tional Grange industry disapproving it—all others seemed to give 30-day leasing its approval and consent.

We, the certificated carriers that I represent, feel that our privilege of paying percentage should be continued. We believe that motor carriers should be allowed to arrange for the terms of leasing equipment on any basis they see fit.

Many of us not only lease equipment of owner-operators for 30 days, but longer, and the payment to these operators is based on percentage of revenue. There can be no rate cutting involved in longperiod leases since to keep good men and equipment we all know that they must make money and be kept contented.

One of our group reports an average of ten to twelve thousand dollars a year net earnings to the owner operator of their tractor leased to them.

A restriction of use of percentage can only impose a hardship on regulated carriers who are about the only ones that have a use for it, certainly not the independent or shipper lessee, inasmuch as I can find out shipper trip leasing is based on mileage or flat rate.

We authorized carriers operate in many fields of commodities, different type of equipment, and different parts of the country. Percentage of revenue gives us a fair way to base the earnings and divide the revenue with owners of leased equipment and owner-operators. Operators who invest their money in equipment have an incentive to feel that they, too, are a businessman, and when they operate on percentage and receive part of the revenue, they feel they are receiving the most for their sincere efforts and investment.

We feel that the Interstate Commerce Commission cannot cure rate cutting by eliminating percentage. Substitution of mileage or flat rate offers no changes and imposes only an added hardship to accounting work.

It is our belief that in the 30-day leasing law the ills of percentage practices will be cured.

These points have been presented to the full Commission at their oral argument hearing, and the matter is still pending.

We feel these issues involve directly that of the certificated carriers. It is to us that the matter of trip leasing an independent is being referred. We do this and are willing to do so, and the provision of the rule would allow a fair and reasonable way for the independent, exempt agriculture hauler to have a return haul.

While we carriers are not in complete accord with the Commission's rules, we are willing to accept what our Commission sets out, and we have complete faith in them and have found that when we have gone to them individually or as a group they have listened to us and taken into consideration our problems.

In matters of this type, the Commission weighs all argument pro and con and arrives at a fair decision, all things considered. We know they will do so in this instance. It has been quite obvious by the many changes they have made in the rules governing MC-43.

We again ask you not to pass this bill and leave this matter to be decided by the experienced and capable Interstate Commerce Commission.

Thank you.

Senator SMATHERS. Thank you very much, Mr. Alterman. That is a very fine, comprehensive, and persuasive statement.

Mr. ALTERMAN. I hope it is very persuasive.

Senator SMATHERS. I think you have represented these other lines ably and fully.

Mr. ALTERMAN. I want to say that I have letters of authorization from each one of the carriers mentioned. They are carriers who are principally located in the South and represent the major part of the truckers there.

Senator SMATHERS. Do you have a minute or two, or are you in a hurry?

Mr. ALTERMAN. No, sir; I have a minute or two.

Senator SMATHERS. Do you ever do much trip leasing yourself? Do you carry citrus or any fresh vegetables?

Mr. ALTERMAN. Yes, sir; I do trip leasing. I originally started in the trucking business as a carrier of exempt commodities, when I first started in 1935; and it has given me plenty of experience on both sides of the fence, so to speak.

Senator SMATHERS. Is it not true that most fellows who are today rather successful certificated carriers started out as carriers like you did, carrying farm-to-market goods and things of that nature?

Mr. ALTERMAN. That is a very correct and right statement, sir. Senator SMATHERS. You would not say it is like lawyers who, once they pass the bar examination, or once they get admitted to the court, want to make it tough so there will be no more lawyers; it is not that sort of a situation, is it?

Mr. ALTERMAN. No, it definitely is not.

Senator SMATHERS. You made the statement that there would be a great increase in trip leasing if this bill were passed. I do not understand that. Suppose the ICC continues this sort of exemption for agricultural truckers, letting them trip lease. If that is the rule, or if this bill should become law, why would there be any great increase? Mr. ALTERMAN. If the bill becomes law and the Interstate Commerce Commission has no control over it, and it would be definitely decided that now we can trip lease to shippers-much of this is referring to companies that look for a way to haul their products cheaper than by regulated carriers.

