and aside from Morehead City, which is just about as favorably situated, there is no point on the coast between Charleston and Norfolk, except Wilmington, which facilities you are familiar with.
4. Depth of channel to port as maintained, 17′; width of channel is sufficient to enable the government to send in destroyer craft, which require approximately 500′ for turning. The actual channel is from 200′ to 300′.
5. Depth of water and width of channel at location of site offered to State for terminal: We have one site that is peculiarly adaptable for this purpose, in that it is bounded on one side by the railroad, and on two sides by water, one side of which is the main channel of the Inland Waterway. The draw-bridge at this point is 90′ in width. Schertzer lift type bridge. The actual high ground at this point amounts to about one acre, but the proposed site covers a total of 4½ acres which could be very easily made by the deepening of the channel in Town Creek and along the frontage. This site is favorable by reason of the railroad location and the Inland Waterway. It would be necessary in considering this site to arrange for literage from the main channel, about ¾-mile distance, for ocean going draught. Should such draught develop to any extent the Cape Lookout Harbor would be the proper harbor to work with.
6. Channel in front of site is 90′ in width, with 12′ depth. See answer to question 5 above.
7. About 3′-mean rise and fall tide.
8. About 3 miles maximum, probably around 2 miles average, speed ebb and flow tide.
9. Protected from the outside by a natural bulwark of islands and land running along this coast for about 60 miles. This natural bulwark is about 1½ miles away from Beaufort, and ranges from ½ mile to 1 mile in width.
10. Distance from Atlantic Ocean 2 miles. Pilotage reasonable and proper. Course and channel are marked with lights and beacons maintained
by the government and it would neither be necessary to wait for favorable tides or any other factor in entering or leaving the port to and from the proposed site.
11. Location and description of site: Water frontage, by reason of dredging, which is all in sand (would total about 600′). We have an option on this site and should we be favored with the terminals the land would cost less than $1,000 per acre; in all probability a considerable portion of this could be secured by local subscription, but as the time of canvassing is very short we have not made any particular effort to get definite promises on that.
12. Accessibility of site to centers of base products: Site is favorable. It is served by the Norfolk-Southern Ry., and the eastern end of Carteret County served by Beaufort, is a large producer of white and sweet potatoes; is going more and more into general truck products; good corn; good cotton (until within the last year); and good tobacco. A considerable local tonnage could be secured for shipments.
Population 3,000 in 1920 census; population now about 3,500; population of the County east of the Inland Waterway, all of which is very directly served by Beaufort, approximately 10,000; no railroad to the east of us, and the fact that practically every acre in this section can be reached within 2½ miles by light draft vessels makes our location especially favorable for joint business with all sections of the eastern portion of the County.
Banking: Two good strong banks, whose affiliations are such that any reasonable business can be taken care of. Communications: Telephone, telegraph, mail, etc. Labor: Mixed—white and colored. Fairly good supply except in boom times. Housing, very short. Coal imported from West Virginia largely. Water furnished by city waterworks, electric lights furnished by city electric light plant, both owned by the town. Practically all sections of the town sewered and a large portion is now being paved. A great asset to Beaufort in the way of food supply is the fishing and shell fishing, which afford livelihood for a considerable number of the population east of the Inland Waterway, and which is equivalent to several hundred dollars each year.
13. No belt line railroad. No need in this instance.
14. Norfolk-Southern Ry. only service here.
15. Hard surfaced highway now being constructed, this being the terminus of Route 10. Good county roads are being constructed throughout the County.
ELIZABETH CITY
AND
PASQUOTANK RIVER
WATERWAYS WITHIN THE STATE
OF NORTH CAROLINA
The State of North Carolina is peculiarly adapted, by nature, to the development of a system of waterways as is no other state on the Atlantic Seaboard; her coast from the head of Currituck Sound on the north to the head of Myrtle Grove Sound on the south is protected by a string of sand dunes and beaches, leaving sheltered her sounds and river mouths and making them extremely desirous for small boat traffic. The advent in recent years of the motor boat has revolutionized water traffic and this fact together with a good road system and motor transportation should awaken the people of North Carolina to her possibilities.
Nearly all of the larger and more important rivers within the State are being or have in years past been improved by the federal government. These improvements have consisted of snagging in some of the smaller streams, and in the upper reaches of the larger rivers, and dredging in the larger and more important waterways. Inlets have been deepened making possible the exchange of domestic with foreign commerce; artificial waterways have been dredged, shortening distances and affording greater protection to small craft; while in other instances locks and dams have been employed as a means of affording greater navigable depths. Wherever it can be shown with a reasonable degree of certainty that present or future commerce justifies the expenditure, the Government is willing to make improvement.
Within the State of North Carolina there are four principal streams which flow in a general southeasterly direction emptying into the Atlantic ocean or sounds contiguous thereto. These are the Cape Fear, Neuse, Tar, and Roanoke Rivers, having a combined navigable length of approximately 400 miles. Some of these streams have been under improvement since as early as 1829. The total amounts expended on these streams alone have amounted to about $8,380,000.
A brief history of the improvement of each of these streams is here given in greater detail.
Cape Fear RiverCape Fear River is formed by the confluence at Haywood, North Carolina, in Chatham County, of the Haw and Deep Rivers. It flows in a southeasterly direction, and empties into the Atlantic Ocean at Cape Fear near the southern extremity of the State. Its total length is about 400 miles, of which 145 miles is under improvement by the Government. The effect of tide reaches about 70 miles. The stream is divided into two sections with Wilmington, N. C., as the point of division. The combined drainage area is 7,500 square miles.
Originally there were three bar entrances with a least depth of about 10 feet while the controlling depth in the river up to Wilmington was 7½ feet at low water. Above Wilmington the river was navigable during about nine months of the year as far as Fayetteville, 115 miles.
Improvement of that portion of the river below Wilmington was undertaken under authority of the River and Harbor act of March 2, 1829, additional improvements being authorized by the River and Harbor acts of July 22, 1854; July 11, 1870; March 3, 1873; June 23, 1874; September 19, 1890; June 13, 1902; March 2, 1907; July 25, 1912; March 2, 1919; and the act of September 22, 1922. The improvement of the river above Wilmington was authorized by the River and Harbor act of March 3, 1881 and subsequent acts dated June 13, 1902, and the existing slack water project of June 25, 1910.
The more notable projects adopted by the Government involved the closing of New Inlet, the construction of Swash Defense Dam and the canalization of the upper portion of the river.
Bar improvement was begun in 1854. Between the mouth and Wilmington, improvement consisted of connecting deep pools with dredged cuts. These cuts were dredged and jettied and eventually became the channel existing today. As a result of improvements by the federal government the bar channel has a depth of 26 feet at mean low water and this draught can be carried to Wilmington, N. C. A draught of 7 feet can be carried up the Cape Fear to Lock and Dam No. 1, five feet to Elizabethtown and two and one half feet to Fayetteville, at all seasons of the year. Money has been appropriated by Congress for a new bar channel with a depth of 30 feet at mean low water.
A statement showing growth of commerce as related to improvements follows. The river is here treated in two sections, (a) Cape Fear River at and below Wilmington, and (b) Cape Fear River above Wilmington.
(a) Cape Fear River at and below Wilmington N. C.
The first commerce of which there is any definite record is that of 1852 which amounted to $4,540,700.00. Up until this time there had been expended for improvement on the portion of the river $300,000. During the year of 1870 the commerce amounted to $13,500,000. In 1889 the commerce had increased to 325,512 tons valued at $20,000,000 with the total expenditures for improvement $1,903,924.47; the development of commerce for each dollar expended amounting to $3.30. Foreign exports alone increased during this period from $1,500,000 to $8,000,000. During the year 1890 the commerce amounted to 346,557 tons valued at $21,447,320, the total amount expended for work reaching $2,093,885. In 1900 the commerce was valued at $33,345,612 and amounted to 621,852 tons. To June 30, 1889 the total amount expended amounted in round numbers to $2,836,500. Commerce for the year 1910 amounted to 872,426 tons valued at $52,214,254 and in 1920, 559,560 tons with a value of $79,522,927. The commercial statistics for the year 1922 showed considerable decrease, attributable to falling
off of cotton shipments. The total expenditures for improvements and maintenance on this stream to June 30, 1923, were $7,268,930.82. A glance at these figures shows that the development in commerce per dollar spent for improvement increased from $3.30 in 1889 to $10.00 in 1920.
(b) Cape Fear River above Wilmington N. C.
The improvement of this portion of the river, between Wilmington and Fayetteville, began in 1881 at which time it seems to have been necessary to buy out private owners of the river for $10,000. At that time there was a low water depth of four feet from Wilmington to Kelly's Cove, 46 miles, and a depth of one foot to Fayetteville. The latter depth existed during about ten months of the year. The project of January 26, 1881, was to buy out the private owners of the stream, clear the channel of natural obstructions and provide a three foot channel to Fayetteville. Improvement was begun very shortly after money became available and in 1887 after an expenditure of $65,832 there was a moderately well cleared channel the entire length of the river, with two feet of water to Elizabethtown and a one-foot year-around depth to Fayetteville, the value of the commerce amounting to approximately $1,000,000. The report of 1890 to the Chief of Engineers, U. S. Army, showed that commerce had increased to $2,518,045 with total amount expended for improvement $86,370. At the time of the adoption of the canalization project in 1902 depths in the river to Fayetteville had not changed appreciably and it was decided to construct 3 locks and dams at a cost of $1,350,000 to give a mean low water depth of eight feet to Fayetteville. This project was modified by act of June 25, 1910, which provided for two locks and dams, it having been decided to increase depth in the upper pool by dredging. This is the present project which is incomplete. Locks and dams have been completed but dredging of upper pool to project depth has not been completed.
The commerce of 1922 amounted to $4,052,525 with a total expenditure on this portion of the river of $1,330,839.98.
Neuse riverNeuse river rises in the northern part of the State and flows in a general southeasterly direction until it reaches the waters of Pamlico Sound. The river is 350 miles long, 150 of which is under improvement by the Government.
Improvement of this stream was begun in 1878 at which time it was full of snags and blockades placed during the Civil War (so as to make navigation impracticable.) The project adopted for improvement which is the present project provides for a channel 300 feet wide and 8 feet deep at dead low water below New Bern, 4 feet to Kinston, and during nine months of the year, 3 feet to Smithfield. It was proposed to obtain depths and widths by dredging and snagging. At present
there is an available depth of 8 feet to New Bern at dead low water, three and a half feet to a point twenty-three and a half miles above; thence two and a half feet to Contentnea Creek, thirty-one and a half miles above New Bern and one foot to Seven Springs, seventy-five miles above.
In 1885 the commerce had increased from practically nothing to $1,000,000 per year. The commerce of 1890 amounted to $6,469,103, the total expenditures for improvement to date being $233,267.77—each dollar spent in improvement being accompanied by a development of about $20 of annual commerce. For 1900 the value of the commerce is not given but it showed a slight falling off over the previous year in tonnage. In 1910, 402,428 tons of commerce valued at $7,472,530 were carried over this waterway which value was practically the same as that for the year 1920. The value of the commerce in 1922 showed considerable decrease, amounting to $5,335,012. The total expenditures for improvements have amounted to $481,379.37 or for each dollar spent in improvement there has been a development of about $10 of annual commerce.
PAMLICO AND Tar RiversThe Pamlico and Tar Rivers are in reality but one stream called the Pamlico River below Washington, N. C., and the Tar River above that point.
The stream rises in Person County, flows in a general southeasterly direction about 215 miles and, like the Neuse river, empties into Pamlico Sound. When placed under governmental improvement in 1876, the Pamlico River had an available depth of only three feet at low water in its upper portion near Washington; thence the Tar River had during eight months of the year an available depth of from two to three feet for 49 miles, up to Tarboro, its practical limit of navigation; but the channel of the combined stream was almost completely obstructed by two war blockades of the Civil War, and by snags and overhanging trees. Prior to 1853 there was a small amount of dredging done in the lower portion of the river to remove a sand shoal.
The improvement proposed in the project of 1876 (for the Pamlico) and of 1879 (for the Tar) was to secure a clear and safe channel 9 feet deep at low water up to Washington; thence a channel 60 feet wide and 3 feet deep at low water for 23 miles further to Greenville; and thence a channel 60 feet wide and 20 inches deep for 26 miles further up to Tarboro. This project forms the basis of the existing project and has been continued, with modifications, until the present day, the channel widths and depths over the various stretches having been increased. At present the project depths are available; ten feet can be carried to Washington, thence about five feet depth and fifty feet width to Greenville, and one foot to the mouth of Fishing Creek.
WASHINGTON AND TAR RIVER
The earliest records which can be given any credence show that the commerce over this stream amounted to approximately 178,720 tons valued at $4,670,810. In 1904 commerce was valued at $17,041,203. During the calendar year 1906 a peak was reached, the value of the commerce amounting to $20,816,394. The commerce for the year 1922 amounted to 152,272 tons valued at $3,448,148. Total expenditure for improvement on this stream to June 1923 amounted to $396,880.45.
Roanoke riverThis stream is formed by the junction of the Dan and Staunton Rivers at Clarksville, Va. It flows southeasterly into the waters of Albemarle Sound, N. C. The portion under improvement extends from the mouth to Weldon, N. C., 129 miles.
Originally the stream was obstructed by shoals, snags, sunken vessels and overhanging trees. The controlling depth being 10 feet at mean low water from the mouth to Hamilton, N. C., 62 miles; and 2 to 3 feet at mean low water to Weldon, N. C., 67 miles.
The original project which is the existing project was adopted in 1871, and provides for removing obstructions between the mouth and Hamilton so as to furnish a channel adequate for vessels navigating the sounds of North Carolina, and, by dredging, snagging and regulating, procure a channel with a least width of 50 feet and a mean low water depth of 5 feet, above Hamilton to the head of navigation.
The project is about 80% completed. A mean low water depth of ten feet exists to Hamilton and three feet can be carried to a point 2 miles below Weldon, N. C.
In 1870 the commerce amounted to 150,000 tons, there being no figures available as to its value. In 1912 the commerce reached a peak of 78,294 tons valued at $5,300,000 as against 76,425 tons in 1922 valued at $793,171. The total expenditure on this stream to date for improvement amounts to $248,500.
Waterway, Norfolk, Va., to Beaufort Inlet, N. C.This chapter would be incomplete if it did not mention the waterway which extends from Norfolk, Va., southward through the state of North Carolina to Beaufort, N. C., and the waterway southward through the sounds of North Carolina to the mouth of New River, N. C.
With the exception of five land cuts the first mentioned waterway lies within natural waterways. Beginning at Norfolk, Va., it follows successively the Southern Branch of Elizabeth River, Va., the Virginia cut of the former Chesapeake and Albemarle Canal; the north Landing River, Va., Currituck Sound, N. C., Coinjack Bay, N. C., the North Carolina Cut of the former C. and A. Canal; and the North River, N. C. to Albemarle Sound, a distance of 63.5 miles. The route then crosses the sound from the mouth of North River to the mouth
of Alligator River, 12.9 miles. Between the southern shore of Albemarle Sound and the junction of the Pungo River and the Pamlico River, it follows successively the Alligator River, N. C., a proposed land cut from Winn Bay, on the Alligator River, to Wilkersons Creek, a tributary of the Pungo River (the land cut being a bent line approaching the town of Fairfield, N. C.), a distance of 63.5 miles. The route then crosses Pamlico River from the mouth of Pungo River to the mouth of Goose Creek, a distance of 5.7 miles. Between the south shore of Pamlico River and Pamlico Sound it follows successively Goose Creek, a proposed land cut between Goose Creek and Beef Creek, touching Jones Bay, Gales Creek and Bay River, a distance of 13.7 miles. Between the mouth of Bay River and the mouth of Adams Creek it follows Pamlico Sound and Neuse river, a distance of 21.1 miles. Between the mouth of Adams Creek and Beaufort Inlet it follows successively Adams Creek, a land cut connecting Adams Creek and Core Creek, Core Creek and Newport River, to Beaufort Inlet 21.1 miles, a total distance of 201.5 miles. The proposed mean low water depth is 12 feet. Improvement of this waterway began in 1873 when the River and Harbor act authorized the improvement of the Southern Branch of Elizabeth River, N. C. The various improvements comprising the waterway were consolidated in 1890 and again in 1907. The modified River and Harbor act of July 25, 1912, is the existing project.
At present there is a continuous waterway from Norfolk Va., to Beaufort Inlet, N. C. with the exception of the land cut between Winn Bay and Wilkersons Creek which is now being dredged. When completed, this waterway will afford a sheltered route for small craft plying between Norfolk and Beaufort. Its effect upon commerce can not be accurately estimated until the waterway is completed.
To June 30, 1923, $4,699,456.93 had been spent on this improvement, the commercial value of freight transported amounting to $10,894,999.
Waterway, Beaufort to Jacksonville, N. C.This waterway traverses the sounds southward from Beaufort to the mouth of New River and thence via New River, to Jacksonville.
Improvement of this waterway began in 1886. At that time the portion between Beaufort and Swansboro had a governing low water depth of 1.5 feet, and between Swansboro and the mouth of New River, 0.5 feet; the governing low water depth for New River being 4 feet. The channels were very tortuous and narrow.
The River and Harbor acts of 1836, ’37 and ’38 appropriated $50,000 for the improvements of New River. The River and Harbor act of 1890 authorized the improvement of the waterway between New River and Swansboro and the River and Harbor act of 1886 authorized the improvement of that portion from Swansboro to Beaufort Harbor. The existing project which is the project adopted in 1917 provides for a channel 100 feet wide and 3 feet deep at mean low water
EDENTON AND ALBERMARLE SOUNDbetween Beaufort and Swansboro and thence 40 feet wide and 3 feet to 4 feet deep at mean high water to a point near the mouth of New River; thence 40 feet wide and three feet deep at mean low water to Jacksonville. This project is 96% completed, there remaining some 60,000 cubic yards of material near the mouth of New River still to be removed from proposed channel.
The commerce for the year 1914 amounted to 72,064 tons valued at $696,244; the commerce for 1922, 84,667 tons valued at $1,266,819. Total expenditures for improvement to date on this waterway amount to $291,459.17.
During the year 1922 there was spent for improvement and maintenance of waterways within the State of North Carolina approximately $561,717.00. The commerce for the calendar year 1922 carried on these streams amounted to 2,362,186 tons valued at approximately $107,496,871.00.
More detail information as to the improvement of the streams within the State may be had by reference to the Annual Report of the Chief Engineers, U. S. Army, which gives total lengths, heads of navigation, and commerce.
It can hardly be said of the improvement of the waterways of the State that a definite scheme or plan of development has been followed and it is debatable whether such a plan would have been productive of greater results than has been the outcome of the “hit and miss” scheme which seems to have been adopted by the government. Improvements have been undertaken and prosecuted when and where the commerce would justify.
Additional inlets along the coast of our State not now under improvement could possibly be further developed to furnish additional points for the receipt and distribution of foreign commerce. The sounds and waterways along the coast could be used as mediums over which this commerce could be distributed to warehouses constructed at or near the mouths of the various streams which penetrate into the country back from the coast and there await transportation by small gasoline boats or barges to the points of consumption along the streams, or to the intersection of the streams with the arterial highways traversing the State. Truly, as has already been said of North Carolina, she has a system of natural waterways, not yet fully developed, perhaps, for which some of the larger States have paid vast sums.
WATERWAY IMPROVEMENTSScuppernong River—The present project provides for a channel 3,400 feet long 150 feet wide and 10 feet deep at M. L. W. across the bar, and a channel 100 feet wide and 10 feet deep from the bar to Columbia; a channel 40 feet wide and 8 feet deep to Spruill's Bridge, including 20 cut-offs; a channel 30 feet wide and 7 feet deep to Cherry,
including a triangular shaped turning basin 150 feet on a side and 7 feet deep. Project 69% completed.
Cherry, 26 miles from the bar, is the head of navigation. At present there is a channel 10 feet deep across the bar and thence to Columbia, 7 feet to Spruills Bridge and 5 feet to Cherry.
This is a non-tidal stream with little or no slope, the oscillations of the surface being controlled by the wind.
Expenditures to June 30, 1923, $55,737.22.
Manteo (Shallowbag) Bay—The project is to dredge a channel 100 feet wide and 6 feet deep at low water, from the entrance of the bay to the wharves at Manteo at a cost of $13,750 with $2,000 annually for maintenance.
Manteo is at the head of navigation.
The bay is non-tidal. Variations in water level due to winds seldom exceed 1 to 2 feet higher or lower than the mean stage.
The project is completed.
A channel 100 feet wide and 6 feet at M. L. W. exists from Roanoke Sound to Manteo.
Expenditures to June 30, 1923, $23,750.
Waterway Connecting Swan Quarter Bay and Deep Bay—The project is to dredge a channel 5,500 feet long 50 feet wide at bottom, 6 feet deep at M. L. W. at a cost of $14,575 with $900 annually for maintenance. Project is completed.
Lunar tides are very small. Variations in water level are due to wind.
At present the controlling depth is 6 feet.
Amount expended to September 30, 1923, $17,664.76.
South River—The project is to secure a channel 100 feet wide and 7 feet at M. L. W. from Aurora to the head of the existing 7 foot channel by necessary widening at bends, at an estimated cost of $16,000 with $800 annually for maintenance.
The project is completed. The project was modified by the R. & H. act, March, 1913, to provide for a channel 7 feet deep and 50 feet wide to Royal and 7 feet deep and 35 feet wide to Idalia, the head of navigation.
The stream has little current and no tide. Variations in the water surface range from 1½ feet to 3 feet and are due to winds.
A draft of 7 feet can be carried to Idalia.
Expenditures to September 30, 1923, amounted to $16,000.00.
Bay River—The project is to obtain a channel 150 feet wide and 10 feet deep at M. L. W. from deep water up to a point 3,500 feet below Stonewall and thence 100 feet wide and 10 feet deep at M. L. W. to Bayboro, at an estimated cost of $21,000 with $1,000 annually for maintenance. Project was completed in 1914.
Bayboro, 17 miles above mouth, is the head of navigation. Stream is non-tidal. Prevailing winds cause variation in water surface from 1 to 2 feet. Nine feet can be carried to Bayboro at M. L. W. Expenditures to September 30, 1923, $26,900.00.
Swift Creek—The project is to secure a clear channel from the mouth of the creek to Vanceboro, by the removal of natural obstructions at an estimated cost of $1,600 with $500 annually for maintenance. The project is completed.
Vanceboro, 12 miles from the mouth is the head of navigation.
The maximum flood height at Vanceboro is 12 feet. During flood stages there is considerable current. At present there is a channel 50 feet wide and 5 feet M. L. W. to Vanceboro.
Amount expended to September 30, 1923, $4,698.97.
