Capt. RANDALL. Yes, sir.

Mr. PADGETT. To what extent?

Capt. RANDALL. Well, it would fill up to its natural depth, unless you could take it somewhere there south of it, put a dike out and throw the current, deflect the current from the end of your dikejust the same as our piers on the city front-we have to dig those at the ends.

Mr. PADGETT. The proposal was that the dikes come in there [indicating], according to program, and then a breakwater is built out there for perhaps 500 feet beyond the mouth of the dike on either side. Would that prevent the silting in front of the dike, or would that produce an eddy in which it would go around and accumulate?

Capt. RANDALL. It would accumulate. Wherever you create an eddy, it is bound to accumulate-it is slack water.

Mr. PADGETT. That is what I wanted to find out. For instance, say this represents the breakwater that goes out 500 feet on either side in front of the dikes that are set back 500 feet back there, and the mouth of the dike there is dredged 40 or 42 feet from the sills. Is the current such that it would sweep in and make an eddy and deposit silt in that pocket in front of the dikes?

Capt. RANDALL. Yes, it would.

Mr. PADGETT. How fast do you think it would?
Capt. RANDALL. Oh, that is very hard to say.

Mr. PADGETT. I don't mean in inches, but would it be a substantial and material deposit?

Capt. RANDALL. Yes; it would deposit very fast. It does the same thing along the city front-the wharves on the city front, between the wharves it fills in very quickly. They are continually digging, probably dig them down to 30 feet, and I suppose they will last maybe a year and a half, and they have got to be dug againcontinually digging. It is just the same between two piers as it is between two breakwaters-it would be exactly the same thing.

Mr. HICKS. Captain, there has been a good deal of talk about the relative conditions of fog in the southern part of the bay and the northern part. What is your opinion in regard to that?

Capt. RANDALL. There is more fog in the northern part of the bay, a great deal.

Mr. HICKS. More fog in the northern part?
Capt. RANDALL. Yes.

Mr. HICKS. We have been hearing the reverse.

Capt. RANDALL. You have got winter fogs that last about two months steady, say in January and February you have got a great deal of fog in the northern part of the bay, particularly above, say, Angel Island. In the summer months you have your fog that comes in through the Gate and breaks off at Angel Island to the northward, and breaks off about Goat Island to the southward-goes in across the channel. They will last, I suppose, about five months of the year. South of that you have no fog to speak of, only occasionally in the wintertime, maybe, oh, I suppose 20 or 25 days in the year.

Mr. HICKS. But for the 365 days of the year, on an average, there would be more fog to the north of Angel Island than to the south of it, you think?

Capt. RANDALL. Yes, sir.

Senator BALL. We are obliged to you, Capt. Randall.

Mr. NOLAN. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the commission, if you will bear with us for a few minutes we will try to close up on behalf of San Francisco.

I want to say that I have been very much interested in the statements of some of the other gentlemen representing the other sites. The other day Chief O'Shaughnessy told you of the wonderful advantages of the Hetch Hetchy project so far as water and power are concerned. Some of the gentlemen are very generous in giving away sites that cost nothing, and they are giving away some of the San Francisco advantages that cost nothing. The Hetch Hetchy project is going to cost us about $75,000,000, and I want to extend, on behalf of San Francisco, an invitation to all of these gentlemen, and especially to our friends over across the bay, to come in and share some of the cost of these wonderful properties with us. And let me say this to you gentlemen who represent the Senate and the House and you naval officials: Nobody else has any right to give away or offer to give you anything on behalf of San Francisco. When you have finally determined the location for a naval base, our labor market is at your command, all the facilities of our industrial and civic organizations and labor organizations are at your command, and all of the assistance that the city and county of San Francisco, with its wonderful advantages, both so far as Hetch Hetchy and every other project that we have are concerned, they are all at your command. And we' will give them to you gentlemen; and these other gentlemen do not have to give them to you.

But I repeat that if they want to share in these projects of ours, we extend to them now a generous invitation to come in and help pay for this wonderful Hetch Hetchy project and share in the benefits, not alone in so far as it may affect our national defense, but in so far as might affect their different industries, and especially across the bay in relation to their industrial projects.