There are those that because of the advantages of long distance, if they can get their product to where someone else ships from a nearer point, he will then make a deal with the exempt carriers.

We have a situation here-the name of Armour was mentioned, Armour Truck Co., which operates from the Midwest into Florida. There is absolutely nothing wrong with their leases.

Our public utilities commission has thoroughly gone into it with them after stopping their trucks. They come to Florida and haul agricultural commodities north.

If they cannot get agricultural commodities north, they trip lease to a certificated carrier. If the 30-day leasing rule was in effect, there would be no way available to the exempt-commodity carrier because the private carrier would not be allowed to trip lease.

To give you an example, there are many companies that own a fleet of trucks. They come down there with an exemption, and then tell me to give them a return load, and I will give them one.

Senator SMATHERS. They lease to you; they trip lease to you?

Mr. ALTERMAN. They trip lease to me. They have a load of commodities to haul back-cans, paper cartons. They can haul exempt agricultural commodities back too. But it is easier for them to come to me and say, "Alterman, give me a load, this trip we have nothing going back," so we lease them and give the exempt carrier nothing; but under this law the exempt carrier would get the privilege, because the law would say we must wait for the exempt carrier.

Senator SMATHERS. I do not think the law would say that.

Mr. ALTERMAN. The rule-maybe I am using the wrong word-says he could not lease back, a private carrier or exempt carrier. Take Armour who hauls meats southbound in their company vehicles, northbound I could not give them a load of concentrates.

Senator SMATHERS. Let me see. I did not follow you there. You say that this would throw all the business into the exempt carriers. Give me that illustration again. I did not follow you at all. Tell me that again.

Mr. ALTERMAN. If this rule of 30-day leasing is allowed to go in, then the exempt carrier, the carrier of a commodity that is exempt, would have more of an advantage and would have more loads available for him because the private carrier or the company that hauls nonexempt commodities, such as meat southbound and a nonexempt commodity northbound-the situation would work either way-he would not be allowed to trip lease back to a certificated carrier, because under the provision only the exempt commodity carrier would be allowed to trip lease back.

Therefore, there would be more loads available to the exempt commodity carrier. If they are trying to help the agricultural carrier, and there seems to be so much talk about helping the farmer and helping the agricultural carrier, make these trucks available, and the exempt agricultural carrier would get back to his point quicker because there would be more loads available for him.

Senator SMATHERS. Of course, it depends on which way you are working it, and you straighten me out if I am wrong. In our State, in the lake region, in the citrus area, where they go north, if we did not have the exception which the ICC now has-in other words, where they let them trip lease for less than 30 days-then obviously those men who during our peak season of citrus or fresh vegetables, after they go north, could not lease for just one trip coming right back. Then they would have to come back empty, would they not?

Mr. ALTERMAN. Yes, that is right; and when I first started, Senator, we had to go five trips a month, and deadhead back, and Í made money, but today we could not.

Senator SMATHERS. So they have to trip lease back?

Mr. ALTERMAN. That is right.

Senator SMATHERS. Of course, that is all we are trying to do, is to make it possible for the genuine agricultural trucker to be able to trip lease coming home.

Mr. ALTERMAN. Right, sir.

Senator SMATHERS. So that he can get back and haul some more agriculture. There is a flexibility in trucks that is not in the railroads, and you know in our situation down in Florida if we had to rely on

the railroads we would not have any farm economy like we have today. The railroads do not have the flexibility.

They do not have the cars. You know they now have a shortage of boxcars out in the West-it is always something like that-so you have to have truckers.

We are not interested in making this so that truckers who are not legitimate agricultural haulers can just take off and go around the country. We are not interested in letting those fellows run without regulation.

We think they should be regulated, and we think they deserve to be regulated; but we do not want to interfere with the movement of fruit and vegetables and things like that, as they are moved into the markets.

That is the problem I see.

Mr. ALTERMAN. I would like to take a little time and explain it. We have many examples, and to try to get one that hits home, you and I both know that in our State of Florida, agriculture is very important. I think this whole thing we are all talking about is sort of Florida when you get down to it.