Contentnea Creek—The project is to maintain the stream between its mouth and Stantonsburg by removing obstructions from the natural channel.
Snow Hill, 31½ miles from the mouth, is practically the head of navigation although during freshets, boats can reach Speights Bridge 50½ miles from the mouth.
A draft of from 3 to 4 feet can be carried to Fool's Bridge during six months of the year.
The portion above Fool's Bridge is navigable during high stages of water only.
The stream is non-tidal.
No work was done on this stream during this year.
Expenditures to September 30, 1923, amounted to $90,640.17.
Trent River—The existing project is to secure a D. L. W. depth of 8 feet at New Bern, a 6 foot depth over Foys Flats, and maintain a channel 50 feet wide and 5 feet deep at L. W. to Trenton, the head of navigation, 38 miles from New Bern.
The project has been completed.
At D. L. W. a draft of 6 feet can be carried over Foys Flats to Pollocksville and 4 feet to Trenton.
Variations in water surface of upper portion of stream are caused by freshets while the portion near mouth is affected more by prevalent winds which cause fluctuations as great as 5 feet.
Expenditures to September 30, 1923, $153,548.37.
Channel Connecting Thoroughfare Bay with Cedar Bay—The project provides for a channel 5 feet deep and 50 feet wide, approximately 1.5 miles long at an estimated cost of $9,000 with annual maintenance of $300.
There is no lunar tide, variation in the water surface being due to winds.
The project is completed.
A depth of 5 feet exists in the waterway.
Expenditures to September 30, 1923, $12,000.
Beaufort Harbor—The project provides for the maintenance of jetties and sand fences at Fort Macon and Shackleford Points; for a channel 100 feet wide and 7 feet deep across Bulkhead Shoal to Beaufort; for a channel 60 feet wide and 10 feet deep from Beaufort to the Pamlico Sound-Beaufort Inlet Waterway via Gallant's Channel and the excavation of a turning basin 10 feet deep at Beaufort. Tidal range 2½ feet at Beaufort.
The project is 95% completed.
At M. L. W. 5½ feet of water exists in the Bulkhead channel and 7½ feet in Gallant's channel. In the channel in front of Beaufort there is a depth of 9½ feet. Amount expended to September 30, 1923, $310,462.27.
Waterway Connecting Core Sound and Beaufort Harbor—The existing project provides for dredging a channel 75 feet wide and 7 feet deep at M. L. W. at a cost of $30,000 with $4,000 annually for maintenance.
No work has been done on the project.
The average tide at Beaufort is 2.5 feet.
A depth of 5 feet exists throughout length of cut with exception of eastern end, 3 feet.
Expenditures, September 30, 1923, $37,367.32.
Harbor at Morehead City—The present project is to secure a channel 10 feet deep at M. L. W. from a point 2,000 feet westward of Beaufort Harbor and extending westward along the wharves of Morehead City a distance of 3,800 feet, the upper 1,000 feet having a width of 200 feet and the lower 2,800 feet a width of 100 feet.
Estimated cost $19,000 with $2,000 annually for maintenance.
Project was completed in 1913.
A M. L. W. depth of 10 feet is available.
Tidal range 2½ feet.
Expenditures to September 30, 1923, $33,900.00.
Beaufort Inlet—The project is for a channel 300 feet wide and 20 feet deep at M. L. W. across the bar. Project was completed in 1910. Estimated cost $45,000.00.
Since restoration in 1917, channel was shoaled and a depth of 14 feet at M. L. W. is the maximum available depth across bar.
There is a tidal range of 3½ feet at the bar. Expenditures to September 30, 1923, $123,812.83.
Harbor of Refuge, at Cape Lookout—The existing project provides for the construction of a harbor of refuge inclosing 575 acres of 30
feet or more in depth at an estimated cost of $3,526,600. The mean range of tide is 3.7.
The length of breakwater now showing above low water level extends seaward from the original high water mark to sta. 48, a length of 4,600 feet. This wall has been completed. The project is 53% completed. 652,455.89 tons of stone have been placed in the wall and shore connections.
Expenditures to September 30, 1923, $1,388,996.11.
Northeast Cape Fear River—The project provides for a channel 22 ft. deep and 150 ft. wide from the mouth to 2¾ miles above and for clearing the channel for small steamers to Hallsville and for pole boats to Kornegays Bridge. Nothing has been done to procure the 22 ft. depth over the lower portion. Work on the upper portion has been completed and additional work proposed is for maintenance only.
Kornegays Bridge, 103 miles from the mouth, is the head of navigation.
At low stages a draft of 6 ft. can be carried to Baunnermans Bridge and three feet to Crooms Bridge.
There is a tidal range of 2.5 at the mouth decreasing to nothing a short distance above Baunnermans Bridge.
Expenditures to September 30, 1923, $47,285.38.
Black River—The existing project of 1893 is to maintain a natural channel to Clear Run at an estimated cost of $2,000 per annum.
Lisbon, 74 miles from the mouth is the head of navigation.
At low stages a draught of 5 ft. can be carried to Point Caswell, 2½ ft. to Haws Narrows and 1½ ft. to Clear Run.
Amount expended to September 30, 1923, $38,558.95.
Shallotte River—The project is to dredge a channel 36 ft. wide and 4 ft. deep at M. L. W. from the mouth to White's Landing, 8 miles above.
The project was completed in 1914.
Shallotte, 9 miles from the mouth, is the head of navigation.
There is a tidal range of 3 ft. at Shallotte and 5 ft. at the bar.
A. M. L. W. draught of 3 ft. can be carried to White's Landing.
Expenditures to September 30, 1923, $13,945.00
Meherrin River—Project adopted in 1907. Project completed in 1908. Project dimension—Channel 7 ft. deep at M. L. W. from Murfreesboro to the mouth. Range of tide—nontidal but subject to freshet causing 3 ft. to 4 ft. variations. Expended to September 30, 1922, $12,785.64. Tonnage, calendar year 1921, $6,858. Head of navigation, Murfreesboro.
Newbegun Creek—Project adopted in 1919. Project completed in 1920. Project dimensions—Dredge channel 2654 ft. long, 40 ft. wide and 5 ft. deep at mean water level. Range of tide—nontidal. Variations
of 2 ft. from mean level produced by winds. Expended to September 30, 1922, $4,881.64. Head of navigation, Old Weeksville. Tonnage calendar year 1921, 3,823.
Edenton—No federal project. Nine feet of water available.
Elizabeth City—No federal project. Eleven feet of water available.
(8)BRIEF OF Fayetteville CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
CONCERNING A THIRD LOCK IN THE
Cape Fear River
NOTE—Presented to the Honorable Board of Engineers of the United States Army at a hearing held in Washington, D. C., on December 11th, 1923, by the Fayetteville, North Carolina Chamber of Commerce.
In preparing this brief, it is the purpose of the Fayetteville Chamber of Commerce to lay before your honorable body such facts as we have been able to gather, that would have a tendency to establish our just claim for the completion of the project of the Cape Fear River above Wilmington, North Carolina, so as to give an eight-foot, all-year-round channel to Fayetteville.
We are not calling your attention to the history of this project in detail, because we feel sure that you have full knowledge of it. We stand on our rights and the promise of Congress to supply us with an eight-foot channel to Fayetteville. (H. Doc. No. 890, 60th Cong., 1st Sess.). This project has already cost the Government something over $1,300,000 (Annual Report Engineers, 1922, Part 1, page 690), and the purpose for which this money has been expended has not yet been accomplished. We feel that our city of Fayetteville, which has steadily grown in population, is justified in seeking adequate water transportation facilities.
We wish to particularly call your attention to the commerce carried on this river in the year 1921. This commerce amounted to 61,615 tons, at a valuation of $3,111,537, and of this amount something over 90 per cent of it was shipped to and originated from points below Fayetteville. During this period there were no boats making regular trips to Fayetteville, due to insufficient water. The commerce for the year 1922 amounted to 94,230 tons, valued at $4,052,525, practically all of which passed over the improved section of the river. The principal items of commerce were poultry, eggs, groceries, cotton, timber, wood for fuel, grain, dry goods, hardware, fertilizer, fertilizer materials and general merchandise.
Fayetteville HEAD OF NAVIGATION ON THE Cape Fear River
In 1922 there was established a boat line, which continued in operation from October to the following spring. This line, although entirely inadequate, succeeded in increasing its tonnage to a considerable degree. On its first round trip it carried 10 tons of freight; on its second, 17 tons; on its third, 24 tons; on its fourth, 90 tons; on its fifth, 148 tons; on its sixth, 153 tons; and on its seventh, 187 tons, which clearly demonstrates the possibility of the growth of commerce to and from Fayetteville and her surrounding territory. In other words, the tonnage of Fayetteville and points over Lock No. 2 will mean an addition to the commerce that is at present being carried on the river.
We wish, in connection with the Cape Fear River, to call your attention to the increased tonnage on the Appomattox River from Petersburg to Norfolk, Virginia. In 1921 the tonnage on the Appomattox was 110,457 at a valuation of $171,516, consisting chiefly of sand and gravel. During this period boats were unable to get to Petersburg with any sort of a heavy load. After the development of the river, a line of boats was started, and we have been officially informed that one of the boats now carries over 800 tons of high-class merchandise per month. This tonnage is in addition to the tonnage that is still carried in sand and gravel, and the result is due to the development of the river. The project of the Cape Fear and Fayetteville is, in many respects, very similar to the project of the Appomattox and Petersburg, and we feel safe in stating that our ratio of increase will be as great, if not greater, than that of the Appomattox from Petersburg to Norfolk.
The city of Fayetteville is surrounded by one of the best agricultural sections in the country. The main crops that are produced are cotton, corn, tobacco, grain, fruit, and garden truck. About 25,000 bales of cotton are raised and marketed in Cumberland County per year in addition to the enormous quantity shipped in. Fayetteville is the logical center of a large trading section radiating over from 50 to 75 miles of territory in all directions. Fayetteville is in close proximity to large sand and gravel deposits and only a short distance from the famous Sandhills peach section of North Carolina.
There are many diversified manufacturing and industrial plants surrounding the city proper. Among some of these are cotton mills, yarn mills, sawmills, gingham mill, silk mill, box factories, turpentine refinery, cotton-seed oil mill, fertilizer plant, and many others all doing a great volume of business through the city of Fayetteville. There are over 60,000 spindles in operation in the various mills, and all of them are running at full time. The industrial section of Fayetteville has greatly increased in the last five years, and several of the larger plants have been established in that period.
The Federal Government is maintaining one of its most important military posts, Fort Bragg, within nine miles of our city. The post is connected with the city by means of a gasoline propelled trolley, which handles passengers, express, and freight. The Atlantic Coast Line Railroad
runs through the edge of the reservation with a side-track into the center of it. The State Highway Commission has authorized the construction of a hard-surfaced road from the city to the post, which will be under way early in the spring. Under the plan of dock facilities, hereinafter mentioned, the post will be linked up with the city with direct rail connection, making shipments coming by water of easy access. A very great many tons of commerce are shipped to the post, much of which can readily come by water all the way from the point of origin. Fort Bragg is also used as a training center for National Guard troops and reserve officers, thus making shipments at certain seasons of the year exceeding heavy.
The United States Geological Survey has made an extensive examination of the Deep River coal lands of North Carolina, which are adjacent to the city of Fayetteville, and this survey shows that there are available about 67,000,000 tons in the deposit. There are at present two mines operating within 40 miles of Fayetteville, with very good prospects of future extensive developments. By a short haul over the railroad to Fayetteville, and the development and opening up of adequate water transportation facilities, this product can be hauled through Fayetteville and on down the river at a minimum cost.
The country surrounding Fayetteville is heavily timbered in a great many sections, and there is available a great deal of timber that can be carried on the river, together with heavy shipments of cut and dressed lumber.
The Cape Fear River at present has several available power sites on it, and with the construction of a third lock and dam and the establishment of eight feet of water to Fayetteville the year round it will tend to increase this potential phase of the river's development. The North Carolina Geological and Economic Survey is presenting to your honorable body a supplementary brief to this one, dealing with this phase of the development, in the event of the installation of a minimum flow of eight feet the year round to Fayetteville.
Realizing the vital importance of the opening of the Cape Fear River for navigation, and desiring to do everything in its power to assist in this matter, the city of Fayetteville authorized the issuance of bonds to the amount of $75,000 for the erection and installation of proper terminal and wharf facilities, and same will be issued and work started just as soon as the city is assured of proper all-year navigation on the river.
Plans were prepared by Alsop & Pierce, a firm of engineers of Newport News, Virginia, and cover a complete outline of wharves and dock facilities, warehouse room, with a belt-line railroad and hoisting rigging, which will be located at the foot of one of the principal streets of the city.
These plans were forwarded to the War Department, which suggested certain changes, that were so made, and approved, and the city only awaits instructions from the War Department, to the effect that the
depth of the river will be made the necessary eight feet by the installation of a third lock and dam, to proceed with the issuance of the bonds and the construction of the wharves, as it would be an utter waste to erect wharves and terminals when there would be no boats plying the river to make use of them.
The labor conditions of Fayetteville and surrounding territory are excellent in every respect. There has never been any labor trouble of any sort in the history of the city. There is a very small foreign population in this section and very few floating laborers. All of the industries are working at full time and are having no labor trouble of any nature. Most of the labor population are native stock, who are settled, a great many of them having homes and places of their own.
The health and climate conditions of Fayetteville are excellent, the average yearly temperature being 58° and the mean annual precipitation about 49.2, which tends to make this section of the State an ideal one all year round.
The city of Fayetteville is well served with rail facilities, having direct connections in practically all directions. It is situated on the main line of the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad, about halfway between New York and Florida. The Atlantic Coast Line also has lines running to Wilmington, North Carolina, and Bennettsville, South Carolina. The Coast Line also has a line running from Fayetteville to Mount Airy, North Carolina, making connection with the Southern Railroad and points in the western part of the State, and with the Seaboard Air Line main line at Sanford, North Carolina. This same line taps the abovementioned coal fields just above Sanford, North Carolina, about 40 miles distant. The Norfolk Southern Railroad maintains a line from Fayetteville to Raleigh, North Carolina, where it joins the main line of that road. This road goes through a rich deposit of sand and gravel.
The Aberdeen and Rockfish Railroad runs from Fayetteville to Aberdeen, North Carolina, where it makes connection with the main line of the Seaboard Air Line from New York to Florida. The Aberdeen and Rockfish also taps the famous Sandhills fruit section of North Carolina.
In addition to the above-mentioned rail connections, there is also the trolley line that runs from Fayetteville to Fort Bragg, which makes direct connection with the post and handles freight, express, and passengers to and from the city.
The official 1910 census gave Fayetteville 7,045 people within the city limits, and a conservative estimate made by the Fayetteville Chamber of Commerce a few weeks ago places our present population close to 15,000 people. A great many of the mills of the city are just outside the city limits, and as a result they are not included in the official census, although they do all of their business directly in the city; the same being true also of a large residential section that lies just outside the limits. We feel that it is no more than right to include this population in our figures, as they are within a mile of the center of the city and do all
of their business here, there being no small separate communities right near the city proper. The greatest increase in the population of the city has taken place within the last five years, and is steadily being augmented with newcomers, almost daily, and as a result of this increase the business and industrial development of this section has become remarkable, and as a direct cause is increasing the daily shipments of commodities in and out of this section of the county.
Practically all of the largest and most important industries of Fayetteville are located within a radius of a mile and a half of the site of the proposed terminals, a fact which will tend to keep transfer charges at a minimum and will make them of easy access to a belt-line railroad. All of the other industries which are a little farther away from the proposed terminal site are easily reached by railroad connection.
Fayetteville without water transportation is entirely at the mercy of the railroads in regards to freight rates; and while this argument is by no means a plea simply to have freight rates reduced and then not take advantage of the water facilities, it is used as a means to place Fayetteville in a position to compete with other jobbing centers. Along this line we quote from the engineers’ report of 1922 with reference to the development of the Appomattox River:
“The improvement has made navigation safer and easier and has resulted in more favorable freight rates to and from Petersburg.”
The general business conditions of the city of Fayetteville and surrounding territory are excellent and steadily improving. Agricultural products are bringing, in most cases, very good prices, and there is an overwhelming amount of commodities being brought to and sent from this community. The deposits of the banks of Fayetteville alone are now over $4,000,000, and a great deal of new construction is under way.
The citizens are now building a new hotel, and several other large buildings will be started in the very near future. Fayetteville may easily be called a city of homes, as there is a great deal of home building under way at the present time. The retail merchants’ business in Fayetteville is very flourishing and a great many commodities are continually changing hands, thus creating new markets for goods to be shipped in to the community.
The development of the Cape Fear River, through canalization, so as to give a minimum depth of eight feet, furnishes a proper argument for through water and freight rail rates, which will make possible the sending out from North Carolina of a vast quantity of commodities now being exported for ports in adjoining States. These shipments should by all means pass through North Carolina water ports, and by reason of the short railroad haul to Fayetteville from other parts of the State and with the development of the river, it would mean that a great deal of this class of goods would logically come through Fayetteville. Take the matter of cotton shipments alone: Fayetteville at present has several large warehouses that handle an enormous amount of cotton every year.
Approximately 25,000 bales are being shipped for export this year alone, and practically all of this commodity could be exported direct from Fayetteville and on out through Wilmington, North Carolina, which is North Carolina's largest port. A comparison of the present rail rates tends to show that with the installation of adequate water transportation, this cotton could still be shipped cheaper by river through Wilmington, than by rail to other South Atlantic ports.
| PRESENT COTTON EXPORT RAIL RATE PER 100 POUNDS | |
| Fayetteville to Norfolk, Virginia | 62c |
| Fayetteville to Savannah, Georgia | 67c |
| Fayetteville to Charleston, South Carolina | 53c |
| Fayetteville to Wilmington, North Carolina | 44c |
In addition to cotton, there are many other North Carolina products that offer a fertile field for export, such as furniture, cotton goods, turpentine, and tar products, grain, flour, coal, lumber, ties, poles, together with a great many more too numerous to mention.
A great number of the local merchants and jobbers are buying goods on the Pacific Coast and are having them shipped through the Panama Canal to Norfolk, Virginia, and then trans-shipped by rail to Fayetteville. The government has appropriated over a half million dollars for work on the Cape Fear below Wilmington, and after the cutting of the channel through the bar and opening the river to vessels of larger draft, a great many of these vessels can come up the river without the extra cost of lighterage. Inasmuch as Wilmington after this improvement, will become the logical port of North Carolina, it will go a long way in aiding, after the establishment of eight feet of water. Some of the most well known commodities now being shipped by this route are canned goods, dried fruits, canned fish, shingles, lumber, and other materials. Such business could and would be handled economically to the benefit of the jobber and in a manner that would reflect itself in a saving to the ultimate consumer, namely the residents of North Carolina and adjacent territory.
Over $1,300,000 has been expended on the project and two of the locks and dams are completed, but Fayetteville still has only about four feet of water. In 1920 approximately $53,000 was spent in dredging the channel, but this did not alleviate the condition, as the silt and debris was washed back into the original channel. Dredging costs about $40,000 annually to keep the channel clear to the depth of three or four feet and will not serve to reach the required eight foot depth that is necessary, if boats of any capacity desire to come up the river to Fayetteville. The effect of the improvement is as follows:
“The effect of the improvement has been to permit boats drawing 5 feet to go 71 miles above Wilmington at all times, while formerly they could only go 39 miles, and to permit boats drawing 4 feet to go to Fayetteville, 115 miles above Wilmington, while formerly
boats drawing only 2 feet could go there at all times. There has been no effect on rail and water freight rates.”
In connection with this we wish to offer the following facts:
| (1) | The installation of the two completed dams has made it possible for boats to go nearly twice as far as before. If this is true it logically follows that with the completion of the other proposed lock, boats of the same and greater depth could go on up to the head of navigation. |
| (2) | The country between Wilmington and Fayetteville is sparsely settled, with no big towns located on the river. The bulk of commerce that can be carried on the river above Wilmington originates and is brought into Fayetteville, and until adequate water is provided, the commerce over this part of the river naturally will not be increased to any great degree, and as a result rail and water rates will not be affected. |
In dealing with this, the most important portion of this brief, we wish to state that in gathering the statistics quoted below, we requested the various individuals and firms supplying us with this information, to give their estimates as nearly correct as possible, and impressed upon them that we wanted these estimates to be conservative in every respect. Right along this line, we also wish to state that in every case when we requested this information it was gladly given, and everyone expressed a great readiness and willingness to do everything in their power to assist in getting this vital addition to the commercal and industrial development of this section of the country.
(a) Data Secured. In securing this data, we sent out two forms of a questionnaire (copy of which is included and marked Exhibit “A”), and also made personal investigations, receiving in every case the whole-hearted support of the shippers of the community.
(b) Estimates Based on Improved Projects. We feel that the history of past waterway development where conditions have been favorable, as in the case of the Cape Fear River, where tonnage has materially increased, is a safe record on which to base our estimates of potential future tonnage. As an example, we call attention to the growth of tonnage on the Appomattox, after the establishment of the diversion dam and the deepening of the channel. This growth in tonnage was in addition to the original shipping, and is tonnage carried clear to Petersburg, where formerly no high class merchandise was enabled to be taken up the river as far as Petersburg. In 1921 the tonnage on the river was 110,457 tons and in 1923 the tonnage was 476,360. The amount of commerce carried in 1923 was 38% higher than that carried in 1922. This growth not only served to establish water rates to Petersburg, but also had the effect of reducing the rail rate, thus effecting a saving to the consuming public.
In the case of Richmond, Virginia, the effect of the improvement has been beneficial in permitting the use of larger and deeper-draft vessels. The value of commodities handled in 1921 was $52,392,509 against $17,075,381 in 1920.
In the case of Jacksonville, Florida, the effect of the improvement has made possible the establishment of regular transportation facilities, and has resulted in the establishment of favorable water freight rates.
(c) Lumber. There are large lumber interests in Fayetteville that have large holdings of timber lands situated on the water that could be profitably brought to their plants here by water from point of origin, provided there was all year transportation. These lands are located so that the lumber could be transported without charge by water to this place. In addition to this supply, a good deal of the finished lumber can be loaded at Fayetteville and shipped to Northern Ports without change, provided boats drawing seven to eight feet of water would come up the river regularly.
