Obrázky stránek

Mr. CATRON. Not to my knowledge, sir.

Mr. Reuss. Are there any Socialists that you know of in the upper Cumberland Valley region ?

Mr. CATRON. Not to my knowledge, sir.

Mr. Reuss. Then you would disagree with the statement about these federally financed dams, that they are creeping socialism?

Mr. CATRON. I would.

Mr. Reuss. You think it is good Republican doctrine to have such dams?

Mr. CATRON. I am a good Republican, sir.
Mr. Reuss. Thank you.
Mr. Jones. Mr. Lipscomb.

Mr. LIPSCOMB. I am saying, "good for him.” I am glad to have company here.

Mr. JONES. That was a good statement.
Mr. William Herbert, of T. L. Herbert & Sons, Inc., Nashville.

We are glad to have you, Mr. Herbert. Do you have a prepared statement ?

[ocr errors]



& SONS, INC., NASHVILLE, TENN. Mr. HERBERT. No, sir. I do not. Mr. JONES. You want to shoot from the hip?

Mr. HERBERT. Yes, sir. I am going to give you some actual experiences.

My name is W. B. Herbert, Jr., of T. L. Herbert & Sons of Nashville. I was asked to appear here to give more or less a picture of our conditions, which covers, you might say, the entire program that is represented.

First on the toll program. In the sand and gravel production we operate dredgeboats and barges and towboats. At the present time we are dredging 107 miles below Nashville in order to secure the proper type of materials. We now have to go through three different individual locks. If such a toll is placed on this commodity, it would definitely put us out of competition in meeting the competition of land plants, not only in sand and gravel, but also in limestone, which is used for relatively the same purposes.

In a statement along that same line I believe if one industry or one group of persons should have to pay a toll, I think everyone should have to pay a toll and work it out on the basis of their operations or what it is used for. However, I am totally opposed to any tolls whatsoever on the rivers.

In our operations in dredging in the rivers and removing the sand and gravel, we have siltated the uses of the river. If I may explain, some 20 miles below Nashville there was an island which was known as Guy's Island. At one time there was a 200-foot channel there. In other words, there is just 200 feet between the island and the bank, which any boat could negotiate. That existed at all times, in high water as well as in low water. Now, in securing the sand and gravel we went in and dredged this island out entirely. As of today they have some 600 feet, or the complete width of the river, which the boats can navigate without any hazardous conditions whatsoever.

That is just one condition. There have been numerous places where our company and other like companies have done the same thing.

I do not have anything else on that phase of the subject. If you would like to ask a question there I would be glad to try to answer it.

Mr. Jones. Fine, Mr. Herbert. Are there any questions? Mrs. GRIFFITHS. Would you like to charge a toll then for the use of the ocean if we are going to charge a toll for the use of the rivers?

Mr. HERBERT. Yes, ma'am.

Mrs. GRIFFITHS. And you would suggest we charge a toll to the truckers for using the highways?

Mr. HERBERT. I think that has already been charged, hasn't it?

Mrs. GRIFFITHS. No. They are paying on income, just like everybody else is.

Mr. HERBERT. Yes, ma'am.

Mrs. GRIFFITHS. But you would add on additional cost to them for using the highways?

Mr. HERBERT. I think if any toll is charged on the rivers for anyone using the rivers, regardless of what purpose, then they should be charged accordingly.

Mrs. GRIFFITHS. And any other means of transportation.

Mr. HERBERT. Any means. Not only transportation, but any means and any uses of the rivers or the waters of the rivers—there should be a toll charged, you might say equally or proportionately.

Mr. JONES. Mr. Lipscomb.

Mr. LIPSCOMB. Do you pay excise taxes on the fuel that you use in your business?

Mr. HERBERT. Yes, sir. We pay taxes on our fuel. We do not pay the highway tax. That is exempt. You see, there are two taxes. One is a highway tax and there is a nonhighway tax. We do pay the nonhigway tax. In other words, we do not use any fuel that consumes the use of the highways.

Mr. LIPSCOMB. Is not the tax on gasoline, which trucks, for instance, pay, considered kind of a user's tax for the highways? Mr. HERBERT. Yes; but I am referring, you might say, to fuel oil

; diesel fuel. We do not use gasoline.