We start producing there in November, and we last right on through July. We are almost the year-round. Consequently we have trucks that come from all over, who come from Mississippi, Georgia, Alabama, all over.

They just sort of camp in Florida. If I tell you that there are 4,000 trucks a day sometimes leaving with our merchandise, that is not too many. During the very height of the season in the operation there comes about a shortage for boxcars and trucks-we need both of them. We need railroads, and the railroads and trucks are both needed.

You cannot live one without the other. The individual exempt trucker that we are talking about is a poor fellow. He does not have any money. He just bought this truck by the skin of his teeth.

Senator SMATHERS. I want to stop you there. You say individually exempt trucker. Do you mean this fellow who is supposed to be a farmer?

Mr. ALTERMAN. No, sir.

Senator SMATHERS. That is the man that I do not have clear in my mind. If he is not originally carrying agricultural products, how does he get an exemption to get started? You said an individually exempt trucker. Give me an illustration.

Mr. ALTERMAN. My son can be an exempt trucker; your brother can be an exempt trucker.

Senator SMATHERS. Just the mere fact that I go buy a truck, am I considered exempt?

Mr. ALTERMAN. Yes, sir; that makes you an exempt trucker, and you need no license, no nothing. All you have to do is go to a dealer and buy a truck and a trailer and you are in business.

Senator SMATHERS. And that is what you call an individually exempt trucker?

Mr. ALTERMAN. Yes, sir; that is the ones we are talking about, and he does not need a license at all.

Senator SMATHERS. We will say it is my brother who starts out, and he picks up a load of machinery out of Miami, and he starts north. If he were stopped, he would have to have a certificate, would he not?

Mr. ALTERMAN. Then he is hauling a commodity that is not agricultural. The only thing he can haul is all kinds of fruit and vegetables and fresh fish; and I suppose poultry, but I would sure like to know the difference between cutting up a chicken and cutting up a

Cow.

Senator SMATHERS. I agree with you. It is hard to say they are not agricultural products.

Mr. ALTERMAN. Now we want to help this fellow that is hauling our fruits and vegetables out of Florida. He gets, oh, approximately $450 to $500 to carry a load from around the lake region to New York, for example.

He gets to New York, and he wants to come back. He can come back empty. But he can pick up a load of produce-Maine potatoes or onions-there is a lot of stuff from South America and California that is shipped from New York to Florida.

Senator SMATHERS. But it has to be an agricultural commodity? Mr. ALTERMAN. Yes; so the fellow gets a load, or he goes to a carrier that holds an ICC certificate and he is allowed to lease it, and he gives him a load of machinery.

He gets it back to Florida and he gets paid for it. That fellow is an exempt carrier.

Under this provision that the ICC is proposing here, which has been explained by Commissioner Cross today, we would be allowed to continue that.

Assume that he cannot get a carrier to Florida to give him a load, he leases to Atlanta, Ga., and then in Atlanta, he will get another load from Great Southern-

Senator SMATHERS. Let me ask you a question right here. Suppose we have this fellow, my brother, up in New York, and he has come back down to Florida as you illustrated.

Suppose then he cannot get another agricultural load. Can he go to you as a certified carrier and trip lease to you out to Omaha, Nebr., with a load of machinery, if your run happens to be out that way?

Mr. ALTERMAN. Yes, sir; if I have a certificate from the Interstate Commerce Commission authorizing me to run out that way carrying general commodities. He can lease to that carrier for one trip.

Senator SMATHERS. If he gets out to Omaha, Nebr., and he then finds no more agricultural products, can he then lease to some company which has a certificate from Omaha down to Texas carrying some more machinery?

In other words, can he continue to trip lease all around the country carrying what are not agricultural products by just the virtue of the fact that (a) he started out carrying agricultural products; and (b) he can trip lease? That is what I am not clear on.

Mr. ALTERMAN. In my opinion, he can do that, and I have had it explained to me, that he cannot. The only thing that I see that he cannot do would be on a series of trips-say now we got him in Omaha and you got him down to Texas, now if he decides to go from Texas to California, then he is starting to go in a direction away from where he came, and he has to come in some point on a direction back to the origin that he came from. In other words, if he wanted to go from Texas, then from Texas he had better start to Florida.