(d) Commerce 1922. We are giving below a synopsis of the tonnage carried over the improved section of the Cape Fear River in the year 1922, showing classifications by classes:
| SUMMARY, 1922 | ||
| Classes of Commodities | Tons | Value |
| Animal and animal products, except wool and hair | 187 | $ 53,450 |
| Vegetable food products | 2,074 | 539,215 |
| Other vegetable products | 203 | 8,460 |
| Textiles | 653 | 446,700 |
| Wood and paper | 792 | 367,751 |
| Nonmetalic minerals | 750 | 20,213 |
| Ores, metals, and manufactures | 68 | 23,800 |
| Machinery and vehicles | 15 | 3,000 |
| Chemicals | 51,238 | 2,560,670 |
| Unclassified | 250 | 29,266 |
| Totals | 94,230 | $ 4,052,525 |
(e) Pledged Tonnage Prospective. The figures that will be quoted below will be the date that we have secured from the shippers and merchants of Fayetteville, who have expressed a desire to see the water transportation facilities of the river fully developed so that they could take advantage of same. This pledged tonnage is in addition to the commerce now carried on the river, as commodities cannot now come up to Fayetteville, on account of low water, and the business developed after the completion of the canalization will be an increase over the present commerce handled, as the bulk of the goods will have to come to Fayetteville, there being no distributing point between Fayetteville and Wilmington.
| SUMMARY PROSPECTIVE PLEDGED TONNAGE | ||
| Classes of Commodities | Tons | Value |
| Animal and animal products | 240 | $ 52,584 |
| Vegetable food products | 4,910 | 560,840 |
| Textiles and dry goods* | 2,805 | 2,884,000 |
| Wood and paper† | 49,525 | 664,000 |
| Nonmetallic minerals | 9,100 | 175,280 |
| Chemicals | 31,260 | 1,236,000 |
| Hardware and heavy hardware, including machinery | 1,575 | 100,000 |
| Unclassified: including drugs, clothing, and shoes, sugar, flour, coffee, molasses, electrical goods, and items of general merchandise | 3,260 | 465,085 |
| Totals | 103,675 | $ 6,137,789 |
| GRAND SUMMARY | ||
| GRAND SUMMARY | TONS | VALUE |
| Commerce carried on river, 1922 | 94,230 | $ 4,052,525 |
| Pledge prospective tonnage | 103,675 | 6,137,789 |
| Grand Total | 197,905 | $ 10,190,314 |
(f) Endorsements. We are including herewith letters endorsing this project, marked Exhibit “B” from the Wilmington, North Carolina Chamber of Commerce and the State of North Carolina Ship and Water Transportation Commission; both of which were unsolicited, together with the afore mentioned supplementary brief that will be handed the honorable Board by the North Carolina Geological and Economic Survey.
Conclusion. In view of the vast advantage to North Carolina as a whole; industrially, commercially, agriculturally, and economically, as well as to the adjacent surrounding section of the country, that will materialize when adequate water transportation is established on the Cape Fear River and in view of the pledged prospective tonnage that will become available as soon as transportation opens up, we, the Fayetteville Chamber of Commerce representing the business, industrial, commercial, agricultural, and professional interests of the City of Fayetteville and the State of North Carolina as a whole, as well as the consuming
public, respectfully submit to your honorable body our just claim for the completion of the Cape Fear project, through the installation of a third lock and dam, to the end that proper steps can be taken in the very near future to push this project to a successful completion, so that water transportation facilities can be enjoyed on the Cape Fear River and the consuming public of North Carolina share in the benefits so accured.
Respectfully submitted,
Fayetteville CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
R. M. HORSBURGH, Secretary.
EXHIBIT “A”
The following questionnaire is typical of the ones sent out to secure information on this subject. The name of the signers of same are held confidental, but the following is an exact replica over an authorized signature.
FORM No. D. BUSINESS AND INDUSTRIAL
(The answers as to quantity and value are to be approximated, but are wanted as nearly correct as possible.)
Character of business or industry? Cotton yarn mill.
Average wage paid common labor? $1.50 per day.
Average wage paid skilled labor? $2.50 per day.
Labor conditions as applied to your business? Good.
PROSPECTIVE TONNAGE
What proportion of your tonnage could be profitably carried by water, were the condition favorable for such shipments? 90 per cent.
Approximate value of this tonnage? $50,000 per month.
Do you at any time suffer for lack of proper transportation facilities? If so, in what way? Not since 1921—Before then embargoes often.
Would the completion of the Cape Fear River project be of material help to you in the receiving and distribution of your goods? Yes.
Provided the service is adequate and the rate fair, what tonnage will you guarantee the boat line annually, say, for a period of five years? If we could ship regularly at a fair rate, we alone could ship 1,000,000 pounds annually.
BASIC TONNAGE USED
What fuel do you use? Coal and shavings.
Approximate amount? 30 cars yearly.
Approximate value? $3.90 per ton at mine.
Where derived? Coal from Virginia and Tennessee. Shavings locally.
Cost of transportation? $3.25.
[Signed by an official of the company.]
FORM 2. FOR FARMERS AND TRUCKERS
Do you own any timber lands? Number of acres? 200.
Character of timber? Pine and hardwood.
Approximate value? $4,000.
Do you own or control any coal mines? No.
Would the completion of the Cape Fear River help you materially in the receiving and distribution of your products? Yes.
Would the completion of the Cape Fear River increase the value of your lands? Yes. If so, to what extent? $5,000.
Do you use the boat lines for transportation of your products? Yes. And to what extent? Fertilizer, 300 tons.
Provided the service is adequate and the rate fair, what tonnage will you guarantee the boat lines annually, say, for a period of five years? 500 tons down and 3,000 tons up.
Where do you market your products? Fayetteville and Cape Fear section.
Where do you buy your supplies? Fayetteville and Wilmington.
In what condition are the roads to your markets? Good.
[Signed by prominent Farmer.]
EXHIBIT “B”
Wilmington CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
Wilmington N. C.
December 3, 1923.
GENERAL LANSING H. BEACH,
Chief of Engineers,
Washington D. C.
DEAR SIR:—Facts will be presented by the Chamber of Commerce of Fayetteville, N. C., in the effort to secure favorable action upon the unfavorable report of the District Engineer at Wilmington N. C., relative to the installation of a third lock in the Cape Fear River.
This is a question which has been presented by the Chamber of Commerce of the city mentioned.
We are writing to endorse and to confirm the appeal of the Fayetteville Chamber of Commerce for action, which will justify the installation of a third lock in the Cape Fear River. The object of this improvement is to provide a channel eight feet in depth from Wilmington to Fayetteville throughout the year.
We believe that the argument is sound that the third lock should be installed so as to secure additional results from the expenditures already made for the first and second locks. We believe that the installation of the third lock will result in the development of a steady flow of commerce over the Cape Fear River from Wilmington to Fayetteville, for distribution from the latter point to interior North Carolina.
The prospective development of water transportation by the State of North Carolina we believe is an additional argument for consideration of the matter under discussion. The Ship and Water Transportation Commission of this State is now preparing a report for submission to the Governor, Council of State and the Legislature, carrying ideas, suggestions and recommendations for a more definite and more general use of waterways of North Carolina.
The installation of the third lock will be a decided benefit in our development plans and the volume of business to be generated would undoubtedly justify the expenditure.
We are submitting no facts or figures since these have been collected and collaborated by the Fayetteville Chamber of Commerce.
We sincerely trust and urge that authorizations be recommended by the Board of Engineers for the installation of the proposed third lock in the Cape Fear River.
Sincerely yours,
(Signed) LOUIS T. MOORE,
Secretary.
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
SHIP AND WATER TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
Raleigh, N. C.
Charlotte, N. C., December 3, 1923.
GENERAL LANSING H. BEACH,
Chief Board of Engineers, Washington D. C.
SIR: This Commission desires to endorse most heartily the movement among many of the good people of Eastern North Carolina, for the construction of a 3d lock in the Cape Fear River, in order that it may become navigable up to the city of Fayetteville during all seasons of the year.
This Commission has made an exhaustive study of the waterways and courses of our State, with a view to a full utilization of the same, which are so admirably adapted to shipping and the development of a largely increased commerce.
This Commission is convinced, that with the Cape Fear made thus navigable throughout the year, it will greatly facilitate transportation, enlarge and stimulate commerce through one of the very richest and most progressive sections of the State.
This Commission begs to express the hope that you will consider favorably the petition and argument for this improvement, which is soon to be presented to you and your Board.
Very respectfully,
(Signed) R. M. MILLER, JR.,
Chairman.
NORTH CAROLINA GEOLOGICAL AND ECONOMIC SURVEY
CHAPEL HILL, N. C.
December 8, 1923.
BOARD OF RIVER AND HARBOR ENGINEERS,
War Department,
Washington D. C.
GENTLEMEN:—We have been requested by the Fayetteville (N. C.) Chamber of Commerce to present to you such arguments that appeal to us in favor of the construction of a third lock and dam on the Cape Fear River below Fayetteville. Since the request was received only two days ago, our remarks below are necessarily brief, but they present our ideas based upon a study of the river and a knowledge of the territory which it serves.
In our opinion, the following arguments in favor of the construction of a third lock on the Cape Fear River should be given consideration by your Board:
1. The existing project was adopted in 1910 and called for a controlling low water depth of 8 feet to Fayetteville.
2. The report of the Chief of Engineers for 1921 states the condition of the project as 95% completed with low water depths of 7 feet from Wilmington
to Lock 1; 5 feet to Lock 2; and 2½ feet to Fayetteville. Thus there is at present a controlling low water depth at Fayetteville, and for some miles below this point of only about one-third of the project depth.
3. The primary object of the project was to make Fayetteville the head of navigation on the Cape Fear, as that city is the largest city on the river above Wilmington, is a rail point of some importance and is the point of export for a large trade from a considerable area. The actual goods exported are referred to later. The project has entirely failed to consummate its primary object, since navigation cannot be maintained with a controlling low water depth of 2½ feet.
4. Expenditures on the existing project to 1922 amounted to $1,170,261 and on previous projects on the same river prior to 1910 to $157,297, a total of $1,327,558. This expenditure has brought the project to a state of 95% completion, but has failed to bring the project depth to Fayetteville, the origin of the greatest amount of traffic on the river, notwithstanding the present condition of the river at that city. If it can be shown that additional traffic originating at Fayetteville with the provision of the project depth there would considerably increase the total traffic on the river, it would seem evident that the federal government should complete the remaining 5% of the project in order that a reasonable return in the form of increased traffic might be apparent upon the large investment already made, an investment largely impaired if the project depth is not brought to the point contemplated.
5. The necessity of the project depth as a controlling low water depth, is apparent. River traffic to be successful, must be maintained continuously. It cannot be interrupted for considerable periods by floods or by droughts, else the traffic will turn to more reliable rail routes even at greater cost.
6. Floods on the Cape Fear are of considerable magnitude, but when of sufficient intensity to prohibit navigation they last never more than three or four days. The frequency of such floods is rare, possibly three or four per year, moreover, there are at present active proposals to create impounding reservoirs on the Deep and Haw Rivers (which join to form the Cape Fear) and though these projects are for power purposes they will have an appreciable effect in modifying flood severity.
7. Droughts are of yearly occurrence and exist for considerable periods, from two to three weeks to as many months. During these periods, the controlling depth is stated to be 2½ feet at 2 for some miles below Fayetteville. Consequently the chief impediment to profitable water traffic on the Cape Fear is the present controlling low water depth. If the project depth were obtained, a river traffic could be maintained with no interruption other than the very occasional floods.
8. The fundamental requisite to obtain the project depth of 7 feet at Fayetteville is a third lock and dam below that city. To maintain this depth by dredging has been found impracticable.
9. The foregoing statements are designed to show that (a) the project adopted in 1910 calls for 7 feet controlling depth at Fayetteville; (b) that it is 95% completed without obtaining more than one-third this depth at Fayetteville; (c) that unless this depth is provided a large available traffic from Fayetteville is lost to the river; (d) that in this event the government loses any kind of adequate return upon its investment; and (e) that to provide the project depth there will be required a third lock and dam below Fayetteville.
10. It remains to be shown that (a) there is present traffic available at Fayetteville which could and would be diverted to the river if the project
depth was available and (b) that there are sources of commerce in the vicinity of Fayetteville from which traffic could be attracted to the river.
11. It is our understanding that the Chamber of Commerce of Fayetteville has presented data to your Board covering the point (a) in the above paragraph. The time at our disposal in preparing this brief is insufficient to allow us to present such data, although it is emphatically our opinion that existing traffic from and through Fayetteville would be diverted to the river did the project depth exist.
12. As to the sources of export which would probably be shipped by water from Fayetteville did the project depth exist, the State Geological and Economic Survey is prepared to present certain detailed and reliable data as follows:
a. Coal (Deep River Coal Field).
b. Tale.
c. Gravel-Lillington, largest plant in State. Large quantities exported now by rail.
d. Brick.
e. Cotton. (Great cotton raising country. Wilmington cotton export point.)
f. Lumber, etc. All bulk, non-perishable goods, ideal for water carriage and now being exported in large quantities.
13. With the rapid improvement of the State's highway system (construction based on $65,000,000 bond issue is now well under way) and the large sums being spent for county highways, it is evident that transportation of the goods mentioned in the preceeding paragraph to river terminals for transhipment is an entirely practicable matter and a procedure which would be very likely to follow the establishment of the project depth at Fayetteville.
14. The demand for additional power at and near Fayetteville has been acute during the past two years. Recently a 15,000 KW steam power station has been established on the river a short distance above Fayetteville. This station is planned, and foundations and water conduits are built, to allow of an eventual capacity of 60,000 KW. It is interconnected with the Southern Appalachian system. Should a third lock and dam be constructed below Fayetteville it is recommended that serious attention be given to equipping it with hydro-electric generating apparatus for supplying power to operate the locks and in order that the power in the river now wasted may be conserved for use either by Fayetteville directly or through interconnections with nearby transmission systems. Studies made by the Survey show that the amounts of power shown in Table 1 could be generated by an 8 foot fall below Fayetteville.
15. The North Carolina Geological and Economic Survey, on the basis of the facts presented above, requests that the Board of River and Harbor Engineers consider favorably the construction of a third lock and dam on the Cape Fear River below Fayetteville to complete the project depth of 7 feet to that city, and that a hydro-electric development be included in the project.
Respectfully submitted,
(Signed) THORNDIKE SAVILLE,
Hydraulic Engineer,
N. C. Geological and Economic Survey.
(9)
STATISTICS OF IMPROVEMENT OF RIVERS AND
HARBORS IN THE Wilmington DISTRICT
This district includes river and harbor improvements in central and eastern North Carolina from the mouth of Roanoke River, Albemarle Sound, to Little River, S. C., near the State line, embracing the watersheds of all rivers in North Carolina which empty into the sounds thereof or the Atlantic Ocean within the limits stated.
WATER FRONT OF THE PORT OF Wilmington
| COMMERCE, YEAR 1922 | |||||
| Name of River | General Commerce | Timber | Passengers | ||
| Short tons | Value | Short tons | Value | ||
| Scuppernong | 21,608 | $ 476,784 | 6,300 | $ 25,200 | 300 |
| Manteo Bay | 12,998 | 1,140,000 | 12,000 | ||
| Swan Quarter and Deep Bay | 4,116 | 322,579 | 500 | ||
| Pamlico and Tar | 131,961 | 4,364,376 | 56,802 | 227,208 | 7,000 |
| South River | 8,896 | 334,342 | 8,025 | 32,100 | 600 |
| Bay River | 6,522 | 340,372 | 2,850 | 11,400 | 400 |
| Neuse | 217,296 | 6,142,992 | 59,843 | 239,372 | 5,000 |
| Smiths Creek | 21,895 | 223,172 | 660 | 2,640 | 800 |
| Swift Creek | 3,182 | 112,916 | 14,028 | 56,112 | |
| Contentnea Creek | 1,120 | 39,200 | |||
| Trent | 12,150 | 381,348 | 34,839 | 139,356 | 200 |
| Beaufort to Morehead harbors | |||||
| Thoroughfare Bay | 6,741 | 81,425 | |||
| Beaufort | 27,700 | 1,180,017 | 6,045 | 24,180 | *12,000 |
| Core Sound | 20,026 | 1,200,711 | 3,462 | 13,848 | 10,000 |
| Beaufort and Jacksonville | 47,964 | 1,124,007 | 36,703 | 142,812 | 15,000 |
| Morehead City | 10,348 | 1,048,698 | 1,560 | 6,240 | 12,000 |
| Beaufort Inlet | 45,911 | 896,998 | |||
| Wilmington | 667,540 | 57,251,120 | 47,321 | 373,796 | *18,722 |
| Cape Fear River above Wilmington | 64,552 | 3,844,709 | 29,688 | 207,816 | 1,529 |
| Northeast | 105,916 | 4,437,667 | 8,141 | 81,410 | 600 |
| Black | 3,180 | 417,405 | 3,450 | 24,150 | 375 |
| Shallotte | 4,112 | 335,530 | 1,500 | 10,500 | |
| Totals | 1,445,734 | $79,696,871 | 321,197 | $1,617,870 | *97,026 |
| Tons | Value | ||
| *CARGOES IN TRANSIT 1922 | Beaufort | 69,766 | $ 2,094,976 |
| Wilmington | 63,910 | 7,772,150 | |
| Totals | 133,676 | $ 9,867,126 | |
| Total tons | 1,766,931 | ||
| Total value | $81,314,741 |
| FINANCIAL SUMMARY Amounts expended on all projects in the District to June 30, 1923, after deducting receipts from sales, etc. as shown. | |||||
| Group A | Sales Deducted | New Work Nearest Dollar | Maintenance Nearest Dollar | Total Net Expended | Total Appropriation |
| Scuppernong | $ 4,035 | $ 42,675 | $ 13,061 | $ 55,738 | $ 81,110 |
| Manteo Bay | 74 | 10,503 | 13,247 | 23,750 | 23,750 |
| Swan Quarter | 1,000 | 8,551 | 9,114 | 17,665 | 17,665 |
| Pamlico and Tar | 1,471 | 301,681 | 95,200 | 396,881 | 416,664 |
| Fishing Creek | 22,715 | 8,633 | 31,348 | 31,348 | |
| South River | 12,452 | 3,548 | 16,000 | 16,000 | |
| Bay River | 22,730 | 4,170 | 26,900 | 26,900 | |
| Neuse | 1,500 | 369,399 | 111,980 | 481,379 | 496,750 |
| Smith's Creek | 14,472 | 254 | 14,726 | 14,726 | |
| Swift Creek | 1,600 | 3,099 | 4,699 | 5,700 | |
| Contentnea | 1,019 | 64,395 | 26,245 | 90,640 | 91,300 |
| Trent River | 2,495 | 110,317 | 43,231 | 153,548 | 155,652 |
| Total Group A | $ 11,592 | $ 981,491 | $ 331,783 | $1,313,274 | $ 1,377,565 |
| Group B | |||||
| Thoroughfare Bay | $ | $ 12,000 | $ | $ | $ 12,000 |
| Beaufort | 5,512 | 197,742 | 106,224 | 303,966 | 330,376 |
| Core Sound | 1,202 | 20,000 | 12,854 | 32,854 | 64,600 |
| Beaufort and Jacksonville | 16,910 | 198,707 | 92,752 | 291,459 | 304,221 |
| Morehead City | 1 | 20,292 | 13,608 | 33,900 | 33,900 |
| Beaufort Inlet | 44,484 | 79,324 | 123,808 | 123,812 | |
| Total Group B | $ 23,625 | $ 493,225 | $ 304,762 | $ 797,987 | $ 868,910 |
| FINANCIAL SUMMARY—(Continued) | |||||
| Group C | Sales Deducted | New Work Nearest Dollar | Maintenance Nearest Dollar | Total Net Expended | Total Appropriation |
| Northeast, Black and Cape Fear | $ 153,980 | $5,128,272 | $2,140,658 | $7,268,930 | $ 7,474,794 |
| Cape Fear (above Wilmington) | 48,161 | 1,248,202 | 82,639 | 1,330,840 | 1,382,432 |
| Northeast | 244 | 10,688 | 36,597 | 47,285 | 55,200 |
| Black River | 1,156 | 12,358 | 25,585 | 37,943 | 43,800 |
| Total Group C | $ 203,541 | $6,399,520 | $2,285,479 | $ 8,684,999 | $ 8,956,226 |
| RECAPITULATION | |||||
| TOTALS: | |||||
| Group A | $ 11,592 | $ 981,491 | $ 331,783 | $1,313,274 | $ 1,377,565 |
| Group B | 23,625 | 493,225 | 304,762 | 797,987 | 868,910 |
| Group C | 203,341 | 6,399,520 | 2,285,479 | 8,684,999 | 8,956,226 |
| Total Groups A, B, C | $ 238,758 | $7,874,236 | $2,922,024 | $10,796,260 | $11,202,701 |
| Shallotte River | $ | $ 11,408 | $ 2,537 | $ 13,945 | $ 13,945 |
| Harbor of Refuge, Cape Lookout | 1,363,798 | 24,824 | 1,388,623 | 1,400,000 | |
| Totals | $ 238,758 | $9,249,443 | $2,949,385 | $12,198,828 | $12,615,646 |
(10)
COST AND OPERATION OF BOATS
(ABSTRACT OF COMMISSIONER WALLACE'S REPORT)
As chairman of the committee to ascertain the approximate cost of boats, and the cost of operating the same, I beg leave to submit the following report:
BOATS DESIGNED FOR FREIGHTING PURPOSES ONINLAND WATERS
Boats designed for freighting purposes on Inland Waters at a maximum draft of 10 feet of water, must necessarily be of the “Round Bottom Boat” type, with very little dead rise.
This boat is able to carry considerable tonnage in shallow water. From a personal investigation in one ship yard which has been in operation for more than 40 years, and from correspondence with four large ship builders, the following facts were ascertained:
Cost of building and operating 300 ton freight boat:This size boat, equipped with Deisel engine costs about $248 per ton to build and equip. The builders’ estimates varied from $170 to $400 per ton. The cost of operating this size boat on crude oil costing 6c per gallon, and lubricating oil at 50c per gallon, would be $1.30 per hour. The cost of the crew, consisting of captain, mate, two engineers, cook and three deck hands would be $645 per month. Cost of provisions would be about $120 to $160 per month.
Cost of building and operating 500 ton freight boat:This size boat equipped with Deisel engine costs about $208 per ton to build and equip. The builders’ estimates vary from $120 to $350 per ton. The cost of operating this size boat on crude oil at 6c a gallon, and lubricating oil at 50c per gallon would be about $2.05 per hour. The cost of the crew, consisting of captain, mate, two engineers, cook and four deck hands, $685 per month. Cost of provisions would be from $135 to $180 per month.
Cost of building and operating 1000 ton freight boat:This size boat equipped with Deisel engine costs about $150 per ton to build and equip. The builders’ estimates vary from $115 to $200 per ton. The cost of operating this size boat on crude oil at 6c per gallon, lubricating oil at 50c per gallon, would be about $3.10 per hour. Cost of crew consisting of captain, mate, two engineers, cook and five deck hands will be $725 per month. Cost of provisions would be from $150 to $200 per month.