Mr. LIPSCOMB. Diesel trucks pay a highway tax; do they not?

Mr. HERBERT. Yes, sir. They do. But we are exempt from the highway tax. On the boats, pertaining to the rivers, we are exempt from the highway tax because it is not used on the highways.

Mr. LIPSCOMB. I have just an observation. That is all. Supposing you

did pay a tax on waterways use similar to the highway tax, and that went toward paying for the operation and maintenance of the gates and waterways?

Mr. HERBERT. We are paying a Federal tax. There is a Federal tax on all fuels.

Mr. LIPSCOMB. But in addition the trucks pay a highway tax, do they not?

Mr. HERBERT. I do not know. I am not in the trucking business. I will not answer that question. I just operate a few trucks in town, but I do not operate anything on the outside.

Mr. LIPSCOMB. Do you have any idea as to how much waterway users pay in Federal excise taxes in a year?

Mr. HERBERT. No; I do not.


Mr. LIPSCOMB. Thank you.
Mr. JONES. Thank you very much.
Mr. HERBERT. May I continue for just one minute ?
Mr. JONES. Yes; indeed.

Mr. HERBERT. As far as the lower Cumberland River is concerned, speaking in terms of flood control and the system that has been proposed for the dams to be built on the Cumberland River, we are very much in accord with that. It not only helps navigation but it prevents floods. It has not only helped our company but it has helped the entire communities adjacent to the river.

In 1927, 1937, and 1947 we had disastrous floods and they cost millions of dollars. I cannot quote the figure. In 1955, if it had not been for the system of the upper dams it is my opinion that Nashville and other towns located on the river would have experienced the same experiences as they have in the past. It looks like it comes every 10 years. That is the timing on the preceding floods. It is a great saving, and I think it would be an asset to any community adjacent to the Cumberland River. I think that the program should be followed out 100 percent. Mr. Jones. Are there


further questions? (No response.)

Mr. JONES. Thank you very much, Mr. Herbert. We appreciate your testimony.

Mr. HERBERT. Thank you so much.
Mr. Jones. The Honorable Robert Daniel, mayor of Corbin, Ky.
How are you, Mr. Daniel ?
Mayor DANIEL. Fine. Thank you, sir.
I have a prepared statement here, but I will deviate from it some.

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am the mayor of Corbin, a small city located in southeastern Kentucky. While I think your committee is here for a different purpose from the one that would hear requests for funds to build dams, I came here today hoping that your decisions would favor the building of Federal power dams and that you

would have friends on the House Public Works Committee that you could influence and assist us in securing funds to start the planning of a dam on Laurel River, in southeastern Kentucky.

While I am primarily interested in getting a dam built on Laurel River, I don't feel that I would be acting in the interest of the taxpayers and the people of southeastern Kentucky after my coming here if I didn't ask you gentlemen to use all of your influence to prevent the adoption of the Hoover Commission report as a policy of our Federal Government. If that report ever becomes the policy or becomes a law of our Government, we in areas such as ours would never realize or get dams that would create employment and build industry.

We just couldn't become a partner of one of those partnership deals that the Commission talks about not that we would not want to, but our people just don't have the money to put up that the Commission would define as "our share.” Had we this kind of money, I wouldn't be here today. I would be at home trying to help utilize the money they speak of as being our share to assist our unemployed.


[ocr errors]

We have thousands of unemployed in each of the several counties around us and in southeastern Kentucky. These unemployed are Americans and many of them are the same fine young men who have fought and defended our principles and our country in the two recent wars. Yet today they have come back home to find that there are no jobs for them, no means of supporting their families in the area where they call home and where they were born and reared. They are people who are proud of our American way of life, proud of our country, and they have enough pride about them that they want to work in order to stay out of the so-called commodity lines. I know you gentlemen may be familiar with our country up there, but the commodity lines are growing every day. In our opinion it is not a thing we want to see in the United States.

I say this, and I hope I am taken seriously when I tell you that most of us in eastern Kentucky think that our economy is such in our area to make Federal public-works projects to create jobs for men with hungry families a point of major interest to all.