Gentlemen, I will, with your permission, call upon the mayor, who will address you for a minute, and after that upon Dr. Rastall for a few minutes, and Mr. Thompson wants to make a slight correction in a statement he made the other day, and we are through. Mayor Rolph, gentlemen, who desires to say a few words to you. Mr. BRITTEN. I understand Mr. Thompson desires to ask a privilege

now.

Mr. NOLAN. Yes, before the mayor proceeds, I have just learned that Mr. Thompson does not want to take up your committee's time, but will file his statement.

Mr. BRITTEN. Mr. Thompson's statement will stand as his remarks in the record.

(The statement of Mr. Thompson, handed to the reporter for insertion in the record, is as follows:)

STATEMENT OF P. R. THOMPSON FOR THE RECORD IN THE HEARING ON NAVAL BASE SITE, NOVEMBER 19, 1920.

TRANSPORTATION-HUNTERS POINT.

The San Francisco Examiner, of November 18, quotes Mr. Joseph E. Caine as follows:

"The matter of railroad freight rates between Alameda and Hunters Point was discussed and it was admitted that the transcontinental rates would be the same, but that delivery at Alameda would be from one to five days quicker. Power and water experts said the rates for these commodities would be about the same for the two sites."

All the data furnished and testimony given by me on behalf of all of the organizations in San Francisco has given reference to authorities in every instance and therefore is emphatically evidence and not mere declaration or argument, and the following evidence is submitted to refute the above statement.

I have handed to the reporter Southern Pacific Coast Division time-table No. 4, of August 3, 1919, which were available, and the following is reference to detail on pages 4 and 5 of the coast division time-table and pages 12 and 13 of the western division time-table, which specifically constitutes evidence. In railroad operating parlance, all trains coming to San Francisco regardless of direction are classed as westbound trains, and all trains going from San Francisco are classed as eastbound trains.

All transcontinental freight trains coming via the Ogden gateway are run as manifest trains, either as a regular train carded on the time-table or as an extra section of this train, and are known as manifest trains because they are so segregated to permit the longest haul without breaking up (disturbing) the train. The Ogden manifest shown on Western Division time card, page 13, as No. 253, is westbound, and this train leaves Ogden with transcontinental freight for the bay district. It is scheduled as terminating at San Francisco and runs via Roseville, which is just east of Sacramento, Stockton, Tracy, Niles, Dumbarton Bridge to San Francisco. On western division time-table 13 it leaves Tracy at 3.30 p. m., arrives at Niles 7.15 p. m., and on page 16 leaves Niles at 7.40 p. m. and arrives at Redwood Junction at 9.30 p. m., where it is turned over to the coast division, as shown on page 5, as train No. 253, and arrives at San Francisco at 11.30 p. m.

No regularly scheduled Ogden manifest is carried on time card with Oakland as the terminus for the reason that the preponderance of all traffic, on account of the export and other traffic that has to be transshipped via steamer, has to come to San Francisco wharves. If, however, this same train, No. 253, was scheduled to Oakland and moved via Niles, it would be scheduled to arrive at Oakland at 9.15 p. m. The statement calculating the time of two hours from Niles to Oakland is based upon the schedule of the same train on the coast division, page 5, from Redwood to San Francisco, which is approximately the same distance as from Niles to Oakland.

The other transcontinental freight moving by the Southern Pacific Sunset Route, or through the El Paso gateway, is hauled in train No. 243, as shown on coast division time card, beginning with page 15, where it is turned over to the coast division at Santa Barbara at 6 p. m., and following it through on the various subdivisions of the coast division it arrives at San Jose at 10.30 p. m. of the second day. At San Jose the Oakland and Alameda freight in this train is cut out and it is run through from there as an extra on the western division or it is put in train No. 801, which is scheduled on page 14 of western division time card westbound. Train 243 leaves San Jose, after cutting out the Oakland and Alameda freight, at 12.01 a. m. of the third day and arrives at San Francisco at 3 a. m., as scheduled on page 5 of coast division time card. This is called the Sunset and Galveston steamer manifest train of the Southern Pacific Co., and the service to San Francisco is, I maintain, proven by the detail of these time cards to be superior to the service already provided for Alameda.

This disposes of the transcontinental freight traffic, and what applies to the Ogden manifest, 253, and the manner of operating also applies to all freight originating at Tracy, Stockton, Sacramento, and points east of those points.