The builders’ estimates varied so much that a fair average was taken. The Deisel type of engine is coming more and more into use, and is looked upon as being the most economical power for boats. Besides this advantage there is considerable saving in tonnage capacity over the boiler and engine method of providing power. As there are so many types of boats and the ideas of builders so varied, it is rather difficult to say which is the best.
It is impossible to determine the cost per ton mile of hauling freight since it depends largely on the actual amount of freight handled. It is clear from the above statement, however, that the larger the boat, the lower the cost per ton of handling freight; provided, the full capacity of the boat is utilized. The size of the boat is therefore to be carefully adjusted to the probable volume of freight offered for transportation.
OCEAN-GOING BOATS FOR COASTWISE SHIPPINGThe following facts have been obtained with reference to cost of securing and operating coastwise steamships:
A conference with both the sales and allocation departments of the Emergency Fleet Corporation brought the information that the government had discontinued its policy of leasing ships since the practice had been found both unsatisfactory and unprofitable.
I am of the opinion, however, that a bona fide offer by the State of North Carolina for the leasing of these ships would be favorably considered. The cash price for ships suitable for this service ranging from 2,800 to 4,200 tons has been fixed at $75,000 each. The same ships could be bought on a time price of $76,000 each—the exact terms to be agreed upon at the time of purchase.
The estimated cost of operating such ships ranges from $245 to $275 per day.
One of the largest coastwise steamship lines has submitted the following facts, ascertained from the actual operation of two coastwise ships, each of 2,500 dead weight tons: Cost of operation per day based on 24 hours service was $250, which included only the actual operating expenses.
The cost of terminals per month at three ports was $5,000. The cost of repairs for the two ships averaged about $5,000 per month.
The overhead expenses involved in the operation of these two ships averaged $6,500 per month.
Interest on the investment and insurance on the property should be added to the above. This type of ship carries a total crew of 27 to 30 men, and has a speed of about 7½ to 8 miles per hour.
(11)
DEPTH OF WATER IN Cape Fear BASIN; DRAFT
OF VESSELS ENGAGED IN OCEAN SHIPPING
One of the important considerations in the development of an ocean port in the Cape Fear Basin is whether there is sufficient depth of water now available or now in prospect to accommodate the types of vessels most commonly used in ocean shipping. The present depth over the bar at Southport and extending up to Wilmington is 26 feet at mean low water. A project to deepen this channel to 30 feet is now being considered by the Board of Engineers of the War Department, with good reason to believe that it will be approved and pushed to completion in case the State undertakes to develop commerce through this harbor.
With this information in mind, the following fact concerning the draft of vessels is of interest. Out of 14,513 vessels listed in Lloyd's Register for 1918-’19, 81.45 per cent had drafts of 25 feet or less, and 99.32 per cent have drafts of 30 feet or less.
Since trade through the Panama Canal is one of the elements to be considered, the vessels using it should be able to enter any port on the South Atlantic seaboard which hopes to develop to any great extent. The canal has a depth of 41 feet but only 17 vessels out of a total of 603 passing through the canal from the leading Atlantic and Gulf ports had a draft of 30 feet or over. This is less than 3%. Over 60% had a draft of less than 25 feet. Of the 118 vessels carrying general cargo from European ports through the Canal during a recent year not one exceeded 30 feet draft. During the last eight years 30,939 vessels passed through the Suez Canal. Of these only 3.3% had a draft exceeding 27 feet. Of the deep draft vessels, which include all those over 27 feet draft, entering the port of New York in 1918, less than one-fourth had a draft of over 30 feet. The tendency too is toward vessels of from 25 to 30 feet draft, clearly indicating that this is the most profitable type of commercial cargo vessel.
(12)STATISTICS OF NORTH CAROLINA TRADE AND
INDUSTRY
| PROGRESS IN MANUFACTURING IN NORTH CAROLINA FROM 1904 TO 1919 (15 Years) | ||||
| Year | Capital* | Cost of Materials | Value of Products | Value added by Manufacture |
| 1904 | $ 141,000,639 | $ 79,268,004 | $ 142,520,776 | $ 63,252,772 |
| 1909 | 217,185,588 | 121,861,530 | 216,656,055 | 94,794,525 |
| 1914 | 253,841,808 | 169,941,971 | 289,411,987 | 119,470,016 |
| 1919 | 669,144,096 | 526,906,181 | 943,807,949 | 416,901,768 |
| RANK OF SOUTHERN STATES IN MANUFACTURES, 1919 | |||
| State | Cost of Material | Value of Products | Value added by Manufacture |
| North Carolina | $ 526,906,181 | $ 943,807,949 | $ 416,901,768 |
| Virginia | 371,540,833 | 643,511,621 | 271,970,788 |
| South Carolina | 227,986,384 | 381,452,984 | 153,466,600 |
| Tennessee | 344,766,730 | 556,253,162 | 211,486,432 |
| Georgia | 440,490,057 | 693,237,096 | 252,747,039 |
| Alabama | 300,664,290 | 492,730,895 | 192,066,605 |
| 1. | Number of establishments with $1,000,000 Capital or over increased in 5 years between 1914 and 1919 from 32 to 144, or 4 times. |
| 2. | Cotton manufactures constituted ⅓ total value of products. Tobacco manufactures constituted ¼ total value of products. |
| 3. | Leading industries in value of products—Cotton, tobacco, lumber and timber products, cotton seed oil and cake, knit goods, furniture. |
| PREDOMINANT INDUSTRIES IN NORTH CAROLINA ACCORDING TO VALUE OF PRODUCTS, 1919 | |
| Agricultural crops | $503,229,000 |
| Cotton goods | 318,368,000 |
| Tobacco manufactures | 259,824,000 |
| Furniture, lumber and timber products | 84,653,000 |
| Cotton seed oil and cake | 46,995,000 |
| Live-stock products | 35,860,000 |
| Knit Goods | 29,834,000 |
| CHIEF SOURCES OF GOODS SHIPPED INTO NORTH CAROLINA | |
| Commodity | Source of Supply |
| Agricultural implements | Illinois, Wisconsin |
| Automobiles | Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, New York |
| Books | New York, Illinois |
| Brick and tile | Ohio, Pennsylvania |
| Canned goods | California, New York |
| Cement | Pennsylvania |
| Citrus fruit | Florida, California |
| Electrical machinery | New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio |
| Flour | Minnesota, Illinois |
| Hardware | Connecticut, New York, Illinois, Ohio |
| Iron, steel | Pennsylvania, Ohio |
| Knit goods | Pennsylvania, New York |
| Leather | Pennsylvania, Massachusetts |
| Lime | Pennsylvania, Ohio |
| Lumber | Tropics, Pacific Coast |
| Meats | Illinois, Kansas |
| Paints | New York, Illinois, Ohio, Pennsylvania |
| Paper | New York, Maine, Massachusetts, Wisconsin |
| Petroleum | New Jersey, California, Oklahoma |
| Pottery | Ohio, New Jersey |
| Sewing machines | Illinois |
| Shirts | New York |
| Shoes | Massachusetts, Missouri, New York, Virginia |
| Steam fittings and furnaces | Illinois, Pennsylvania, New York, Ohio |
| Stone and marble | Indiana, Vermont, Pennsylvania, New York |
| Sugar | New York, Pennsylvania |
| Tires | Ohio (over half of all manufactured) |
| Tools | Ohio, Massachusetts |
| Woolens and worsteds | Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, New Jersey |
| DENSITY OF POPULATION IN THE TIDE-WATER COUNTIES AS COMPARED WITH THE DENSITY OF THE STATE AS A WHOLE (Only land area considered) | |||
| County | Land area in square miles | Population | |
| Total | Per square mile | ||
| Beaufort | 840 | 31,024 | 36.9 |
| Bertie | 703 | 23,993 | 34.1 |
| Bladen | 976 | 19,761 | 20.2 |
| Brunswick | 790 | 14,876 | 18.8 |
| Camden | 220 | 5,382 | 24.5 |
| Carteret | 573 | 15,384 | 26.8 |
| Chowan | 165 | 10,649 | 64.5 |
| Columbus | 933 | 30,124 | 32.3 |
| Craven | 660 | 29,048 | 44.0 |
| Cumberland | 670 | 35,064 | 52.3 |
| Currituck | 292 | 7,268 | 24.9 |
| Dare | 377 | 5,115 | 13.6 |
| Edgecombe | 509 | 37,995 | 74.6 |
| Gates | 359 | 10,537 | 29.4 |
| Halifax | 676 | 43,766 | 64.7 |
| Hertford | 341 | 16,294 | 47.8 |
| Hyde | 617 | 8,386 | 13.6 |
| Jones | 417 | 9,912 | 23.8 |
| Martin | 438 | 20,828 | 47.6 |
| New Hanover | 216 | 40,620 | 188.1 |
| Onslow | 743 | 14,703 | 19.8 |
| Pamlico | 350 | 9,060 | 25.9 |
| Pasquotank | 223 | 17,670 | 79.2 |
| Pender | 815 | 14,788 | 18.1 |
| Perquimans | 252 | 11,137 | 44.2 |
| Pitt | 627 | 45,569 | 72.7 |
| Tyrrell | 390 | 4,849 | 12.4 |
| Washington | 327 | 11,429 | 35.0 |
| Total | 14,497 | 545,231 | 37.6 |
| Rest of State | 34,243 | 2,013,892 | 58.8 |
| ESTIMATED CONSUMPTION OF COAL IN NORTH CAROLINA IN 1922 | |
| Tons | |
| Short-line railways | 22,000 |
| Light and power plants | 245,000 |
| Gas plants | 28,000 |
| Water-works | 30,000 |
| Ice plants | 85,000 |
| Hospitals (not including Government owned and operated institutions) | 11,000 |
| Municipal governments (including county homes) | 14,000 |
| City schools | 25,000 |
| County schools | 10,000 |
| Steam laundries | 26,000 |
| Domestic consumption (based on applications by retail dealers) | 510,000 |
| Manufacturers of food and medicine | 10,000 |
| Cotton seed oil mills | 78,000 |
| Cotton mills | 1,250,000 |
| Tanneries | 78,000 |
| Lumber manufacturing | 50,000 |
| Brick plants | 130,000 |
| Aluminum manufacturing plants | 32,000 |
| State institutions | 32,000 |
| State Highway projects that are now under construction or contracted for | 30,000 |
| Miscellaneous (including all classes of consumers not mentioned above) | 25,000 |
| Total | 2,721,000 |
NOTE—Sufficient information was not obtainable to determine estimate annual consumption in tobacco manufacturing, tobacco redrying, and furniture manufacturing industries, to list separately. No information whatsoever could be obtained from sixteen counties. The difference between the above named total and the total of the county list represents cotton mill consumption; the estimate of 1,250,000 tons being based upon conservative estimates furnished by North Carolina Cotton Manufacturers Association, while a large portion of the cotton mills did not file application with the North Carolina Coal Committee, such applications being the main source of information in compiling statement showing estimated total consumption of each county.
PART IIIRAILWAY DISCRIMINATIONS AGAINST
NORTH CAROLINA
RAILWAY DISCRIMINATIONS AGAINST NORTH
CAROLINA
| 1. | Introduction |
| 2. | Specific Cases. |
| 3. | Comparison of Rates from New York to Interior, etc. |
| 4. | Comparison of Rates from Chicago to Interior, etc. |
| 5. | Comparative Statement showing Rates on Important Commodities in Car Load Lots from Chicago, Detroit, etc. |
| 6. | Present Discriminations about to be Increased. |
| 7. | The Burden of Freight Rates. |
| 8. | Earnings of leading Railways serving North Carolina. |
| 9. | History of the Cape Fear and Yadkin Valley Railway. |
CAROLINA
(1)
INTRODUCTION
Discrimination in rates and quality of service may be as great an evil in a transportation system as no transportation at all. In fact, such a condition may actually be worse, for a community without facilities for getting commodities to and from markets will develop a local self-sufficiency characterized by reasonable comfort and strong self-reliance, while one which has been provided with a transportation system develops a specialized industrial life, which is absolutely dependent upon getting its products to market and its supplies from market. If it is unable to do so upon terms as favorable as other communities with which it is forced to compete, its industries will be paralyzed and its trade will stagnate. Exceptional natural advantages or the vigor and initiative of its citizens may postpone this outcome for a while, but eventually the disaster befalls.
North Carolina has suffered from discriminations of every type since railway transportation became the dominant vehicle of trade. This has been partly due to her own failure to utilize the weapons which compel fair treatment, and partly due to the crafty throttling by the railways of such efforts as she did make to free herself from railway bondage.
In the following pages will be found brief descriptions of these discriminations.
In considering these injustices it should be borne in mind: First, that North Carolina is the greatest tonnage producer in the South; Second, that railroads will use every power at their command to secure the longest possible haul over their own lines; Third, that owing to the cheapness of water transportation, they will resort to desperate measures to prevent its interfering with their traffic.
(2)SPECIFIC CASES
(A few instances of unjust charges have been selected and presented below, as an introduction to some tables which indicate the general condition. The facts were supplied by traffic managers of various Chambers of Commerce, and are by no means exhaustive.)
CASE NO. IIn this instance there were two car loads of freight consisting of school furniture, such as desks and tables. The total weight of the
two cars was 74,500 pounds. They were shipped from Morristown, Tennessee to Raleigh, N. C., direct via the Southern Railway. The charges assessed against these two cars was $599.10. If the identical cars had been shipped from Morristown to Norfolk, Virginia, over the same railway, the freight would have been $353.88. This is $245.22 less, and for a haul which is 177 miles longer. The case is even more glaring when it is stated that the cars moving to Norfolk from Morristown are usually routed through Raleigh, via Selma to Norfolk. The freight to Raleigh is 69% greater than to Norfolk, although it is the shorter distance. The discrimination in this case illustrates the discrimination existing against a large portion of North Carolina. This condition has made it impossible to develop any great distributing business in school furniture in North Carolina, and has imposed a heavy toll on the effort to provide better equipment for our schools.
It may be added that a car load of book cases and combination desks can be shipped from Morristown, Tennessee, to Boston, Massachusetts, for less than it can be shipped to the central part of North Carolina, although it would move through North Carolina on its way to Boston.
CASE NO. IIA car load of automobiles leaves Detroit, Michigan, for Norfolk, Virginia, and at the same time a car load of automobiles leaves Detroit for Raleigh, North Carolina. The Norfolk dealer has to pay only $119 freight charges on his shipment, while the Raleigh dealer has to pay $189. The distance from Detroit to Norfolk is 60 miles greater than the distance from Detroit to Raleigh.
CASE NO. IIIA car load of cotton starting from either Norfolk, Petersburg, Portsmouth or Richmond, Virginia, destined for Augusta, Georgia, will pass through the entire State of North Carolina at a rate 12½c less than the rate from the same points to Raleigh, North Carolina.
The rate for the same car load of cotton starting from Baltimore, going on through North Carolina to Augusta, Georgia, a much longer distance, would be 13½ cents less than the rate from Baltimore to Raleigh, North Carolina.
CASE NO. IVMr. Brown is a wholesale grocer, located in Norfolk, Virginia. Mr. Smith is a wholesale grocer, located in Raleigh, North Carolina. Both Mr. Brown and Mr. Smith purchased a car load of canned goods in Cincinnati, Ohio. One car of canned goods goes to Norfolk, Virginia; and the other to Raleigh, North Carolina. Each of these merchants has a customer in Durham North Carolina. Durham is 26 miles
from Raleigh. Mr. Brown of Virginia ships his customer in Durham 10 cases of canned goods. Mr. Smith of Raleigh does likewise. But Mr. Smith's customer has to pay 1c per hundred pounds more for transportation costs than does Mr. Brown's customer, which fact puts the North Carolina wholesaler at a disadvantage in competition with the Virginia wholesaler even in dealing with merchants only 26 miles away.
CASE NO. VThis is a case involving fertilizer materials, canned goods, sugar, bagging and cotton ties received at Wilmington by boat, and shipped by dealers there from waterfront warehouses or ship-side. The railroads by arbitrarily applying the maximum interstate rate on shipments to points in North Carolina succeeded in lifting the rate to a point which discriminated against Wilmington in favor of Charleston, South Carolina, and Norfolk, Virginia. Mr. J. G. McCormick of Wilmington cited the following case in a brief which he presented to the Corporation Commission: “The rate charged on fertilizer materials from Wilmington to Ellerbe, North Carolina, was $5.36 per ton, while the rate from Charleston, South Carolina, was $3.94, and from Norfolk, $4.39; the distance in both cases being greater than from Wilmington. This not only discouraged the development of business in Wilmington but since the rate should have been lower from there than from either of the other points, placed an extra burden on the farmers. The State Corporation Commission has ordered the railroads to desist and apply the intrastate rates which are lower. It remains to be seen whether the railroads will appeal to the Interstate Commerce Commission.*
CASE NO. VIKeystone, West Virginia, is a representative coal shipping point in the Pocahontas field on the Norfolk and Western Railway. The rate on coal per ton to Petersburg, Virginia, a distance of 305 miles from Keystone is $2.65, while the rate to Winston-Salem, North Carolina, a distance of 252 miles, is $3.09. Both of the cities are on the Norfolk and Western lines. This means that for a 53 mile shorter haul a penalty of $22.00 is imposed on every car of coal consumed in Winston-Salem. Probably 5,000 cars is a low estimate of the amount of coal annually consumed in that city. So a burden of over $100,000 per year is its reward for its greater nearness to the coal fields.
The rate to Durham, 299 miles from Keystone, and also on the Norfolk and Western, is $3.20 per ton. Incidentally, it may be stated that there is no coal rate published in connection with the old Cape
* NOTE—As this report goes to press the Atlantic Coast Line and Seaboard Air Line Railways have secured a restraining order against the North Carolina Corporation Commission forbidding the enforcement of this order.Fear and Yadkin Valley line to Wilmington, which is the shortest route to that port.
Comparing the coal rates from another district, we find that coal is shipped from Dante, Virginia, on the Carolina, Clinchfield and Ohio Railway to Charleston, South Carolina, for domestic use for $2.82 per ton, and for bunkering ships, for $2.52 per ton. The rate to Wilmington from the same mine and by a more direct route over the Seaboard Air Line via Bostic, is $2.93 for domestic use, and $2.67 for bunker purposes.
CASE No. VIIOn glass bottles from the glass manufacturing area of West Virginia to Alta Vista, Virginia, the rate is 34c per 100 pounds for a distance of 616 miles; whereas, for an 88 mile additional haul to Greensboro, North Carolina, an additional charge of 28c is made. This means that a manufacturer or dairyman in that city has to pay $84 a car in excess of Virginia cities, or 82% more freight for 14% greater distance, and over a section or railroad earning the greatest gross and net revenue of any railroad south of the Potomac River.
CASE No. VIIIOn agricultural implements in carload lots shipped from Detroit, Michigan to Virginia cities like Lynchburg, Petersburg, Richmond and Norfolk, with an average distance of 695 miles from Detroit, the rate is 41 cents per hundred. If a car of this same necessary farm equipment were sent to such North Carolina cities as Winston-Salem, Greensboro, Durham, Raleigh, and Wilson with an average additional distance of 85 miles, an extra charge of 46½ cents per hundred would be made; in other words, for less than a 12½% greater distance, the charge is more than doubled; and this, too, over north and south trunk lines which have a greater density of traffic than the Virginia trunk lines, over which this traffic moves from the Ohio River eastward to the Virginia cities.
CASE No. IXThe rate on cast iron pipe from the Birmingham-Anniston, Alabama group to Raleigh, North Carolina, is $7.70 per ton of 2,000 pounds, while the contemporaneous rate from the same producing points through Raleigh and other points in North Carolina to the Virginia cities is $4.95.
CASE No. XMerchants in Greensboro, North Carolina, and South Boston, Virginia, ordering shoes from a wholesaler in New York City, and routing in connection with the steamers to Norfolk and rail lines beyond, are in this position: The Greensboro shipment after arriving at Norfolk is handled 267 miles by the Southern Railway, and is charged at a rate
of $1.26 per 100; the shipment to the merchant at South Boston is handled by the Norfolk and Western from Norfolk to South Boston, a distance of 267 miles, at a rate of only 91c per 100—a difference of 35c per 100 pounds in favor of the Virginia merchant.
It might be said that this is an exception. Let us take the same articles from the same destination and we find that to Rocky Mount, Virginia, a distance of 284 miles from Norfolk, the rate charged is $1.16 against $1.25 to Greensboro.
Roanoke, Virginia, is a point comparable to Greensboro, and we find that from New York, for a distance of 257 miles from Norfolk, the merchant pays on shoes at the rate of $1.14 per 100 against $1.26 to Greensboro.
CASE No. XIOn nails in car lots from Pittsburgh to Lynchburg, 36,000 pounds car load minimum, we find a rate of 33½c per 100 in Pa. Tariff Go. I. C. C. 13279 for a haul of 543 miles; whereas, the rate on the same commodity to Greensboro is 48c per 100 pounds as carried in Cottrell's I. C. C. 426; or for 112 miles additional haul there is added a 14½c charge which is seemingly out of proportion to the rate up to Lynchburg. It amounts to an increase of 43% in the rate for an increase in distance of slightly less than 20%, and over a line of great traffic density.