We look at dams as the type of Federal public-works projects that will be the exact opposite of the leaf raking that we all once deplored and made fun of. We look at the dams as a permanent fresh foundation under the economy of our region, which can only survive if that fresh foundation is provided. We also know enough about the long-range returns of such projects to the Federal Treasury to feel assured that we are not appearing before you as simple beggars asking a handout. We feel certain that 1 dam or 4 dams on the headwaters of the Cumberland will return to our Government in a matter of a few years an increase in income taxes that our people will be glad to pay, and probably will pay, $4 or $5 for every dollar spent.

To begin with, the reservoirs behind these dams will become the only storage of cold water in eastern Kentucky of a sufficient size to be feasible as sites for giant steam-electric powerplants which the private power companies would be certain to build. They would build them there—not to help us—they would build them because we are in the center of a vast supply of good and cheap coal.

If we had the big storage of cold water necessary for cooling steamelectric generating plants there already would be dozens there. Why? Because it is always cheaper to ship the power than it is to ship the coal to the already developed and power-hungry industrial areas that are rapidly developing in the cities of Kentucky that are not too distant away from us.

Kentucky Utilities, for instance, has to shoot big streams of water up into the air to cool it off at the only steam-electric plant it operates in our vicinity.

I would like to say that the city of Corbin owns its distribution system of electricity. Some 7 or 8 years ago we were forced to buy power from Kentucky Utilities Co. when our plant would not generate the electricity we needed for the domestic use of our town. In order to buy power from Kentucky Utilities, they made a contract with us whereby we would continue the operation of this small plant that we had with a privilege of cutting in on their power when we had an overload. For 6 or 7 years they held us at a minimum of power that we could use, because they did not have it to furnish to us. Any community or any city such as our town in western Kentucky is going to be jeopardized or held back as far as industrial development is concerned when power is not available—and it is not available in our territory.

I start off by saying what our dams would do for the power folks, I guess, because I would hope that Congress, if it builds the dams, would be willing to let the city of Corbin and other municipally owned systems nearby have first call on the power to be produced by our dam or dams.

We need that first call on the power because we could lower our power rates. Then we would be in a good position to attract heavy power-using industry.

We need the flood-control storage that would be built into these dams. We are as a matter of fact in the center of one of the Nation's prime uncontrolled flooding areas, where every spring's rain can bring devastation and washout that will doom a small town.

We need these dams for other reasons. We need them because every rapidly developing industrial area in this country, particularly where that industry is chemical in nature, is running up against the need for more and more clean, cool water.

If the hard-hit soft-coal areas of east Kentucky should in the next 4 or 5 years come into possession of 4 or 5 really sizable stored supplies of good, fresh water, they would step out front as among the most desirable locations in the country for new chemical industry. All of you gentlemen are familiar with the increasing use of cheap soft coal as the basic raw material for such industry. As a matter of fact, the combination of coal and plenty of good, clean water is an almost unbeatable combination to offer industry of the chemical type these days.

You may ask, Why provide such a resource for east Kentucky!

1. If you don't, you will soon find that the Federal Government will be spending more than the cost of several dams on annual relief bills in eastern Kentucky. That is how bad the employment in the coal industry in eastern Kentucky is today.

2. If you don't you may find that your lack of action has resulted in a migration of many thousands of former coal miners to the big cities of the East and Midwest and the North to contribute to an unemployment that already is noticeable in some of these cities. This coal miner is a fine citizen in his hometown when times are not too bad. But, remember, he has already learned how to get together and organize. Take him and put him broke and hungry in a big city looking for jobs that are not available, and he is likely to be a rough customer for anybody to handle. One thing is sure. He will have to be supplied with a really high priced standard of relief once he gets to the big cities. And Uncle Sam will have to stand most of the bill for this too.

3. The economic drowning or neglect of a region such as ours when all other sections are enjoying prosperity is simply bad advertising for a big, rich country like ours. To tolerate such conditions as we are experiencing in our section for too long will certainly create dangerous situations for our entire country and our entire economy.

I think it would be a part of our long-run commonsense economics not only to rescind the restrictions on such spending as proposed by the Hoover Commission, but to rescind even the existing restrictions, and build our dams that we are asking for.

« PředchozíPokračovat »