To further refute the statement that there is a differential of one to five days in favor of Alameda on transcontinental freight, or any freight for that matter, refer to detail of these two time cards to prove that it takes but four hours and five minutes, running time, between San Francisco and Oakland via Dumbarton Bridge. Reference: Page 4, coast division time card, train No. 242, leaves San Francisco at 6.50 p. m., arrives at Redwood Junction at 8.20 p. m., and arrives at Niles, on page 16 of western division time card, at 9.40 p. m., or 2 hours and 50 minutes in running time from San Francisco to Niles via Dumbarton. This train is not scheduled through to Oakland, and to substantiate the statement as to the 4 hours and 5 minutes, refer to No. 278, page 12, of western division time card, which leaves Oakland at 4.05 p. m. and arrives at Niles at 5.20 p. m., running time 1 hour and 15 minutes, which total 4 hours and 5 minutes.

I was the assistant to the train master of the coast division for seven or eight years, and actually had charge of the operation and making of the time cards of all the trains of the coast division, and handled the power and the men, and my knowledge is from actual operating experience, and it now is the practice to clean up the surplus carload freight in the San Francisco and Oakland yards by running extra trains via Dumbarton Bridge, the running time being in the neighborhood of four to five hours.

From my experience and knowledge of railroad operation I emphatically state that, if anything, the service that San Francisco gets is superior to the service on the transcontinental and other traffic except traffic directly tributary to Oakland and Alameda;

that is, such traffic as originates between Stockton, Tracy, and Oakland and Alameda. This is because the traffic destined to San Francisco is of such volume that it permits solid trains scheduled through to San Francisco, thus avoiding breaking up train in congested terminals, such as Sacramento, Stockton, etc., to get out cars or fill out the train to maximum.

As between Alameda and Hunters Point the same equal freight rates apply. There is no advantage at either place except on traffic that is immediately tributary to either of the two places.

However, every statement in my testimony, as to the freight rates and as to the operation and service, can be substantiated in Washington by the Interstate Commerce Commission, which is readily available to the naval commission.

The letter to the Hon. Henry W. Keyes, transmitting copy of central bureau memorial, should be included in the record.

SHOALS IN NORTH AND SOUTH CHANNELS OF BAY.

Referring to the statement made at the time of the interrogation of Capt. Clem Randall, to the effect that the Pinole Shoal, which is 5 miles wide, was dredged in 1913 for a length of 27,700 feet to a depth of 30 feet and a width of 500 feet: Survevs in June, 1914, showed that this channel, for 14,000 feet, had filled up 4 feet, and in a period of 30 months, for a length of 24,600 feet, that it had filled up 6 feet, representing 3,000,000 yards and over of deposits.

The Joint Congressional Committee on naval base is here referred to the report on the El Campo site, filed with the Helm Commission, which will substantiate these statements as to the channel and the shoals and also will substantiate the part of the record referring to the cause of the shoals and the effect of the tides. If my memory serves me correctly, the report on the El Campo site eliminated all sites on the other side of the bay and the Mare Island and any site south of the shoal in the south channel of the bay mentioned by Mr. Dwyer, for the reason that the tides and the nature of the currents would always cause the deposit of the silt on the Pinole shoal or the south channel shoal and along the shore line of the east bay. The Helm report eliminated the El Campo site.

FREIGHT RATES.

Reference is made by Mr. Dwyer to the decision of the State railroad commission, which ordered the removal of all discrimination against this side of the bay in the freight rates and switching charge. This decision is numbered 8221, and is a companion to the Interstate Commerce Commission decision in I. C. C. case No. 9906.

I attach herewith map of California, compiled by the State railroad commission, and have shown thereon the Ogden Manifest over the route it is run, in heavy yellow line. The running time from Ogden to San Francisco or Oakland is eight days. Note the yellow square made at Roseville. Roseville is the break-up yard of the Sacramento division and the Oakland freight in this train is cut out at Roseville and put in a fast train with perishable and rush freight from the north and run via Sacramento and Benicia, which train has to be ferried across the Carquinez Straits, and which train is shown on the map in heavy red pencil line. Of course, there is delay in breaking up and making up the train at Roseville, and there is also delay in ferrying across the straits, and therefore the route indicated by red pencil is used as little as possible for freight service, the preponderance of Oakland freight from Sacramento and north thereof moving via Stockton and Niles along the yellow route to Niles or via the yellow route as far as Stockton and Tracy and then via the red pencil route to Oakland. The distance from Stockton to Oakland via Tracy and Port Costa-red line-to Oakland is the same as the distance from Stockton via Niles to Oakland. The blue pencil line represents the Sunset-Galveston Manifest via El Paso. Note the blue square around San Jose, at which point the Oakland freight is cut out and moved up the east side of the bay.