(3)COMPARISON OF RATES FROM NEW YORK TO INTERIOR NORTH
CAROLINA POINTS VIA NORFOLK AND WILLMINGTON
(In analyzing this table is should be borne in mind that the same rates are granted through Richmond as through Norfolk. Richmond, on the James River, has a depth of 18 feet, while Wilmington has 26 feet, and yet Richmond gets all the benefits of through water and rail rates to North Carolina points. This Commission requested the North Carolina Corporation Commission to institute proceedings before the Interstate Commerce Commission to compel the railroads to establish a through rate from New York via Wilmington to interior North Carolina points lower than the combination of separate water and rail rates. The railroads have willingly done this for Richmond, Norfolk, and Charleston, but stubbornly refuse to do so for Wilmington. It may be said that Wilmington is a greater distance from New York than Norfolk, but in rate making one mile of rail haul is considered equivalent to three miles of water haul. It is interesting to note, too, that the rate through Charleston, which is a greater distance beyond Norfolk than Wilmington, is the same as the Norfolk rate to points in western North Carolina. In other words, New York goods can flow into North Carolina from all ports except our own, even though they may be a greater distance from New York than our own port. Such an able presentation of this unfair treatment was made by our Corporation Commission in the case mentioned above, that it is printed in full following the table of rate comparisons.)
| RATES FROM NEW YORK | ||||||||
| To— | Distance from Norfolk (Miles) | RATE VIA Norfolk | Distance from Wilmington (Miles) | RATE* VIA Wilmington | ||||
| First Class | Fifth Class | Sixth Class | First Class | Fifth Class | Sixth Class | |||
| Goldsboro | 155 | 126 | 59½ | 51½ | 84 | 156½ | 70½ | 57½ |
| New Bern | 170 | 126 | 59½ | 51½ | 87 | 146½ | 66 | 54½ |
| Wilson | 131 | 126 | 59½ | 51½ | 108 | 163 | 72 | 58 |
| Raleigh | 174 | 126 | 59½ | 51½ | 133 | 167½ | 75 | 58 |
| Greensboro | 228 | 126 | 59½ | 51½ | 181 | 179 | 80½ | 62½ |
| Winston-Salem | 256 | 126 | 59½ | 51½ | 209 | 189 | 85 | 67 |
| Fayetteville | 205 | 137 | 65 | 56 | 84 | 135½ | 61 | 47 |
| Hamlet | 258 | 137 | 65 | 56 | 111 | 163 | 69½ | 61½ |
| Sanford | 216 | 137 | 65 | 56 | 119 | 163 | 74 | 60 |
| Charlotte | 322 | 137 | 65 | 56 | 187 | 180½ | 82 | 64 |
| Statesville | 303 | 137 | 65 | 56 | 223 | 189 | 88 | 68½ |
| Lumberton | 256 | 148½ | 77½ | 64 | 67 | 152 | 65½ | 57½ |
| Gastonia | 363 | 148½ | 77½ | 64 | 209 | 183½ | 83½ | 66 |
| Asheville | 419 | 159½ | 83 | 69½ | 338 | 211½ | 97 | 77½ |
BEFORE THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION
DOCKET No. 15399
| CORPORATION COMMISSION OF NORTH CAROLINA | Brief of Complainant. |
| v. | |
| ABERDEEN AND ROCKFISH RAILROAD COMPANY, et al. |
The issues presented in this case are confined to through water and rail rates between the Port of New York and interior points in the State of North Carolina through the Port of Wilmington. The issues presented are simple and are not deemed to require elaborate argument.
Complaint in this proceeding is by the Corporation Commission of the State of North Carolina, and is brought at request of the North Carolina Ship and Water Transportation Commission, which commission was created under an act of the General Assembly of North Carolina of 1923, by appointment by the Governor, and was created and charged with the responsibility of making a general investigation and recommendations with respect to terminal and port facilities at the several ports in this State and with respect to steamship service to and from such ports. The complaint is supported by Chambers of Commerce of important cities in the State, traffic organizations representing numerous shippers in the State, and is also supported by the Chamber of Commerce of the city of Wilmington. It is well understood by distributors in the city of Wilmington that some advantage accrues to jobbing interests located in the city of Wilmington in the existing rate structure which this complaint is intended to correct, in that it gives to distributors in the city of Wilmington an advantage in the distribution of commerce in the territory contiguous to the city of Wilmington, as against the higher through rates applying through the Port of Norfolk; but, in taking the broader view that there ought to be a more extensive development of commerce through the Wilmington port, such business interests located in the city of Wilmington are giving their support to the complaint in this proceeding to establish a system of reasonable through rates between the Port of New York and such interior points in the State of North Carolina through the port of Wilmington.
GENERAL PURPOSE OF COMPLAINTThe general purpose of this complaint was stated by complainant's witness, W. G. Womble, as follows:
“The general purpose of this complaint is to have the Clyde Steamship Company, in connection with the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company and the Seaboard Air Line Railroad Company, and their connecting lines in North Carolina, join in making reasonable through water and rail class and commodity rates between New York and points in North Carolina, and particularly to such points in North Carolina as are located nearer to the port of Wilmington than to the port of Norfolk, and with a view of giving to such points as are entitled to an equality of rates via either of these ports the opportunity of using either of these routes, and more particularly to provide such a system of through rates between New York and such points in North Carolina as are
nearer to the port of Wilmington than to the port of Norfolk as will give to such points the benefit of their proximity to the port of Wilmington, and such through rates as will give to such points the benefit of the shorter rail haul on shipments moving through the port of Wilmington” (p. 28).
PHYSICAL CONDITION OF Wilmington PORTThe Clyde Steamship Company has for many years maintained regular schedule service between New York and Wilmington. It owns ample terminal facilities on the water front in the city of Wilmington with 175 feet frontage with a large warehouse, and has direct connection with the belt line operating on Water Street in the city of Wilmington, and serving both the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company and the Seaboard Air Line Railway Company. Both the Atlantic Coast Line and the Seaboard Air Line own extensive water-front properties in the city of Wilmington, the Atlantic Coast Line having one wharf with 980 feet frontage and one with 133 feet frontage (p. 16). It has a slip 62 feet wide contained in one general freight wharf with 144 feet frontage, one coal dock with 60 feet frontage, and one haul dock having 175 feet frontage. These wharves are equipped with modern conveniences for handling traffic. (Witness J. J. Burney, reading from report upon importance of rivers and harbors of the Wilmington district, prepared by the Engineering Department of the United States government, 1923.) There are adequate and convenient facilities for interchange of traffic between the Clyde Line and the rail lines at the Wilmington port; and, as the testimony shows, through rates were for many years maintained by the Clyde Line and the rail lines operating to and from the Wilmington port.
For the year 1922, the value of the volume of water-borne traffic moving over the bar of the Wilmington harbor was $57,251,120 (p. 14). The preponderance of this volume of traffic was interchanged between rail and water carriers at Wilmington. The population of the city of Wilmington is 42,000. The United States Government has spent more than seven million dollars in improvement of the harbor and port of Wilmington; and, in report of engineers, they state that the vessels coming to Wilmington are much larger than formerly, the average tonnage in 1886 being 421, while in 1922 it was 2,162. (Witness J. J. Burney, p. 18.) Reference to Womble Exhibit No. 1 will show the radiation of the five rail lines out of Wilmington, which lines by direct routes serve a large proportion of the cities and towns in North Carolina, and generally by mileages less than the rail mileages from the port of Norfolk. The mileages both from Norfolk and from Wilmington are shown on Womble Exhibits, Nos. 18, 19, 20 and 21.
JURISDICTIONNo question was raised at the hearing of the jurisdiction of the Interstate Commerce Commission of the subject-matter of this complaint. At the conclusion of the hearing, counsel for respondent companies reserved the right to argue the question of jurisdiction. In view of all the facts and circumstances in this case, we assume that the jurisdiction of the Commission will not be seriously challenged. The Clyde Steamship Company is one of the oldest of common carriers in the steamship service and engaged not only in port to port service, but under tariffs filed with the Interstate Commerce Commission engages in transportation of through rail-and-water and rail-water-and-rail traffic. Under tariffs on file with the Commission, it handles both local traffic from the port of New York and traffic received from rail lines from interior eastern points through the port of New York
to destinations in the Southeast through South Atlantic ports other than Wilmington, and to and from some points in the State of North Carolina through the port of Charleston. It also carries, under tariffs on file with the Commission, proportional rates between New York and Wilmington for application on business through the port of Wilmington. Such proportional rates are in every instance the same as the local port to port rates between New York and Wilmington, which is the basis for this complaint.
These facts seem to us complete in their subjection of the Clyde Steamship Company to the supervising power and regulation of the Interstate Commerce Commission, and to give to the Commission authority to review and determine the reasonableness of such proportional rates, and authority to require the Clyde Steamship Company to publish such proportional rates between New York and Wilmington as it may find to be reasonable and proper, or to require the Clyde Steamship Company to join with and participate with rail carriers in the establishment and maintenance of reasonable through rates between New York and interior points in North Carolina through the port of Wilmington.
JURISDICTION TO REMOVE DISCRIMINATIONIf any question of jurisdiction should be presented by the respondent, Clyde Steamship Company, it will be our contention that the respondent is not only within the jurisdiction of the Commission by reason of its tariffs now on file with the Commission, but also on the broader ground that its failure to publish through rates between New York and interior points in North Carolina, or its failure to publish reasonable proportional rates to apply in connection with such through traffic, constitutes an unlawful discrimination which the Commission has the power to remove and which, in its protection of the public interest, it should remove. The law does not require any one to become a common carrier; but when it elects to become a common carrier, it must serve without discrimination, and there is no reason consistent with sound public policy which would permit the Clyde Steamship Company to participate in through rail and water rates between interior eastern points and Wilmington, and between such points and interior points within the Southeast through other South Atlantic ports, and refuse to join in such service through the port of Wilmington, while, as its testimony shows, it is handling vessels half-loaded to and from the Wilmington port.
The inherent facts developed in testimony in this case, including the reluctant admissions of witnesses of the defendant carriers, furnish the most convincing and compelling assurance of a determined and consistently maintained policy on the part of water and rail carriers to prevent the movement of traffic through the Wilmington port on any basis of reasonable rates related to the water and rail service through Wilmington, or on any basis that would interfere in any way with the structure of rates based on the longer rail service through Norfolk.
WHY THROUGH RATES WERE CANCELEDThrough rates between New York and interior points in North Carolina were maintained by the Clyde Line and rail carriers for years, but they were in every case the same as the rates through Norfolk, without reference to the length of rail haul involved. Indeed, under this system of rates, the longer the rail haul from Wilmington, as a general principle, the lower the through rate. That is to say that the through rates were made on the Norfolk route basis, and points in North Carolina nearer to Norfolk were
made lower than to points further removed from Norfolk and nearer to Wilmington. The rates through Wilmingon were the same as through Norfolk. The rate to a point a few miles out from Wilmington would be a zone two or zone three rate on the Norfolk basis, while a hundred miles away from Wilmington in the direction of Norfolk they would strike a zone one rate through Norfolk, and the rate through Wilmington would become less than to the point a few miles out from Wilmington.
The time came when the Commission in the exercise of its discretion, would not permit the continuance of that kind of defenseless violations of the fourth section. (Witness Leavis, p. 218.) There would be no fourth secton difficulties with these rates if made upon any reasonable basis with relation to Wilmington, or the route over which the traffic would move. Why did not these carriers then revise these rates to conform to the fourth section? Certainly not because the rail carriers could haul traffic a hundred and fifty miles from Wilmington at less expense than they could haul it fifteen miles from Wilmington. Certainly not because the Clyde Line did not need the business on its line to Wilmington. The Clyde Line does need the traffic. Its traffic manager swears that it is running its boats to Wilmington with forty-two per cent of load and at a cost of $1.02 for each dollar of revenue received. It needs the traffic, which it could handle in its forty-two per cent loaded vessels at a trifle of additional expense. It needs the volume. It needs traffic so badly that it voluntarily surrenders more than half of its own rates from New York to Wilmington to get business from interior rail points beyond New York. Why does it say today, sorely as it needs this traffic and this revenue, that it would not willingly join in any system of through rates to interior points in North Carolina on any basis, to any point, less than the rates for the longer rail hauls through Wilmington, even though it should be given its full local rates as its part of such through rates? (Witness Leavis, pp. 224-225.)
We don't have to guess when confronted with that kind of testimony. Stronger evidence could not be presented of a determination to deny to these points in North Carolina through rates to which they are entitled, made with relation to their proximity to the port of Wilmington, and a determination to preserve and protect the rate structure made to these points through Norfolk.
For convenient reference we quote from testimony of Mr. Leavis, traffic manager of the Clyde Steamship Company, on these points as follows:
“For the period of nine months ended December 31, 1923, this service was operated with a gross operating revenue of $396,398.63. That revenue is accounted for under the Interstate Commerce Commission's Classification Accounting.
“The ratio of operating expenses to operating revenue for said period was 102.32 per cent” (pp. 223, 224).
“Q. (By Mr. Gwathmey): Pardon me, just there. How does that average of 3133 tons compare with the tonnage capacity of those vessels?
“A. About 42 per cent, in round figures” (p. 225).
“Q. (By Mr. Maxwell): Would it be agreeable to the Clyde Line for for the Commission to put in any system of joint through rates between New York and interior points in North Carolina through Wilmington on any basis of divisions to the Clyde Line, if such through rates were less than the water and rail rates through Norfolk?
“A. I do not think we would be willing to do that” (p. 299).
WHAT IS REASONABLE BASIS OF RATESIf the Commission should find that the route through Wilmington is a reasonable and economic route for handling traffic from New York to points in this State having shorter rail haul from Wilmington than from Norfolk, what should be the basis of such through rates?
Certainly not the structure of rates made through Norfolk, for that as rail distance becomes greater from Norfolk, the rail distance from Wilmington becomes less.
The basis submitted by the complainant, through its traffic witness, W. G. Womble, is based upon an approximate average of Clyde Line revenue on its present rates from interior eastern rail points, plus the local interstate rail rates from Wilmington.
Womble Exhibits, Nos. 5 and 6, show this revenue from representative interior eastern points, and his Exhibit No. 7 shows the average of such revenue to be 41.2 cents first-class. This general basis is further confirmed by Womble Exhibit No. 17, showing water and rail rates through Norfolk to Asheville 36 cents, first-class, higher than the local rate from Norfolk to Asheville, and the rate through Charleston is 47 cents higher than the local rate from Charleston to Asheville. Mr. Womble submits that an average between these two of 41 cents first-class would be a properly related basis through Wilmington.
No contention is presented by complainant as to how the revenue on rates made on this basis should be divided, but it does represent that no injury could result to either carrier on this basis of through rates if the revenue should be divided on the general basis on which the rates are proposed. Certainly the rail lines could have no complaint if given their full local interstate rates for their part of the service. That would be more than liberal to them. They handle business through Norfolk to these destinations for materially less than their local rates from Norfolk. In the general development of through rates less than combination, carriers now generally expect to receive less than their local rates as divisions on through business.
The Clyde Line could have no proper basis of complaint if it were given additional traffic for its 42 per cent loaded vessels on the same revenue basis which it has for years received on interior eastern business. Manifestly it finds it advantageous to handle this traffic on this basis or it would not have contined to do so for many years. The only additional expense to the Clyde Line in handling additional traffic for these interior points in North Carolina through Wilmington would be the expense of loading and unloading. It would add nothing to its overhead to haul some more traffic in its less than half-loaded vessels. It is sorely in need of the revenue which would accrue to it on this basis for handling this additional traffic. It is falling just a little short of earning its operating expenses, not because its rates are not sufficiently high, but because it has been forced by railroad influence to stay out of the market for through traffic to interior points out of Wilmington, and for this reason has not developed sufficient traffic to half fill its vessels.
CONCLUSIONThis complaint does not involve the reasonableness of rates through Norfolk to North Carolina destinations. If it should be admitted that these rates are reasonable rates for the service through Norfolk, it would not in any sense weaken the contentions of complainant in this proceeding, which is that a system of rates made with relation to rail haul from Norfolk does not furnish a reasonable basis of through rates through Wilmington. It would be just about as reasonable to make the local rates from Wilmington
to these interior points in North Carolina the same as the local rates from Norfolk, and have the rates decreasing as the length of haul increased.
A consideration of the facts presented in testimony in this case must be convincing that selfish railroad influences have blocked the flow of through traffic through Wilmington, and that as a matter of sound public policy this selfish influence should not be longer permitted to deny to the port of Wilmington the natural flow of traffic through it, and to deny to these points in North Carolina the benefit of their proximity to a natural port that has for thirty-five years enjoyed regular schedule steamer service from New York. We ask the Commission to find that the failure of the defendant carriers to provide reasonable rates through Wilmington from New York to these points in North Carolina constitutes an unlawful discrimination, and to find that the general basis of through rates proposed by witness W. G. Womble is a reasonable basis of through rates to be observed by them.
NORTH CAROLINA CORPORATION COMMISSION, W. T. LEE, Chairman, GEORGE P. PELL, A. J. MAXWELL, Commissioners.
Raleigh, N. C., May 1, 1924.
NOTE—The opening paragraph of Section 500 of the Transportation Act of 1920 reads as follows:
“It is hereby declared to be the policy of Congress to promote, encourage and develop water transporation service and facilities in connection with the commerce of the United States and to foster and preserve in full vigor both rail and water transportation.”
In commenting on this provision in the case of War Dept. v. A. & S. Railway in 77 I. C. C 317, pages 355 and 356, the Interstate Commerce Commission said:
“That whatever may be the case as between rail lines the joint rates over rail and water routes ought to divide without regard to the extent to which rail carriers may be short hauled and not upon the plan designed to discourage or render impracticable the use of such joint routes. The record shows that the exaction by rail lines of their local rates as division under such circumstances has for its admitted purpose the protection of the long haul.”
(4)COMPARISON OF RATES FROM CHICAGO TO VIRGINIA AND NORTH
CAROLINA CITIES
(The comparisons are made in each case between a Virginia city and a North Carolina city which are approximately the same distance from Chicago. Chicago is the greatest source of traffic in the central west, and the rates from this point are representive of the west-east discriminations. The rates for only three classes are given: the first, fifth and sixth—but these include the most important commodities.)
| From Chicago | ||||
| To— | Distance | RATE | ||
| 1st Class | 5th Class | 6th Class | ||
| Charlotte, N. C. | 903 | 2.19½ | .92 | .74 |
| Suffolk, Va. | 914 | 1.39 | .53½ | .44½ |
| Fayetteville, N. C. | 915 | 2.06 | .84 | .66½ |
| Suffolk, Va. | 914 | 1.39 | .53½ | .44½ |
| Durham, N. C. | 850 | 2.01 | .78 | .63 |
| Petersburg, Va. | 855 | 1.39 | .53½ | .44½ |
| Goldsboro, N. C. | 925 | 2.01 | .78 | .63 |
| Norfolk Va. | 937 | 1.39 | .53½ | .44½ |
| Greensboro, N. C. | 817 | 2.01 | .78 | .63 |
| Burkeville, Va. | 804 | 1.39 | .53 | .44½ |
| Raleigh, N. C. | 876 | 2.01 | .78 | .63 |
| Petersburg, Va. | 855 | 1.39 | .53 | .44½ |
| Hamlet, N. C. | 934 | 2.06 | .84 | .66½ |
| Norfolk Va. | 937 | 1.39 | .53½ | .44½ |
| Winston-Salem, N. C. | 820 | 2.01 | .78 | .63 |
| Burkeville, Va. | 804 | 1.39 | .53½ | .44½ |
| New Bern, N. C. | 983 | 2.01 | .78 | .63 |
| Norfolk Va. | 937 | 1.39 | .53½ | .44½ |
(5)
COMPARATIVE STATEMENT SHOWING RATES ON IMPORTANT COMMODITIES
IN CARLOAD LOTS FROM CHICAGO, ILL., AND
DETROIT, MICH., TO NORFOLK, VA., AND NORTH
CAROLINA POINTS IN CENTS PER 100 POUNDS
| Commodity | From | To | ||||||
| Norfolk | Charlotte | Fayetteville | Golds-Boro | New Bern | Raleigh | Wilmington | ||
| Automobiles | Chicago | 153 | 233½ | 214 | 209 | 209 | 209 | 214 |
| Detroit | 119 | 199½ | 199½ | 189 | 189 | 189 | 189 | |
| Agricultural Implements | Chicago | 53½ | 76 | 75 | 73 | 73 | 73 | 77 |
| Detroit | 41 | 69 | 69 | 65 | 65 | 65 | 69 | |
| Packing House Products | Chicago | 53½ | 75½ | 73 | 69½ | 69½ | 69½ | 73 |
| Detroit | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | |
| Salt | Chicago | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| Detroit | 32½ | 45½ | 45½ | 43 | 36½ | 43½ | 39½ | |
| Grain | Chicago | 35 | 48½ | 48½ | 45½ | 40 | 45½ | 40 |
| Detroit | 25½ | 47 | 47 | 44 | 38½ | 44 | 38½ | |
| Flour | Chicago | 35½ | 52 | 52 | 49 | 46 | 49 | 44½ |
| Detroit | 26 | 50½ | 50½ | 47½ | 44½ | 47½ | 43 |
PRESENT DISCRIMINATIONS ABOUT TO BE INCREASED
North Carolina's condition is about to become worse. In the Southern Class Rate Case, the railroads have proposed a heavy increase in rates from the west. Every section of the state will suffer from this new imposition by the railroads except the extreme western portion. Those acquainted with rate matters and commercial competition declare this to be the most desperate situation which has yet faced North Carolina. We not only are denied better conditions, we are actually threatened with a worse fate. There follows a series of tables showing exactly what this means in rate increases. A comparison is made between the present first class rate and the one proposed by the carriers from the three leading western distributing points:
| (a) | Chicago |
| (b) | Detroit |
| (c) | Cincinnati |
The Interstate Commerce Commission is investigating these proposals of the railroads through one of the Commissioners, Mr. Eastman. After a survey of the conditions now prevailing, he has tentatively recommended a scale of rates which involves increases in first class rates from some points, and reductions from others. In fifth and sixth class rates, however, he has recommended increases from practically all western centers ranging from five to fifteen per cent. In view of the fact that these lower classes include some of the most important foods and raw materials, it means a heavier load where it can least easily be borne. Judging from past experience the railroads will continue to seek, by every method possible, to work their will on the people of this State until a competing trunk line with a water terminal within our borders is ready to challenge their power.
