The Cairo bulletin., 1910-09-27
GREAT RAILROADS il
CONTROL MILES | Of
RIVER FROATRGE
Concluded from First Page.)

emitted Dy the government work on
channels. 1t frequently happens that
for given landing the charges are
equal to the entire amount Of the
freight rates received from that land
| ing. This in particulars discourages
landings at small towns.
Y Out Of about 30 towns on the Upper
Ohio, landing charges vary from 81 to
$3.50 per week, or rs to 80 cents per
landing. The average Is about $3.50
per week. To this, for packet boats
must be added the wharf boat and
agency charges, which range from
about 8 to 80 per cent OF the river
freight rate.
The public charges, as such, are
usually intended merely to cover cost
OF maintenance of the water front,
though in most places very little main
tenance is evident.
AT Pittsburg the wharf boats pay the
city sl2 a year, and also a charge for
each vessel landing at public wharves
on tonnage basis per trip. Packets
'of from 200 to 500 tons pay from 81
to IS trip and from 500 tons up IS
La trip. Coal barges, for unloading, 81
a trip,
AT Cincinnati the landing charge at
the public landing for vessels of from
10 to $50 tons Is $3.50 per day; $50
tons an upward. $3.50.
At Louisville there are no charges
on most steamboats, for landing at the
public wharf Barges are charged &C.
cording to size, varying from rs cents
to SO per day. At Nashville the city
charges on steamboats, are $3.50 a
trip. AT Paducah the wharf boat com.
pany charges So per landing, and also
makes charge on incoming freight.
AT Cairo the charges, mainly fixed
by the Cairo Trust property, are "a
cents per vessel ton for the first day
and one-half this thereafter, with a
minimum of IS, and some minor re.
ductions. There appear to be also
some additional wharf boat charges.
At Burlington, Iowa, the charge Ia
$l00 per year per steamboat. At Peo-
ria, ~ per steamboat for the first day.
AT ST. Louis no landing charge 10
made or allowed to be made for the
use Of the wharf boats. The only
charge is on the freight going over
the wharf boat. At Memphis the
landing charge is ~ cents per YES
sci for one week with special rates
for bafges, graded by tonnage. There
is also a charge made by the wharf
boat company for those using the
boat. One steamboat line pays the
wharf boat company $3.50 weekly for
one landing. Other lines pay as high
at $S5 for the same privilege. AT
Vicksburg there are no landing or
wharfage charges,
I II Mflllbe seen, therefore, that there
is a very great variety of practice
with respect to miscellaneous term
NAL charges, and that In the case of
several harbors these charges are ap.
parently so high as to prove a burden
upon traffic. A detailed criticism OF
charges made by private interests, as,
for instance, the charges for Tighter
age, is somewhat outside of the scope
OF this report II il, however, sug-
gestiye to review briefly the differ
ence in practice al few OF the most
important harbors with respect to
public charges for the use of piers.
Thus the policy of New York appears
to be to secure large net revnue
from the use of the municipal piers.
In this 1t has been fairly successful
The city revenue from leased piers in
1908 was s3,4a0. 94G52 In the case OF
San Francisco, the largest Pacific
port, on the other hand, the policy
seems to be to afford terminal faeil.
tiles virtually at cost. The city re.
ceipts for the year 1923 were ST..
101,94967, and the expenses $1,249,.
074,67 Again, at New Orleans, the
principal Gulf port the public termin-
al charges are, relatively speaking,
small. The city receipts from wharves
sheds, harbor dues, etc, for 1909 were
0360,662; the expenses including some
construction work, were s233,173. Az
Philadelphia the total receipts of the
department OF wharves, docks and
ferries in 1900 were s54,332, and the
expenses sI,751,59 Tlfs latter item
includes a large amount for new con.
work and the purchase Of
property, AT most of ehe terminals
on the Mississippi River system the
policy appears to be to exact only
such charges as are necessary for
maintenance.
General Conclusions.
The preceding discussion gives
briefly the existing physical condi.
tions at the leading harbors Of the
country, together with conditions OF
control. These facts, elaborated in
the full report, afford basis for the
study of terminal conditions in the
United States.
This report brings out Ave salient
facts: Rirst. that terminals are as
important as channels; second. that
the hartors of the country. as a rule,
have by no means developed their