The manifest department of the Southern Pacific advised me this morning that the running time from Ogden to San Francisco and Oakland is approximately eight days, and that the running time of the Sunset manifest from Galveston to San Francisco and Oakland is approximately nine days.

P. R. THOMPSON.

Hon. HENRY W. KEYES,

Joint Congressional Committee on Naval Base,

Fairmont Hotel, San Francisco, Calif.

DEAR SIR: Herewith your copy of the report of the central bureau of San Francisco organizations on the naval base, which did not have the signatures of the commercial development committee in time to present to you at the hearings yesterday. It has now been signed by the four members of the committee who were available and signed the reports presented to the other members of your committee.

This report was compiled within one week, and consequently three errors in giving reference maps occurred, and I would be under obligations to you if you would have the secretary of your committee correct the copies presented to the other members of your committee. The corrections should be made as follows:

Page 18 (at the end of the first paragraph) should refer to map No. IV.

Page 37, the reference made in the first paragraph to Map IV should read Map V. Page 53, the reference to Map VI, beginning of first paragraph, should read Map VII. These pages are not numbered, but referred to herein by number after counting both sides of each sheet as an individual page, but in order that there be no mistake on your copy I have placed a Gem clip on the pages referred to.

At the meeting yesterday, in the board of supervisors chambers, Chairman Richard J. Welch requested that freight rates be quoted to substantiate the statements made by me relative to the freight-rate structure, but after thinking the matter over it occurred to me that the best evidence would be that furnished by the Interstate Commerce Commission, which is readily available at Washington. Map No. IV in the report indicates the boundary of the switching limits which were established by order No. 8221 of the California Railroad Commission. The Interstate Commerce Commission is familiar with the establishment of these switching limits, it having taken care of the interstate matters in I. C. C. Case No. 9906.

The switching limits of an industrial district and the uniform charge for switching carload traffic within the switching limits are comparable to the corporate limits of a city throughout which a uniform street-car fare is maintained, which fare in San Francisco is 5 cents. Going beyond the corporate limits of a city, of course, adds to the cost to the commuter for street car fare, and, similarly, going beyond the switching limits of an industrial district of a city adds to the cost of operation and distribution of an industry.

The report itself and my testimony give reference to authorities for every statement contained therein.

I am sending you two copies of this letter in order that you may have one copy for the secretary of the committee.

Yours, very truly,

P. R. THOMPSON.

NOTE. Further correction: Page 33, this authority for Map IV should read, "Prepared by South San Francisco Chamber of Commerce to stress San Francisco industrial district," instead of Chevalier map.

(Further attached to the statement handed to the reporter for insertion in the record, is the following:)

Hon. L. HEISLER BALL,

Chairman Congressional Commission on Naval Base,

NOVEMBER 24, 1920.

United States Senate, Washington, D. C.

DEAR SIR: Referring to my testimony before your commission at the hearings at San Francisco, wherein it was stated that Hunters Point and Alameda had the same freight rates, except in local territory immediately tributary to Hunters Point or Alameda.

It is thought advisable to illustrate the condition in the immediate tributary territory and refer, as we have done heretofore, to recognized authority for the statement, which is the purpose of this letter.

The following provision in Southern Pacific Co.'s terminal tariff No. 230-H, item 1110, I. C. C. No. 4155, prescribes the charge for switching carload freight at all stations in California, and this item is quoted below for your ready reference:

SWITCHING CHARGES.

No. 1110. At all stations in Arizona, California, Nevada, Utah, New Mexico, and Oregon on the Klamath Falls Branch, for movement within switching limits, except as otherwise provided herein (see notes 1, 2, and 3), the switching charge on freight (carloads) will be $0.30 minimum charge; $6.50 per car.

33698-21-14