| (a) From Chicago | |||
| To— | Carrier's Proposed Rate | Present Rate | Increase |
| Charlotte | 2.25 | 2.19½ | .05½ |
| Durham | 2.16 | 2.01 | .15 |
| Edenton | 2.16 | 2.01 | .15 |
| Elizabeth City | 2.16 | 1.81½ | .34½ |
| Fayetteville | 2.28 | 2.06 | .22 |
| Goldsboro | 2.16 | 2.01 | .15 |
| Greensboro | 2.16 | 2.01 | .15 |
| Greenville | 2.16 | 2.01 | .15 |
| Hamlet | 2.28 | 2.06 | .22 |
| Henderson | 2.16 | 2.01 | .15 |
| Hickory | 2.44 | 2.22½ | .21½ |
| High Point | 2.16 | 2.06 | .10 |
| Kinston | 2.16 | 2.01 | .15 |
| Laurinburg | 2.37 | 2.22½ | .14½ |
| Lumberton | 2.37 | 2.22½ | .14½ |
| Monroe | 2.28 | 2.06 | .22 |
| New Bern | 2.16 | 2.01 | .15 |
| Oxford | 2.16 | 2.01 | .15 |
| Plymouth | 2.16 | 2.01 | .15 |
| Raleigh | 2.16 | 2.01 | .15 |
| Rocky Mount | 2.16 | 2.01 | .15 |
| Salisbury | 2.16 | 2.06 | .10 |
| Sanford | 2.28 | 2.06 | .22 |
| Scotland Neck | 2.16 | 2.01 | .15 |
| Statesville | 2.16 | 2.06 | .10 |
| Tarboro | 2.16 | 2.01 | .15 |
| Washington | 2.16 | 2.01 | .15 |
| Weldon | 2.16 | 2.01 | .15 |
| Wilmington | 2.28 | 2.06 | .22 |
| Wilson | 2.16 | 2.01 | .15 |
| Winston-Salem | 2.16 | 2.01 | .15 |
| (b) From Detroit | |||
| Charlotte | 2.06 | 1.88½ | .17½ |
| Durham | 1.94 | 1.78 | .16 |
| Edenton | 1.94 | 1.71½ | .22½ |
| Elizabeth City | 1.94 | 1.50½ | .43½ |
| Fayetteville | 2.06 | 1.88½ | .17½ |
| Goldsboro | 1.94 | 1.78 | .16 |
| Greensboro | 1.94 | 1.78 | .16 |
| Greenville | 1.94 | 1.78 | .16 |
| Hamlet | 2.06 | 1.88½ | .17½ |
| Henderson | 1.94 | 1.78 | .16 |
| Hickory | 2.06 | 2.00½ | .05½ |
| High Point | 2.02 | 1.86 | .16 |
| Kinston | 1.94 | 1.88½ | .05½ |
| Laurinburg | 2.19 | 2.05 | .14 |
| Lumberton | 2.19 | 2.05 | .14 |
| Marion | 2.06 | 1.88½ | .17½ |
| Monroe | 2.06 | 1.88½ | .17½ |
| (b) From Detroit—Continued | |||
| To— | Carrier's Proposed Rate | Present Rate | Increase |
| New Bern | 1.94 | 1.73 | .21 |
| Oxford | 1.94 | 1.78 | .16 |
| Plymouth | 1.94 | 1.71½ | .22½ |
| Raleigh | 1.94 | 1.78 | .16 |
| Rocky Mount | 1.94 | 1.78 | .16 |
| Salisbury | 2.06 | 1.88½ | .17½ |
| Sanford | 2.06 | 1.86½ | .19½ |
| Scotland Neck | 1.94 | 1.78 | .16 |
| Statesville | 2.06 | 1.88½ | .17½ |
| Tarboro | 1.94 | 1.71½ | .22½ |
| Washington | 1.94 | 1.71½ | .22½ |
| Weldon | 1.94 | 1.71½ | .22½ |
| Wilmington | 2.06 | 1.78 | .28 |
| Wilson | 1.94 | 1.78 | .16 |
| Winston-Salem | 1.94 | 1.78 | .16 |
| (c) From Cincinnati | |||
| Aberdeen | 1.87 | 1.25½ | .61½ |
| Ahoskie | 1.87 | 1.20½ | .66½ |
| Albemarle | 1.87 | 1.25½ | .61½ |
| Charlotte | 1.75 | 1.48 | .27 |
| Dunn | 1.87 | 1.25½ | .61½ |
| Durham | 1.75 | 1.20½ | .54½ |
| Edenton | 1.87 | 1.20½ | .66½ |
| Elizabeth City | 1.87 | 1.20½ | .66½ |
| Fayetteville | 1.87 | 1.25½ | .61½ |
| Goldsboro | 1.87 | 1.20½ | .66½ |
| Greensboro | 1.75 | 1.20½ | .54½ |
| Greenville | 1.87 | 1.20½ | .66½ |
| Hamlet | 1.87 | 1.25½ | .61½ |
| Henderson | 1.87 | 1.20½ | .66½ |
| High Point | 1.75 | 1.25½ | .49½ |
| Kinston | 1.87 | 1.20½ | .66½ |
| Laurinburg | 1.87 | 1.42 | .25 |
| Lumberton | 1.87 | 1.42 | .25 |
| New Bern | 1.87 | 1.20½ | .66½ |
| Oxford | 1.87 | 1.20½ | .66½ |
| Plymouth | 1.87 | 1.20½ | .66½ |
| Raleigh | 1.87 | 1.20½ | .66½ |
| Rocky Mount | 1.87 | 1.20½ | .66½ |
| Salisbury | 1.75 | 1.25½ | .49½ |
| Sanford | 1.87 | 1.25½ | .61½ |
| Scotland Neck | 1.87 | 1.20½ | .66½ |
| Statesville | 1.75 | 1.25½ | .49½ |
| Tarboro | 1.87 | 1.20½ | .66½ |
| Warsaw | 1.87 | 1.25½ | .61½ |
| Washington | 1.87 | 1.20½ | .66½ |
| Weldon | 1.87 | 1.20½ | .66½ |
| Wilmington | 1.87 | 1.25½ | .61½ |
| Wilson | 1.87 | 1.20½ | .66½ |
| Winston-Salem | 1.75 | 1.20½ | .49½ |
(7)
THE BURDEN OF FREIGHT RATES ON THE TRUCKING INDUSTRY*
Summary of representative fruits and vegetables sold at wholesale in the cities of Boston, Chicago, New York, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and other cities during the period September, 1920, and July, 1921.
| Showing the burden of transportation which they bear. | ||||||||||
| Total sales | Transportation | Shipper received | Miscellaneous handling Costs | Wholesaler's gross profit | ||||||
| Cars | Amount | Amount | Per cent | Amount | Per cent | Amount | Per cent | Amount | Per cent | |
| Barreled apples | 2,022 | $1,608,522.88 | $ 193,091.39 | 12.00 | $1,284,581.83 | 79.86 | $ 98,196.73 | 6.11 | $ 32,652.93 | 2.03 |
| Boxed apples | 1,466 | 2,822,243.03 | 1,022,388.12 | 36.23 | 1,542,240.83 | 54.64 | 197,229.32 | 6.99 | 60,384.76 | 2.14 |
| Bulk apples | 18 | 8,576.04 | 2,402.87 | 28.02 | 5,590.68 | 65.18 | 85.10 | 1.00 | 497.39 | 5.80 |
| Asparagus | 11,264.00 | 3,127.60 | 27.77 | 6,986.35 | 62.02 | 248.93 | 2.21 | 901.12 | 8.00 | |
| Asparagus | 6 | 9,409.63 | 1,638.79 | 17.41 | 6,851.50 | 72.81 | 166.57 | 1.80 | 752.77 | 8.00 |
| Southern cabbage | 60 | 30,282.33 | 20,089.33 | 66.35 | 9,226.25 | 30.46 | 507.78 | 1.67 | 458.97 | 1.52 |
| Texas cabbage | 65 | 41,413.03 | 31,111.78 | 75.12 | 5,184.10 | 12.52 | 4,024.02 | 9.72 | 1,093.13 | 2.64 |
| Florida citrus | 204 | 346,556.95 | 92,341.32 | 26.65 | 236,287.12 | 68.18 | 2,726.60 | .79 | 15,201.91 | 4.38 |
| Florida and California celery | 147 | 137,601.15 | 69,849.10 | 50.76 | 56,924.94 | 41.37 | 1,927.25 | 1.40 | 8,899.86 | 6.47 |
| California grapes | 140 | 326,582.80 | 91,810.41 | 28.11 | 213,544.56 | 65.39 | 4,898.76 | 1.50 | 16,329.07 | 5.00 |
| California lettuce | 617 | 705,144.62 | 332,507.44 | 47.15 | 314,290.27 | 44.57 | 21,331.32 | 3.03 | 37,015.59 | 5.25 |
| Lettuce | 6 | 4,378.60 | 2,428.35 | 55.46 | 1,512.37 | 34.54 | 437.88 | 10.00 | ||
| Miscellaneous vegatables | 58 | 38,170.51 | 16,762.68 | 43.92 | 17,273.12 | 45.25 | 1,030.32 | 2.70 | 3,104.39 | 8.13 |
| Miscellaneous fruits | 523 | 1,048,443.00 | 324,136.87 | 30.92 | 650,915.12 | 62.08 | 73,391.01 | 7.00 | ||
| California onions | 10 | 7,032.05 | 4,012.35 | 57.06 | 3,880.11 | 55.18 | 243.05 | 3.45 | -1,103.46 | -15.69 |
| Texas onions | 395 | 389,188.68 | 182,584.08 | 46.91 | 189,184.60 | 48.61 | 9,872.69 | 2.54 | 7,547.31 | 1.94 |
| Southern potatoes | 63 | 55,013.07 | 15,857.56 | 28.83 | 37,922.97 | 68.93 | 694.05 | 1.26 | 538.49 | .98 |
| Southern potatoes | 16 | 11,934.89 | 4,209.49 | 35.28 | 6,926.12 | 58.03 | 27.75 | .23 | 771.53 | 6.46 |
| Prunes | 48 | 66,853.19 | 27,767.66 | 41.53 | 35,271.14 | 52.76 | 90.44 | .14 | 3,723.95 | 5.57 |
| Texas spinach | 652 | 648,461.62 | 355,215.16 | 54.78 | 293,541.62 | 45.27 | 34,232.35 | 5.27 | -34,527.51 | -5.32 |
| Strawberries | 113 | 243,111.33 | 32,659.13 | 13.43 | 202,272.37 | 83.20 | 3,133.07 | 1.29 | 5,046.76 | 2.08 |
| Sweet potatoes | 56 | 62,623.22 | 10,408.22 | 16.62 | 48,052.62 | 76.73 | 2,381.80 | 3.81 | 1,780.58 | 2.84 |
| Tomatoes | 104 | 208,837.12 | 41,540.47 | 19.89 | 121,583.02 | 58.22 | 2,480.53 | 1.19 | 43,233.10 | 20.70 |
| Watermelons | 75 | 39,841.47 | 17,886.59 | 44.89 | 22,708.80 | 56.99 | 25.00 | .07 | -778.92 | -1.95 |
EARNINGS OF LEADING RAILWAYS SERVING NORTH CAROLINA
(Below is given a comparison of the earnings of the three railways which dominate traffic in North Carolina. These show in each case how the gross and net earnings per mile of road in North Carolina including branch lines compare with the gross and net earnings per mile of the whole system. These figures indicate that this state is a source of immense profit to the railroads.)
| ATLANTIC COAST LINE | ||||
| YEAR— | Gross Operating Revenue Per Mile | Net Operating Revenue Per Mile | ||
| System | N. C. | System | N. C. | |
| 1912 | $ 7,396 | $ 8,469 | $ 2,414 | $ 2,757 |
| 1913 | 7,833 | 9,309 | 2,491 | 2,941 |
| 1914 | 7,927 | 9,206 | 2,286 | 2,655 |
| 1915 | 6,725 | 8,085 | 1,841 | 2,213 |
| 1916 | 7,895 | 9,823 | 2,805 | 3,490 |
| 1917 | 9,217 | 11,061 | 2,989 | 3,587 |
| 1918 | 11,824 | 14,164 | 2,973 | 3,560 |
| 1919 | 13,057 | 16,629 | 2,067 | 2,652 |
| 1920 | 15,159 | 17,542 | 1,049 | 1,234 |
| 1921 | 13,601 | 15,884 | 1,613 | 1,885 |
| 1922 | 14,596 | 18,107 | 3,872 | 4,804 |
| SOUTHERN RAILWAY | ||||
| 1912 | $ 8,972 | $ 9,814 | $ 2,807 | $ 3,991 |
| 1913 | 9,740 | 10,800 | 2,879 | 4,341 |
| 1914 | 9,887 | 11,104 | 2,696 | 4,078 |
| 1915 | 8,846 | 9,993 | 2,279 | 3,268 |
| 1916 | 10,787 | 12,919 | 3,788 | 4,939 |
| 1917 | 12,991 | 15,995 | 4,383 | 6,054 |
| 1918 | 18,126 | 22,326 | 4,978 | 7,492 |
| 1919 | 18,585 | 23,082 | 2,297 | 4,851 |
| 1920 | 21,915 | 26,473 | 3,095 | 5,803 |
| 1921 | 18,464 | 23,176 | 3,283 | 5,873 |
| 1922 | 18,431 | 23,212 | 4,493 | 6,946 |
| SEABOARD AIR LINE | ||||
| 1912 | $ 7,494 | $ 10,231 | $ 2,171 | $ 4,496 |
| 1913 | 7,980 | 10,951 | 2,538 | 4,578 |
| 1914 | 8,200 | 11,021 | 2,587 | 4,283 |
| 1915 | 6,852 | 9,480 | 2,047 | 3,502 |
| 1916 | 7,586 | 11,997 | 2,507 | 5,341 |
| 1917 | 8,767 | 13,969 | 2,493 | 5,513 |
| 1918 | 10,929 | 17,896 | 1,566 | 5,480 |
| 1919 | 11,558 | 18,426 | 1,043 | 4,477 |
| 1920 | 13,817 | 21,704 | 86 | 4,282 |
| 1921 | 12,024 | 19,217 | 1,633 | 5,323 |
| 1922 | 12,773 | 20,993 | 2,644 | 7,269 |
(9)
BRIEF HISTORY OF THE Cape Fear AND Yadkin VALLEY RAILWAY
(This road was one of the great efforts of North Carolina to provide itself with a trunk line to the West, and it still offers possibilities)
The Cape Fear and Yadkin Valley railroad system was the outgrowth of efforts to build an east and west railroad across the State of North Carolina. As early as 1815 attention was focussed on east and west transportation routes when a canal to connect the Cape Fear River with the Yadkin River was favorably reported to the Legislature. In 1832, the Cape Fear and Yadkin Railroad was chartered for the purpose of connecting these two rivers by rail. Both projects encountered insurmountable obstacles and had to be abandoned.
At this time, Wilmington was an important sea port and Fayetteville, situated at the head of navigation on the Cape Fear River, was an important commercial center. To reach these natural arteries of commerce, plank roads were established west through the state which were used for several generations by stage and wagon trains to carry commerce to and from the middle and western portions of North Carolina, eastern Tennessee, and western Virginia. This was then the only feasible and the natural outlet for the commerce of this section. With the growth of the transportation net in North Carolina, this commerce has shifted north and south.
The Western Railroad, later changed to the Cape Fear and Yadkin Valley, was chartered on February 24, 1852, for the purpose of connecting the mineral deposits of the Deep River section in the counties of Moore and Chatham with navigable water on the Cape Fear River. Soon after the organization of the company, the town of Fayetteville and the county of Cumberland subscribed to $100,000 each in capital stock.
The State purchased $600,000 worth of bonds under acts of the Legislature passed in 1858 and 1861. This purchase by the State was made in order to enable the Western Railroad to extend its line to Greensboro and connect with the North Carolina Railroad. In 1866, these bonds were exchanged for capital stock. The following year, an additional subscription of $500,000 was made. This last subscription was paid for with Wilmington, Charlotte and Rutherford Railroad Company second mortgage bonds. The State later agreed to take these bonds back, but before the exchange could be made, the Wilmington, Charlotte and Rutherford went into bankruptcy and was sold to satisfy the first mortgage bonds. Thus, these bonds became a total loss to the Western Railroad Company.
In 1879 the name of the company was changed to the Cape Fear and Yadkin Valley Railway Company. Legislative authority was given
DISMEMBERED CAPE FEAR & YADKIN VALLEY RAILWAYBed portion known as Atlantic & Yadkin Railway, now in hands of receiver. Blue portion owned and operated by Atlantic Coast Line
for the construction of branches, for an extension to the Virginia line via Mt. Airy, and for a consolidation with the Mount Airy Railroad.
Under provisions of this act passed in 1879, the capital stock accounts of the new company were scaled down 50 per cent. This left the State with holdings of 5,500 shares with a par value of $100 each. The State sold its stock to the North State Improvement Company in 1883 for $10 per share. This company was composed of native North Carolinians closely allied to and interested in the project. The Cape Fear and Yadkin Valley underwent a complete re-organization and the North State Improvement Company took over the construction of the road.
The same act which authorized the sale of the State's stock also provided that the bonds paid to the State for convict labor used in the construction of the road should be returned to the company if certain portions of the road were completed in a period of four years.
There were only forty-six and one-half miles of road in operation when this transfer of stock was made. But, under the leadership of the North State Improvement Company, the work of construction went rapidly forward. Greensboro was reached in 1884, Bennettsville, S. C., in 1884, Mount Airy in 1889, and Wilmington in 1890.
During this time, several townships in the counties of Guilford and Stokes had subscribed to $48,050 in capital stock, and the city of Wilmington to $150,000. Meanwhile, too, plans had matured for a connection with the Norfolk and Western north of Mt. Airy. This connection would have given the Cape Fear and Yadkin Valley direct communication with the middle west. The significance of this connection was indicated by quotations from the report of President Julius A. Gray to the stockholders of the Cape Fear and Yadkin Valley Railway at the annual meeting on April 6, 1882, as follows:
“Submitted to Governor Jarvis a propostion for the purchase of the State's stock in the Cape Fear and Yadkin Valley Railway, with a view to making it a part of the great trunk line from Cincinnati to Wilmington. The magnificence of the scheme, the incalculable benefits to accrue to North Carolina, in the development of her varied resources, by opening up a great highway for three hundred miles across her territory, from her Northwestern boundary to the port of Wilmington, bringing her in direct communication with the great valleys of the Ohio and Mississippi, and giving to our own Atlantic seaports the advantage of one hundred miles in distance over all competitors for the export trade of the vast grain and meat markets of the West, opening up to view the possibility of a grander stride in material progress than we had even dared hope for in the life of the present generation.
“It is not to be wondered at, then, that those proposing to do such great things for us were most cordially received and respectfully listened to by the people of our state generally, and especially so by those most interested in the Cape Fear and Yadkin Valley Railway. Every encouragement was given them to go forward with the enterprise, and every assurance of the hearty coöperation of our State authorities and of the people of North Carolina.”
The importance of this connection is further indicated by the president of the Norfolk and Western in his annual report for 1890, which states:
“Of the North Carolina extension there yet remains to be constructed thirty miles . . . It is very desirable that this extension be completed and the connection made with the Cape Fear and Yadkin Valley as early as practicable, in order that the line may be in active operation and business developed prior to the opening of the World's Columbian Exposition in Chicago. The line that will be formed by your Ohio and North Carolina extensions will be the shortest and most direct route between the South Atlantic States, Chicago and the north west.”
The installation of “Virginia Cities Gateway” rates, as originally planned, by the Norfolk and Western would have placed the Cape Fear and Yadkin Valley in a favorable position to develop the port of Wilmington. These favorable rates were never installed. The Richmond and Danville, now the Southern, gave the Norfolk and Western favorable traffic concenssions and permitted Norfolk and Western agents to solicit traffic in Richmond and Danville local territory. Thus, the rates in the North Carolina territory of the Richmond and Danville were kept from being lowered.
The Cape Fear and Yadkin Valley, as a complete system, embraced the following properties:
| Miles | |
| Main line, Wilmington to Mt. Airy | 284.28 |
| Bennettsville branch, Fayetteville, N. C. to Bennettsville, S. C. | 57.74 |
| Factory branch, Climax to Ramseur | 18.74 |
| Madison branch, Stokesdale to Madison | 11.39 |
| Granite branch, Mt. Airy to Flat Rock | 2.02 |
| Furnace branch, Greensboro to Proximity | 1.00 |
| Main line | 338.68 |
| Side tracks | 26.17 |
| TOTAL | 364.85 |
As a direct result of the panic of 1893, the company defaulted the interest due on its bonded indebtedness and was placed in the hands of a receiver early in 1894. This receivership lasted five years.
During that period, two bond committees were organized. The New York committee, composed of representatives of the Atlantic Coast Line, then the Wilmington and Weldon, and the Southern, held the “A” division bonds and advocated that the road be sold in three divisions. The Baltimore committee, which probably represented the Seaboard, held the “B” division bonds and favored the sale of the road as a whole.
The question was presented to the United States Circuit Court and three separate decisions stated that the property “must be sold as an entirety” and that the sale must not be “chilled or impeded” in any manner. Notwithstanding this, the Atlantic Coast Line and the Southern entered into an agreement to purchase the road on joint account.
The details of the sale are explained in the testimony given by Mr. Walters, one of the purchasers of the Cape Fear and Yadkin Valley and one of the incorporators of the Atlantic and Yadkin and who is now an officer of the Atlantic Coast Line Railway, before the Corporation Commission in 1913:
“That is a rather curious thing. . . . That was quite amusing. The understanding between us was that I was to bid $3,000,000 and buy the road, provided it could be bought up to $3,000,000. We really expected that the road would not sell for so much. Probably $2,600,000 or $2,700,000. There was a Baltimore Committee there representing quite a number of bonds, and I believe representing the Seaboard Air Line, or had some kind of arrangement or agreement with them. I got my bid of $3,000,000 and this Baltimore Committee made another bid, and I was rather non-plussed for a minute, and I turned around and was talking with Mr. Elliott (an officer of the Wilmington and Weldon and later of the Atlantic Coast Line) and when I was talking with Mr. Elliott, I heard Mr. Spencer (then president of the Southern) make a bid, and I thought then, that won't do, and so I made a bid, and then he made another bid, and I made another bid, and then Mr. Spencer moved over and said, ‘For joint account,’ and I said, ‘All right, yes,’ and there he stood and it was knocked down at that price ($3,110,000).”
After the purchase by Mr. Walters, who was acting for the Wilmington and Weldon, later changed to the Atlantic Coast Line, and the Southern, it was incorporated as the Atlantic and Yadkin and sold to the Southern. The Southern then sold back to the Atlantic Coast Line that half of the road lying east of Sanford in Atlantic Coast Line territory. This purchase and division was effected by means of an interchange of bonds, the Atlantic Coast Line issued $1,700,000 and the Atlantic and Yadkin $1,500,000 which, after being interchanged by the Atlantic Coast Line and the Southern, were used by the original purchasers in making payment to the court. Thus, neither of these two roads which came into control of the Cape Fear and Yadkin Valley had to make any cash outlay.
The North Carolina Corporation Commission, under authority of a legislative enactment, investigated this sale and dismemberment. The findings of fact disclosed at this investigation, which took place in 1913, were reported to the Attorney-General who reached the conclusion that it was fraudulently and illegally dismembered.
Suit was instituted in 1923, as authorized by an act of the Legislature passed that same year, for the purpose of having the sale set aside in order that the properties might be operated as an entirety. The suit is now pending in Wake Superior Court awaiting a decisions of the Supreme Court of North Carolina on an appeal from a demurrer granted to the Atlantic Coast Line Railway Company.
In March of this year, the Atlantic and Yadkin was placed in the hands of a receiver at the request of the Southern. The State intervened in this receivership proceeding and was allowed to appoint one of the two receivers.
PART IV A REVIEW OF WHAT IS BEING DONE IN OTHER STATES
PART IV
A REVIEW OF WHAT IS BEING DONE IN OTHER STATES
| 1. | Introduction. |
| 2. | Portland, Maine. |
| 3. | Boston, Massachusetts. |
| 4. | Providence, Rhode Island. |
| 5. | Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. |
| 6. | Baltimore, Maryland. |
| 7. | Norfolk, Virginia. |
| 8. | Savannah, Georgia. |
| 9. | Charleston, South Carolina. |
| 10. | Jacksonville, Florida. |
| 11. | Pensacola, Florida. |
| 12. | Mobile, Alabama. |
| 13. | New Orleans, Louisiana. |
| 14. | Houston, Texas. |
| 15. | San Diego, California. |
| 16. | Los Angeles, California. |
| 17. | San Francisco, California. |
| 18. | Portland, Oregon. |
| 19. | Tacoma, Washington. |
| 20. | Seattle, Washington. |
| 21. | Policy of Public Ownership. |
A REVIEW OF WHAT IS BEING DONE IN OTHER STATES
INTRODUCTION
As a fitting introduction to the appended list of publicly owned facilities, the following is pertinent, being from H. B. 109, 67th Congress, 1st Session:
“Every United States Port should own its own water front, and this should be controlled by a port authority composed of business men who have an intelligent grasp of the export and import business and who are willing to devote sufficient time to the subject. These should be appointed without regard to political affiliations, and should take the broad view that the port is the property of the people at large, and that the provision of the best facilities will promote quicker ship dispatch, attract more ships, and thus enlarge the commerce of the port; that while the port terminal should be self supporting, the charges should be adjusted to produce this result, without injury to business, and that the growth of the port will mean the growth of the city and increased material prosperity to the individuals of the city and state. THOSE STATES WHICH HAVE ONLY ONE MAN PORTS SHOULD IN PARTICULAR EXERT THEMSELVES TO DEVELOP THEM ALONG THE MOST MODERN LINES, AND THE FIRST STEP IN THIS DIRECTION IS THE APPOINTMENT OF A COMPETENT PORT AUTHORITY.”
And further, in the River and Harbor act of March 2, 1919, appears the following:
“It is hereby declared to be the policy of congress that water terminals are essential to all cities and towns located upon harbors or navigable waterways, and that at least one public terminal should exist, constructed, owned and regulated by the municipality, or other public agency of the State, and open to the use of all upon equal terms, and with the view of carrying out the policy to the fullest possible extent, the Secretary of War is hereby vested with the discretion to withhold, unless the public interests would seriously suffer by delay, moneys appropriated in this act for new projects adopted herein, or for the further improvement of existing projects, if, in his opinion, no water terminals exist adequate for the traffic, and open to all on equal terms, or unless satisfactory assurances are received that local or other interests will provide such adequate terminal or terminals.”
In an order of the Interstate Commerce Commission issued on March 4, 1924, the following principle is laid down:
“The fourth section of the interstate commerce act provides in part that upon application to the commission, common carriers may, in special cases, after investigation, be authorized by the commission
to charge less for longer than for shorter distances for the transportation of passengers or property, but that the commission shall not permit the establishment of any charge to or from the more distant point that is not reasonably compensatory for the service performed; and if a circuitous rail line or route is, because of such circuity, granted authority to meet the charges of a more direct line or route, to or from competitive points and to maintain higher charges to or from intermediate points on its line the authority shall not include intermediate points as to which the haul of the petitioning line or route is not longer than that of the direct line or route between the competitive points; and no such authorization shall be granted on account of merely potential water competition not actually in existence.”
Following are some of the places that have developed to a considerable extent and are in many cases continuing to vote bonds and spend millions in the further development of the ports, which is evidence of the satisfaction of the people in their venture and which would seem, after all, the best test of what is in their opinion at least, “good for them.”
(2)PORTLAND, MAINE
The State of Maine in 1917 appropriated $1,235,000.00 for the construction of a state-owned terminal at Portland. The cities of Portland and South Portland donated a site at a cost of $340,000. The experience in this development is so recent that the details of the experience as related in two letters, under date of February 18th and March 21st, 1924, respectively, which have been received from the Chairman of the Port Commission, may prove interesting:
“Am very glad to give you a summary of the results up to date of our State Pier at Portland, Maine. As the pier is not yet entirely completed, and has not been accepted by the Directors of the Port, it is a little early to expect to realize the full benefit of such development, but the results up to date have been such as to entirely justify the development and have more than met the expectations of those who conceived the plan.
“Perhaps you are aware that the State has appropriated $1,235,000.00 for the building of the pier and the Cities of Portland and South Portland purchased a site at a cost of $340,000 which they presented to the State without cost. We have built a pier 1,000 feet long and when it is completed to its full width it will be 360 feet wide. Our original plan was entirely for an ocean pier, but because of the demand from the people of our State for coastwise and transcontinental service, we completely revised our plans and provided the entire east side of the Pier for ocean traffic and the west side for coastwise service.
“On the east side we have one freight shed, 500 feet long and 90 feet wide, with cement asphalt floor 12 inches thick. This is of the strongest and most modern construction and is capable of holding 670
pounds to the square foot. It is a two story shed and the upper story is devoted to the offices of the Directors of the Port and the official force, the immigration offices for this district. The lower shed on the east side is of a little lighter construction but very substantial and is 500 feet long and 60 feet wide. These sheds are connected with substantial grain galleries with the Grand Trunk elevators situated at the head of our pier, having a capacity of 2,500,000 bushels and we can load grain into the steamers very readily. The pier is also equipped with the most modern and up-to-date freight handling appliances and in every way it represents the latest word in handling equipment.
“The west side of our pier has been constructed especially for coast-wise business and we are now operating out of Portland a Portland-Boston passenger and freight service with fine steamers; a tri-weekly New York freight service, which will include a passenger steamer during the summer months; beginning about July 1st, we shall have a steamship service between Portland-Eastport-St. John, connecting us with the Maritime Provinces, and a day boat between Portland and Boston. A very valuable addition to our development is the Nawsco Line, operating between Portland and the Pacific Coast, via the Panama Canal. These steamers take out general cargoes of Maine products from all parts of the State and bringing back the Pacific Coast products for use in this territory. We also act as a distributing center for some portions of New Hampshire and Vermont. The business of this line of steamships has grown by leaps and bounds and has resulted in an entirely new trade relation because of it with the Pacific Coast states. Our manufacturers of shoes for instance, are able to make their product in their factory located along the water power with which our State abounds, and ship them to Portland by rail thence via the Nawsco line to California and undersell the shoe manufacturer of St. Louis, because of the water route. This is resulting in a large increase of the factories of Maine and the development of an entirely new business. We estimate that in the last year, the saving to our merchants and manufacturers on this one line alone amounted to $200,000, while a saving of freight to our industries using our New York and Boston steamship service amounted to about $80,000. You will readily realize what this means to our State and why we are well satisfied with our investment, and this is just the beginning.
“Our known income from the use of the Pier will amount to about $50,000 for the year 1924. In addition to this known income there will be a very substantial amount from the use of our pier by the ocean steamship lines, which are already coming in considerable numbers. For instance, we have just finished unloading a cargo of Norwegian pulp, which will be distributed to the pulp mills in Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont.
“We are anticipating a large movement of immigrants both American and Canadian bound, through this port and we are indeed enthusiastic over the situation and the prospect for the future.
“We are very desirous of establishing a trade route between Portland and South Atlantic ports, and are already discussing with Savannah, Georgia, the establishment of such a service. I see no reason why it could not include your port and would be glad to join with you in bringing this to pass.
“The writer has made a considerable study of this particular line of development for the last 30 years and is thoroughly convinced of its
possibilities as a means of developing our State.” (February 18, 1924.)
“Our State Pier is now practically completed. There are a few minor details which do not amount to much but which have prevented us from accepting the entire Pier from the contractors. Undoubtedly these will be taken care of within a few days so that we can safely say that our Pier is now completed.
“The fifty thousand dollar gross income for 1924 is not an anticipated but a certain income. We are receiving weekly returns from other sources not figured in this income, and we anticipate that the receipts for 1925 will show a largely increased gross and net earning.
“We have never claimed nor led our people to expect that the State Pier, as a direct revenue producer, was attractive, but have stressed from beginning to end the development of business and of the State through the use of the Pier.
“All of these assurances have been more than fulfilled up to the present time, and the people of our State are becoming very much interested and enthusiastic over the Pier. At first they were inclined to be skeptical and pessimistic due to the dismal foreboding of many narrow-minded and pessimistic citizens who exist in Maine in common with other parts of the United States, but results have more than exceeded anticipations and both in Portland and also in every section of our State the pessimists have become optimists and firm supporters of the State Pier.
“The direct returns from the Pier in the way of income have far exceeded my own anticipation, and I have no doubt that we shall be obliged to increase our capacity and add a second and third Pier before we get through with it; Also storage warehouses both cold, warm and dry.
“We are not saying anything about the possibility of paying the interest on our Bonds from our income, but the writer has no doubt whatever that this will be possible in the near future.
“The Eastern Steamship Company who are operating tri-weekly service between Portland and Boston during the winter and a daily service during the summer, and who also operate a tri-weekly service to New York all the year round, and will put on a passenger steamer during the summer, have been financially very successful and have paid large dividends for many years, and are in every sense of the word a successful organization.
“The Nawsco line between Portland and Pacific Coast has already developed sufficient business to make it a paying project and is growing very fast.
“We have within a few days loaded the first grain steamer through our new grain galleries at the State Pier, and it was a most successful operation. We loaded at the rate of six tons of grain a minute into the hold of this steamer—a Cunard Liner—completing her cargo of about 200,000 bushels in a few hours. We expect to do a very considerable overseas business both passenger and freight during the coming year.
“I trust this will not in any way discourage you in your own undertakings and if you will take the trouble to confer with the leading business men and organizations, including our Chamber of Commerce of the City of Portland and the State of Maine, you will have their idea and opinion of the value of the State Pier.
“A study of the Ports of our Western States including San Diego, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Portland, Oregon, Seattle, and Tacoma, as well as Vancouver in British Columbia will prove conclusively that the
growth and development of a State is largely dependent and keeps pace with the growth and development of port facilities.” (March 21, 1924.)
“At the present time the Directors of the Port have in their treasury a balance of approximately $8,000 after all bills are paid, and we feel this is a very good showing for a new Pier as a result of the first year of its existence. (April 16, 1924).”
(3)BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS
Under control of a board consisting of three members appointed by the Governor, and known as the Directors of the Port of Boston.
The State owns three piers, two of which are located on the South Boston waterfront at East Boston. These piers have track connection with the New Haven Railroad. A dry dock is under construction by the State, which will be the largest in the Western Hemisphere. About $15,000,000 has been expended or contracted for in connection with the harbor proper of Boston, over $5,000,000 of this being for State piers. The State of Massachusetts owns 122,751 acres of water frontage, much of which was acquired from the City of Boston.
(4)PROVIDENCE, RHODE ISLAND
The State of Rhode Island built in 1912 a State Dock at Providence costing about $1,000,000, and as a result of this the Fabre Line of steamships, connecting New York and the Mediterranean ports, made it a port of call. Also, as a result of this, an Immigration port has been established there, and the Portugese immigrants, as a class, are coming through that port. This has been a good investment for the state financially. The City of Providence has developed a large water frontage adjacent to this State property, for general terminal purposes upon which it has spent $1,108,281.86, and $375,000 has been appropriated to complete the terminal facilities owned by the City. Last year its income from one dock was $36,000 for dockage, and $16,000 for wharfage.
(5)PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA
The administration of the port of Philadelphia is under Municipal Control. The legislature permitted the City of Philadelphia free scope
of action within its own limits, but required the city to work jointly with the other municipalities along the river in all matters affecting the river beyond the city limits.
The city owns about 20 piers, a considerable number of which are leased to private corporations or used for ferries, or strictly municipal purposes. A belt line is operated jointly by the railways, under agreement with the city, which gives substantially the service of a municipal belt line.
(6)BALTIMORE, MARYLAND
Since 1908 the administration of the port of Baltimore has been under Municipal Control. An act of the legislature of 1921 conferred upon the municipality full power and authority to develop the port on Patapsco River, and establish harbor lines, provide wharves and railroad terminals. The Maryland legislature of 1920 passed an act authorizing the City to issue stock to the extent of $50,000,000 for the improvement of the port by a Commission known as the Port Development Commission and gave this Commission a right to acquire by deed, gift or otherwise, any lands or property rights, easements or franchise for the proper development of the port of Baltimore. That Commission is at the present time engaged in this line of work and has employed experts to assist. In its report issued March 1922 it is estimated that it will expend on the port of Baltimore $10,000,000 per year for ten years.
(7)Norfolk, Virginia
The Norfolk Army base is outside the city limits, ten miles from Norfolk itself. The city has now taken it over and is operating it by its Port Commission on a lease basis.
The city of Norfolk owns three tracts with a water front 2,301 feet long on Hampton Roads at Sewalls Point, about one mile below the Army supply base. It also owns several docks at street ends, suitable for launches and light draft vessels. Considerable interest has been manifested for several years by Norfolk commercial bodies and the city government in the improvement of port terminal facilities. In August, 1916, the city entered into an agreement with the Belt Line by which it was to acquire a site for a municipal joint rail and water terminal, and to make considerable progress within 12 months in constructing a pier with adequate transfer facilities between rail and water. In consideration of the above, the railroad company agreed to extend its tracks
to the new terminal. The agreement was carried out by both parties. As the Federal Government required the new terminal as a site for the Army supply base, the city sold the property to the Government in 1917. Subsequently, the city acquired a new site for a terminal, above alluded to, which is advantageously situated. For the purpose of fully utilizing the channel enlargement now being made by the Government, the construction of a joint rail and water terminal will not only be desirable but necessary for accommodating foreign traffic. A pier with 2,600 linear feet of dockage and a depth of 40 feet, freight house floor area of about 300,000 square feet and warehouse floor area of 1,000,000 square feet would probably answer as an initial unit. A pier similar to those of the Army supply base, described in this report, should meet requirements.
Additional terminal facilities for coastwise traffic would, for the present, appear unnecessary, provided the terminals now in use, which are without proper facilities, be improved.
(8)SAVANNAH, GEORGIA
The railroads here have extensive facilities—The Central Railroad of Georgia, the Atlantic Coast Line, and the Seaboard Air Line. In Savannah the railroads have built great steamship terminals, capable of use by general cargo lines, and have kept the terminals in such use.
Savannah is endeavoring to secure legislative authority for the construction and ownership of terminal facilities.
(9)Charleston, South Carolina
The port administration of Charleston is vested in the Municipality. The city has purchased terminal property from the railroads and the United States at a cost of $1,500,000 to be used as a public terminal. This includes a belt line railroad.
(10)JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA
Is located 27.5 miles from the mouth of the St. John's River. In 1913 the city authorized a bond issue of $1,500,000 for the construction
of Municipal Docks. The city is engaged in carrying out very large improvements at this terminal.
(11)PENSACOLA, FLORIDA
The city of Pensacola, Florida, owns 8,000 feet of frontage not developed, but a bond issue of $450,000 has been approved.
(12)MOBILE, ALABAMA
The City of Mobile is in the southwestern part of the State of Alabama, at the mouth of Mobile River, and the head of Mobile Bay.
The Legislature of the State of Alabama at its last session authorized a $10,000,000 bond issue for the development of this port.
In Port Series No. 3, prepared by the Board of Engineers for Rivers and Harbors of the War Department, and dated 1922, appears the report of the Board. That devoted to Mobile comprises a document of 160 pages with maps. The introduction to the government report above alluded to contains the following comment:
“The War Department is required by law to assist the various ports in the design and construction of modern port terminals of such character as to handle the particular business of the port in the most expeditious and therefore in the most economical manner. The United States Shipping Board in its encouragement of an American owned merchant marine can afford to overlook no detail which will contribute to the economy of ship operation, and the curtailment of the time spent by vessels in port is an important item in ship economics. Before they can properly function in the encouragement of ports and ships both the War Department and the Shipping Board must have the facts, without which the shipping business can not be successfully conducted, nor the port terminal correctly planned and economically operated.
“Before establishing shipping agencies, the manufacturer must consider every factor influencing the prompt and economical movement of his products. Traffic does not always follow the shortest route, or that having the lowest line haul rate, but it will usually be found that there are sound reasons for this seeming disregard of economy. Frequently the principal of these reasons is to be found at the port through which the traffic must pass. In order to attract business, a port must first provide the facilities essential for handling the particular commodities which it is likely to be offered, and this requires a detailed study of production and consumption within the territory naturally tributary to the port, and the provision of equipment especially designed to meet the several requirements of this traffic. The ships calling, or
likely to call, at the port must be studied in the endeavor to provide the facilities and render the service which will permit their most rapid turnaround. The railroad situation is frequently a controlling element in port success. There should be ample trackage serving the terminal or terminals, with the most economical interchange both between the several railroads entering the port, and between these railroads and the ship. Not only should the physical characteristics of the terminal with regard to the coördination between railroad and ship be examined, but the railroad rates should be scrutinized, as in various instances a commensurate utilization of a port has been rendered impracticable by unfavorable rate conditions.
“The absence of any one essential may prevent what should be an economical route or port from securing its tributary business. The trouble may be the lack of adequate terminals, the absence or inaccessibility of storage facilities, the imposition of excessive switching or wharfage charges, the absence of repair or docking facilities, the lack of well-balanced cargoes and frequent sailings, or other conditions affecting the movement of goods through the port and the ability of vessels to earn a fair revenue. Port coördination and management are apt to play a considerable part in the success or failure of the port community to attract and hold business. Where possible, the control of all deep water frontage by the public, as represented by the State or municipality, including the ownership and operation of a belt line railroad connecting all rail lines and all terminals, is a practical solution of the coördination problem, and is an effective remedy for many of the ills that now exist.
“Ports should not have to depend upon the good will or selfish interests of either railroads or steamship lines to develop business. The railroads may prefer to have the business go elsewhere, and the water carriers can scarcely be expected to undertake extensive operations designed to bring goods to a particular port. In other words, the development of traffic should be regarded as one of the permanent functions of the port itself. Among the important objects, therefore, which it is hoped to attain from this series of reports, is a more general appreciation of the benefits to be derived from proper development of our ports.
PUBLIC TERMINAL IMPROVEMENTS“The publicly owned terminals in existence at the present time are owned by the City of Mobile and consist of about 1,500 feet of wharfage, located on the west side of the river near the center of the business section and extending from Dauphin Street to State Street. This wharf is equipped with a shed and has rail connection.
“The city has had under construction an earth-filled pier, known as Arlington Pier, on the west side of Mobile Bay, one and three quarter miles below the mouth of the Mobile River. The plan calls for a pier extending 8,300 feet into the bay, 300 feet wide for the outer 5,800 feet of its length, and 1,315 feet wide for the remaining portion of its length; for the development of this pier by the construction of ample warehouses for storing and handling cargo; and for connecting the pier, by means of a municipal belt line, with all railroads entering the city. Due to increased cost of material, insufficient funds, and the development of unexpected difficulties of construction, the work has been suspended with only twenty per cent of the project completed and with much of that constructed already destroyed.
OWNERSHIP OF WATER FRONT
“There is practically a continuous series of wharves and piers extending for about 14,000 feet along the western or city shore of the Mobile River, from its mouth to One Mile Creek. One of these wharves, with a frontage of 1,500 feet, extending from the foot of Dauphin Street to State Street is, as stated under a previous heading, owned by the city of Mobile. The city also owns 140 acres of the lower end of the city, the location of the Arlington Pier. The remaining frontage is owned by railroads and private interests.
“Blakely Island, on the east side of the Mobile River, has a total frontage of approximately 11,000 feet, on the channel of Mobile River, of which 1,244 feet have been developed. The government owns a frontage of 1,000 feet, the site of the Inland and Coastwise Waterways Service coal and ore handling plant, and the fuel-oil station of the United States Shipping Board. The remainder of the frontage on the west side of the island, amounting to 10,000 feet, is owned by private interests.
“Pinto Island has a total frontage of 3,200 feet on the improved channel, all of which is privately owned. It is occupied by several dry-dock and ship-repair plants.”
The report above referred to is thorough and exhaustive, and covers practically every phase of port operation. It may be stated here that a study of this report, both as to substance and form, would prove profitable and illuminating as being applicable in many details to our own port problem.
(13)NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA
The port of New Orleans is under control of the State Board of Harbor Commission, an agency of the State of Louisiana. The greater part of the terminal facilities at New Orleans are owned and controlled by the State. It has 14.4 miles of water frontage on both banks of the Mississippi River under the control or direction of the Board of Commissioners. It has grown steadily under this control, until it has become the second port in the United States, and presents a very successful example of public ownership and operation of port facilities. The State and other interests have expended over $50,000,000 there.
The State owns eighteen covered wharves with an area of 2,450,000 square feet and seven open wharves with an area of 620,000 square feet. An immense cotton terminal warehouse has been constructed as well as a public grain elevator.
A municipal belt line is operated by the city, which connects the wharves and railroads.
(14)HOUSTON, TEXAS
Fifty miles from the Gulf. Thirty million dollars has been spent on this enterprise, and she is now bonding herself for four million more, and wants more business and seems sure of getting it.
(15)SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA
Prior to 1911 the port of San Diego was under the control of the State Board. At that time it was ceded to San Diego and has since been under Municipal control. They have invested $1,500,000 in Municipal port.
(16)LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA
The harbor is constructed from an open roadstead, and located at San Pedro Bay, 30 miles from the center of the city.
The federal government constructed a breakwater 1,155 feet long, creating an artificial harbor.
The city of Los Angeles owns 90 per cent of the water front, including 1,581 acres of tidelands. Of the latter, 916 acres have been reclaimed and 350 acres are now under lease.
The city has expended to date (1920) on the improvement of the harbor $5,800,000. Bonds for $4,500,000 additional were authorized at an election held in May of this year. Practically all existing navigation facilities are being utilized and additional facilities are being created.
(17)SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA
The port terminals of San Francisco are owned, controlled and operated by the State of California through the State Board and Harbor Commission.
The port is self supporting, and was constructed at an original cost of $13,000,000, for which the State authorized a bond issue. The bill creating the port provided that all profits accruing above its operating expenses, interest on bonds, and the creation of a sinking fund for certain bonds issued, should be used for the further improvement of the port.
For the year ending 1921, an appraisement of the property and other facilities was at a value of $50,000,000. It has forty modern piers, providing 15 miles of berthage space. All these terminal facilities are maintained by revenues derived from dockage on ships, tolls on cargoes, rental of docks, sea-wall lots, buildings, etc., and the beltline railroad switching charges. The terminal system has been self-supporting from the beginning and under the law it is required to so continue. Such a terminal system operating at cost and having a centralized control over the activities of the entire water front has proven to be successful in developing the port meeting the requirements of a gradually increasing commerce and taking full advantage of the improvements afforded by the Federal Government for the locality. Its charges are the lowest of any port in the United States. Its average annual revenue is $2,500,000.
For the year ending 1921, it made a profit of $665,782.07. This port was built and constructed after overcoming many obstructive tactics, when the development was first proposed.
(18)PORTLAND, OREGON
This is an inland port on the Williamette River, 125 miles from the ocean and 12 miles above its confluence with the Columbia River. This port is subject to both State and Municipal control. They are spending $10,500,000 on port facilities.
The city owns three docks with warehouses. The two principal docks also have railroad facilities and tracks for the third are contemplated. There is no complete belt line, although the various railroads perform some such service.
(19)TACOMA, WASHINGTON
This port is under the direct control of the Municipality, and funds for harbor improvements and wharf construction are provided by bonds issued by the city. It owns about four miles water front, and two modern docks known as the Municipal Dock and the City Dock, having respectively 500 and 300 feet frontage. On the Municipal Dock there is a storehouse with track connections. The buildings on the City Dock are leased in general.
(20)SEATTLE, WASHINGTON
The port is administered by a separate and independent Municipal corporation, created by an act of the State legislature. Their highly equipped terminals have cost about $10,000,000, and the city has probably more varied terminal facilities than any other port, although New Orleans has made recent strides with its cotton warehouses and grain elevator.
The foregoing are among the principal ports, publicly owned and operated.
In other instances State governments are coöperating with municipalities in projecting or having under process of construction new additional port facilities:
Portsmouth, N. H., Burlington, Vt., New Bedford, Mass., New London, Conn., New Haven, Conn., Newark, N. J., Wilmington, Del., and many others. In fact it would appear that North Carolina is the only State that in some degree is not developing her facilities.
(21)POLICY OF PUBLIC OWNERSHIP
The New Orleans plan of public ownership as described by Mr. Walter Parker of New Orleans will given an outline of what may be expected to be the outcome of intelligent effort, and the history of other ports—Houston, Texas; Portland, Oregon; Los Angeles, California; Seattle, Washington; Boston, New York and many others, will all bear testimony not only to the wisdom of the enterprise of public ownership, but the practical, profitable experience derived from the exercise of the broad, constructive policies formulated and put into actual working practice, during and after years of intelligent development.
In a brief by Mr. Parker regarding the port of New Orleans, so much of general interest and applicable to any publicly-owned port is contained, it is quoted quite fully as follows:
“Public ownership of harbor sites as practiced at New Orleans, is not confined to the mere building and operation of port facilities, but embraces a complete policy under which both public and private enterprise may find free play under the most wholesome conditions. The idea is to supply, with public funds, facilities for shippers and transportation lines who are not ready to create facilities for themselves, leased sites for those who desire temporary occupancy, and an opportunity for fee simple ownership of harbor sites for those who desire to invest in facilities for permanent occupancy.
“The working out of this broad policy has required many years of effort. Prior to 1896, the public owned all the river harbor frontage
but had not created any machinery for the practical operation of the port under public ownership.
“A Board of Commissioners of the Port of New Orleans was created by law in 1896. It sold some bonds, against the revenues of the port, and built some covered wharves, then some warehouses and other facilities. Ultimately this Board was taken out of politics and given enormous powers in the Constitution of Louisiana. Its vision developed as its work progressed.
“Today the Board is composed of five of the strongest business men, appointed by the Governor for definite terms. This Board serves without pay, and acts as a Board of Directors. It names a general manager, who need not, at the time of his appointment, be a resident of the State, and empowers him to operate the port in the same way any other large enterprise is operated. He employs his staff, who in turn, employ the workers. The surest way for an applicant to fail to obtain employment is for such applicant to attempt to bring political influence to bear.
“Department heads are employed because of executive ability, and salaries are paid accordingly. There is nothing in the law to prevent a proper salary reward for merit and service.
“The world's greatest cotton warehouse and terminal has been built on the river front by the Board. Similarly, the world's most efficient grain elevator, and a splendid coal tipple and storage plant have been created.
“Many miles of wharves, with enclosed steel sheds over them, have been built.
DRIFT OF TRADE“Because the markets of great promise now lie in Latin America, the Orient and Africa.
“Because the bulk of the resources of raw material and food supply and low cost transportation are in the Mississippi Valley, and
“Because of a port policy which is open and all embracing, New Orleans, on the valley's direct trade route to the New Markets, anticipates a sharp favorable diversion from the normal tonnage graph of commerce and industry, and has planned its development only after comprehensive study and thorough analysis to take care of this increase.
“It has sought all the good there is in public ownership and all the good in private ownership of facilities, and is using its great powers to so guide and influence both as to avoid the limitations of the one and the tendency toward monopolization in the case of the other.”
NEW SHIP CHANNEL TO THE SEA“Silt and current create a channel problem at the mouth of the river, 110 miles below New Orleans, South Pass, where the Eads Jetties is, has served as a 36-foot channel through Southwest Pass, but has not yet succeeded in getting the desired depth there.
“The completion of the Inner Harbor and Industrial Canal Lock now makes possible the dredging of a ship channel of 40 or 45 feet depth direct to the gulf through Lake Pontchartrain, which will be free from silt and currents. Such channel would strike the gulf many miles east of the mouth of the Mississippi. Ninety per cent of the ships coming to New Orleans approach from the east. Through such a channel,
nine out of every ten ships would save possibly 24 hours’ time on every voyage to and from New Orleans. The money value of such saving, it has been estimated, would equal the cost of such a channel in a period of less than three years.
“By opening such a channel the federal government would greatly facilitate the commerce of the Mississippi Valley, and ultimately save much monetary outlay. Sailing ships could then reach the main harbor of New Orleans under their own sails. The Inner Harbor lock into the river harbor would also serve the new channel to the sea, which would reduce the cost of such a channel by half. Such a channel is a probability of the near future.”
PORT ECONOMYAs a rule, bulk commodities are produced and made ready for market at one season of the year, and must rest in store somewhere until gradually consumed by the world. The producer needs money, and so must call upon the middle man to carry the load until consuming markets become available. It follows that the greater the cost, risk and difficulty ahead of the middleman, the greater the margin of profit and expense required by him. This means lower returns to the producer and higher prices to the consumer.
“It also follows that where world-used commodities are rapidly passed into consuming markets, before required for actual consumption, they often lose relative value because they can not again be offered for sale in world markets, as would be the case were they held in store in primary supply markets until actually required in some consuming market. This is well illustrated by the case of cotton. Once cotton crosses the ocean to Liverpool it must carry the cost of ocean transportation, and it cannot be resold to American or Oriental mills. But so long as such cotton remains in a primary supply market such as New Orleans, it maintains its parity and may be resold into any consuming market. In most years cotton values in winter, spring, and summer, reflect a greater incrase over fall values than the mere carrying charges amount to.
“Lost motion in handling, unnecessary drayage, high costs of labor, insurance and money, and delays which impose a burden on transportation, are factors of moment in every American port, and reduce the advantage American traders should naturally enjoy by reason of an abundance of raw material, unimpaired credit, and potentially low cost of transportation.
“Port congestion, resulting from lack of proper planning, from personal greed, and from an absence of unselfish guidance and authority, has resulted in high charges in many American ports, which in turn narrow world competitive markets for American products.
“Knowing these facts, and given a wide open opportunity for the testing out of schools of thought, and competitive policies, and for encouraging enterprise and business endeavor, the New Orleans port authorities have planned for today and tomorrow, and are in position to provide policies under which any wholesome tendency in commerce and industry may be fostered.”
“A market of deposit, for the products of the valley on their way abroad, and for the products of the world on their way to the valley, is on the cards. The facilities for such a market of deposit embrace complete coördination between rail, highway and inland water and
ocean transportation, storage and mill. There is provision for certificates of storage, bearing the guaranty of the sovereign State of Louisiana, showing character, class, weight and condition of commodities in store. This means low cost money. Fire-proof waterside warehouses mean low insurance. Coördination means low cost handling.
“Such warehouses may be built on leased harbor frontage by warehousemen, or built by the port authorities and leased to warehousemen, or be both owned and operated by the public, through the Port Board, as the case may require.
“A municipality owned and operated Belt Railway system coördinates all rail lines entering the city, all wharves and warehouses, and all factory sites.
“Through privately-owned harbors and harbor sites on ship laterals of the Inner Harbor, industry, using either the raw products of the valley or of foreign fields, and coördinated with all port facilities and transportation by publicly-owned belt railroad and by lighter, may, singly or in combination, develop and employ economies of a very rare character.”
APPENDIX| A. | CHAPTER 94, PUBLIC LAWS 1923, CREATING THE STATE SHIP AND WATER TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION |
| B. | CHRONOLOGY OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE COMMISSION |
APPENDIX A
AN ACT TO CREATE THE STATE SHIP AND WATER
TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
[CHAPTER 94, PUBLIC LAWS OF N. C., 1923.]
WHEREAS, in order to further promote the public welfare, to provide cheaper transporation to the markets within and without the State of the products of the farms, the forests, mines and factories of the State, and to effect cheaper transportation for commodities purchased by the people of the State, both within and without the State, it is deemed advisable to use more fully the navigable rivers, sounds and other bodies of water within the boundaries of the State: Now, therefore,
The General Assembly of North Carolina do enact:
SECTION 1. That a State Ship and Water Transportation Commission is hereby created to consist of nine members, who shall be appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate, who shall be known as the State Ship and Water Transportation Commission: Provided, that any commissioner appointed under this act may be removed by the Governor for cause. In the case of death, resignation, removal by the Governor for cause, or mental disability of any commissioner during his term of office, his successor shall be appointed by the Governor to fill out his unexpired term. If the Senate shall refuse to confirm any appointee of the Governor, then it shall be the duty of the Governor to appoint another and send in his name to the Senate for its action. The board of commissioners shall at their first meeting, to be held not later than April fifteen, one thousand nine hundred and twenty-three, at a place in the City of Raleigh, to be designated by the Governor, elect one of their number chairman and another secretary, who shall hold for one year and until their successors are elected. The headquarters and main office of the commission shall be located in the State Capitol. The members of the said commission at their first meeting shall organize and adopt a common seal. They shall keep minutes of their meetings, which shall be open to public inspection. They shall have the power to adopt and enforce rules and regulations for the government of their meetings and proceedings, and for the transaction of the business of the commission, and shall have the power and authority to make all rules and regulations for the carrying out the true intent and purposes of this act. They shall meet at the offices of the commission at such regular times, not less than quarterly, as they may by rule provide, and may hold special meetings at any time and place at the call of the chairman or any four members.
SEC. 2. The said commission shall, as soon as practicable after its first meeting, carefully inquire, investigate and ascertain:
(1) If it is feasible and will be reasonably profitable to operate, freight rates and other advantages being considered, one or more lines of ship and water transportation on the navigable rivers, sounds, and other navigable waters within the boundaries of the State and between the towns located on such navigable waters and towns and cities located beyond the boundaries of the State to the north and to the south along the Atlantic seaboard and elsewhere.
(2) The cost of purchasing suitable and adequate boats and ships and the cost of maintaining and operating the same.
(3) The practicability of obtaining docks, wharves and other landing places along the banks of the said navigable rivers, and at towns located thereon within the State, and the feasibility of obtaining terminal facilities at towns or cities without the boundaries of the State, and the cost of building, buying or renting the same.
(4) The reasonable estimate of the earnings of said one or more lines of water transportation to be operated and maintained by said commission.
The said commission shall, after said investigation hereinbefore provided, report in writing its findings and conclusions to the Governor and Council of State, and that the commission named herein, shall cause to be printed a complete report of their findings of facts, and conclusions and mail copy of same to each member of the General Assembly, and if the said Governor and Council of State, after considering the said report, shall conclude that it is feasible, practicable and will be reasonably profitable to operate the said one or more lines of water transportation recommended, if any, by the said commission, then the Governor shall report the findings of said commission and Council of State to a subsequent general or special meeting of the General Assembly. But if said Governor and Council of State shall from said report find that it is not feasible or advisable for the said lines of water transportation to be established and operated, then nothing further shall be done under this act, but the Governor shall report to the next General Assembly of North Carolina the action of the Governor and the Council of State, and shall transmit the report of the said Commission.
SEC. 3. The members of the said Commission shall each before entering upon the discharge of his duties take an oath that he will faithfully and honestly execute the duties of the office during his continuance in office.
SEC. 4. That for the purpose of making the investigation required by section two of this act, the sum of Twenty-five Thousand Dollars ($25,000.00) is hereby appropriated out of the general funds of the State Treasury, to be paid by the State Treasurer upon vouchers approved by the chairman and secretary of said Commission and by the Governor of the State.
SEC. 5. The members of the Commission shall each receive ten dollars ($10.00) per day while engaged in the discharge of the duties of their offices and their actual traveling expenses, and the same shall be paid upon voucher signed by the commission, and approved by the chairman and secretary of the commission.
SEC. 6. This act shall be in full force and effect from and after its ratification.
Ratified this the 16th day of February, A. D. 1923.
APPENDIX BCHRONOLOGY OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE
COMMISSION
MARCH 27, 1923:
Organization meeting.
APRIL 11, 1923:
Hearing in Fayetteville and inspection of the upper Cape Fear.
APRIL 12, 1923:
Hearing in Southport and inspection of its harbor and the lower Cape Fear.
APRIL 13, 1923:
Hearings in Wilmington and inspection of its harbor and port facilities.
MAY 16, 1923:
Hearings held at Morehead City and New Bern, and inspection of Neuse and Trent Rivers. In executive session the following chairmen of sub-committees were appointed: Charles S. Wallace, on Cost and Operation of Boats; Charles E. Waddell, on Docks and Terminals; Emmett H. Bellamy, Commercial Tonnage; and J. Y. Joyner, Rates and Earnings of Boat Lines.
JUNE 7, 1923:
Hearing in Washington, N. C., and inspection of the Pamlico River.
JUNE 8, 1923:
Inspection of Pamlico Sound and adjacent waters, and hearing at Manteo.
JUNE 9, 1923:
Inspection of Albemarle Sound and adjacent waters, and hearings at Elizabeth City and Edenton.
JUNE 25, 1923:
Executive session in Raleigh, and hearing on the commercial possibilities of the Roanoke river. Southport and New Bern citizens also presented additional material.
JUNE 26, 1923:
Hearings continued, with the Wilmington Chamber of Commerce presenting its brief.
JULY 18-19, 1923:
Executive session in Raleigh, and additional data received from Washington, N. C. Mr. Pool of the North Carolina Traffic Association presented facts concerning the freight rate situation. Mr. J. S. Williams of Wilmington presented a brief in opposition to state-owned and operated ships and terminals. Mr. J. A. Taylor of Wilmington made a statement outlining the importance of the problem under investigation, and advising as to certain important factors bearing on the matter. A committee was appointed to confer with the Interstate Commerce Commission concerning rate problems, and the relation of water transportation thereto.
AUGUST 14-15, 1923:
Executive session in Raleigh for the report of the committee appointed to confer with the Interstate Commerce Commission. Passed resolution approving the grouping of the Cape Fear and Yadkin Valley Railroad with the Norfolk and Western system in the scheme of consolidation now being considered. Conference with the State Corporation Commission on matters of joint interest. The Corporation Commission was requested to institute proceedings before the Interstate Commerce Commission for the purpose of establishing through proportional rates on the Clyde Steamship Line via the port of Wilmington to interior North Carolina. Major Oscar O. Keuntz, of the Corps of Engineers of the United States Army, assumed his duties as advisor to the Commission.
SEPTEMBER 11, 1923:
Executive Session in Raleigh, and a hearing on brief of the Chamber of Commerce of Southport, which was presented by General E. F. Glenn of the United States Army. Mr. C. G. Yates, Chairman of the Traffic Bureau of the Greensboro Chamber of Commerce, presented expert evidence concerning rate matters. Commissioners Wallace and Waddell were appointed delegates to attend the session of the Atlantic Deeper Waterways Association in Norfolk, Virginia.
OCTOBER 10, 1923:
Dr. Edwin J. Clapp, noted port authority of New York City, appeared before the Commission by invitation, and presented a comprehensive statement concerning port development. The Wilmington Chamber of Commerce presented a supplementary brief, with expert testimony by Mr. H. McL. Harding, Consulting Engineer and Terminal Expert. A committee from Manteo presented a statement concerning the importance of the location of an adequate terminal at that point. Commissioners Waddell and Bellamy were appointed to make a personal inspection of the port developments at Charleston and Savannah.
NOVEMBER 21, 1923:
Executive session in Raleigh with Senator J. R. Baggett and Mr. Thomas A. Kelly concerning trunk line possibilities. General E. F. Glenn presented certain materials bearing on the problem under investigation. Southport presented a statement in answer to the supplemental brief of Wilmington. The Wilmington Chamber of Commerce presented an additional statement. Reports of committees received and considered. Resolutions were adopted approving the construction of a third Lock in the Cape Fear River.
JANUARY 17-18, 1924:
Executive session in Raleigh for consideration of the form and content of the report.
FEBRUARY 7, 1924:
Executive session in Greensboro for consideration of a tentative draft of the report.
FEBRUARY 28-29, 1924:
Executive session in Raleigh for consideration of the report. Resolution adopted endorsing the deepening of the channel in the Cape Fear River to thirty feet from Wilmington to the sea.
MARCH 1, 1924:
The Commission attended the hearing in Raleigh before Commissioner Cassidy of the Interstate Commerce Commission on the through rate from New York via the Clyde Line, through Wilmington to interior North Carolina.
APRIL 9, 1924:
Executive session in Raleigh for consideration of final report. A resolution endorsing extension of the Inland Waterway from Beaufort to the Cape Fear River was unanimously passed.
MAY 8, 1924:
The Commission met in executive session in Raleigh. The report in its final form was discussed, unanimously approved, duly signed and turned over to the printer.
MAY 23, 1924:
Report delivered to the Governor and Council of State.
INDEX
| Page | |
| ANALYSIS OF NORTH CAROLINA PORTS, Introduction | 38 |
| Baltimore, Md., Harbor of | 130 |
| Bay River Improvement | 68 |
| Beaufort Harbor, Analysis of | 59 |
| Beaufort Harbor Improvement | 70 |
| Beaufort Inlet Improvement | 70 |
| Black River Improvement | 71 |
| Boats, Cost and Operation of | 90 |
| Boston, Mass., Harbor of | 129 |
| Brief in re Corporation Commission v. Aberdeen & Rockfish R. R. | 105 |
| Burden of Freight Rates on the Trucking Industry | 116 |
| Cape Fear Basin, Depth of Water in and Draft of Vessels engaged in Ocean Shipping | 92 |
| Cape Fear River | 61 |
| Cape Fear River, at and below Wilmington | 62 |
| Cape Fear River above Wilmington | 63 |
| Cape Fear River Improvement | 71 |
| Cape Fear River, 3d Lock in (Brief Fayetteville Chamber of Commerce) | 72 |
| Cape Fear and Yadkin Valley Railway, History of | 118 |
| Cape Lookout Harbor of Refuge, Analysis of | 52 |
| Cape Lookout Harbor of Refuge, Improvement | 70 |
| Central Railway connecting Interior of State with Ocean Port as conceived in 1827-’28 | 27 |
| Channel Connecting Thoroughfare Bay and Cedar Bay Improvement | 69 |
| Charleston, S. C., Harbor of | 131 |
| CONCLUSIONS OF THE COMMISSION | 19 |
| Contentnea Creek Improvement | 69 |
| Comparison of Rates from Chicago to Virginia and N. C. cities | 111 |
| Comparison of Rates from New York to Interior N. C. points via Norfolk and Wilmington | 103 |
| Comparative Statement showing Rates, etc., from Chicago and Detroit to Norfolk Va., and N. C. points | 112 |
| Deliveries to Water Carriers at Norfolk in 1922 | 34 |
| Earnings of leading Railways serving North Carolina | 117 |
| Edenton | 72 |
| Elizabeth City | 72 |
| EXISTING SITUATION WITH REGARD TO NORTH CAROLINA'S PORTS AND WATERWAYS | 25 |
| Fayetteville, Analysis Port of | 48 |
| Governor Morrison's Message of 1923 | 31 |
| Houston, Texas, Harbor of | 135 |
| Jacksonville, Fla., Harbor of | 131 |
| Los Angeles, California, Harbor of | 135 |
| Manteo, Analysis Harbor of | 56 |
| Manteo (Shallowbag) Bay Improvement | 68 |
| Meherrin River Improvement | 71 |
| Mobile, Ala., Harbor of | 132 |
| Page | |
| Morehead City, Analysis Harbor of | 50 |
| Morehead City Harbor Improvement | 70 |
| Letter Transmitting The Report | 5 |
| Newbegun Creek Improvement | 71 |
| New Bern, Analysis Harbor of | 54 |
| New Orleans, La., Harbor of | 134 |
| Neuse river | 63 |
| Norfolk Va., Harbor of | 130 |
| Pensacola, Fla., Harbor of | 132 |
| Philadelphia, Pa., Harbor of | 129 |
| Panama Canal as a Factor | 35 |
| Portland, Me., Harbor of | 126 |
| Portland, Oregon, Harbor of | 136 |
| Present Discriminations about to be Increased | 113 |
| Providence, R. I., Harbor of | 129 |
| Policy of Public Ownership | 137 |
| Report of Committee on Inland Navigation, December, 1815 | 25 |
| Report of Committee on Inland Navigation, December, 1816 | 26 |
| REVIEW OF WHAT IS BEING DONE IN OTHER STATES | 125 |
| Rivers and Harbors in Wilmington District, Statistics of | 86 |
| Roanoke river | 65 |
| San Francisco, Cal., Harbor of | 135 |
| San Diego, Cal., Harbor of | 135 |
| Savannah, Ga., Harbor of | 131 |
| Seattle, Washington, Harbor of | 137 |
| Scuppernong River Improvement | 67 |
| Shallotte River Improvement | 71 |
| Southport, Analysis Harbor of | 42 |
| South River Improvement | 68 |
| Specific Cases of Railway Discriminations | 99 |
| Statement of Senator Simmons | 36 |
| Swift Creek Improvement | 69 |
| Tacoma, Washington, Harbor of | 136 |
| Trent River Improvement | 69 |
| Waterway connecting Swan Quarter and Deep Bay Improvement | 68 |
| Waterway Beaufort to Jacksonville | 66 |
| Waterway connecting Core Sound and Beaufort Harbor Improvement | 70 |
| WATERWAYS WITHIN THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA | 61 |
| Wilmington, Analysis Harbor of | 45 |
| WISDOM OF DEVELOPMENT RECOMMENDED TO LEGISLATURE ONE HUNDRED YEARS AGO | 25 |
| APPENDIX: | |
| A. Chapter 94, Public Laws 1923, creating the State Ship and Water Transportation Commission. | |
| B. Chronology of the Activities of the Commission. |
