The Lumber Industry Inquiry 



TUMBERMEX have great hope that the inquiry by the 

 I the Federal Trade Commission into existing con- 



* ^ (litions of the lunilier industrx' niav resuU in 

 some form of rehef which will overcome the ])revailing 

 business depression in the lumber trade and aid it to 

 return t( i a prolitable basis. To this end the lumljcrnicn 

 of the middle west, south, north and the I'acitic slope 

 iipenl\- placed before the members of the Commission at 

 Chicago and elsewhere all the facts they had and sug- 

 gested various methods for relief, the chief of which 

 were the curtailment and regulation of production with 

 ilie sancliim (if the Cio\ernment and the increase in con- 

 sumption encouraged 1)\ laws favorable to such an 

 increase. 



How important the hearings are to the lumberman is 

 evident when so influential a jnurnal as the St. Louis 

 Lumberman says : 



"In our (ipini(jn. the Chicago proceeding was 

 epoch-making for the lumber industry. It was 

 something out of the ordinary in externals and 

 'features.' One realized that it was the first of a 

 series of sessions to be held in the West; that the 

 lumbermen v\'ere honored by the precedence given 

 them over other W'estern interests for the presenta- 

 tion of their case ; that the chosen and elect of the 

 lumber manufacturing business were brought to- 

 gether before the Commission from all over the 

 country, and that, generally speaking, this newly 

 created federal body was "starting something.' . . . 

 The two days spent by the Commission in hearing 

 the lumbermen marked the beginning of new and 

 better history fur the lumber interests, because of 

 the very ])Iain meaning of the creation and the cloth- 

 ing with legal powers of such a body as the Com- 

 mission." 



As to the much-discussed question of the legal power 

 of the Commission, the same paper says : 



"Manifestly, that body must stand in relation to 

 business in the future as the Interstate Commerce 

 Commission has stood in relation to the railroads of 

 the country. P.oth the legislation and the machinerv 

 connected with this new federal agency necessarily 

 ha\e a purpose in the abridgment of the barbarities 

 of anti-trust statutes and a turning toward a more 

 enlightened policy of law-administration touching 

 corporations and associations." 



The A iTc York Lumber Trade Journal harbors some 

 doubt as to whether the Commission has the power to 

 accord the relief requested l)\- the lumljermen but sees 

 benefit in the hearings notwithstanding. It savs: 



"Some are skeptical as to the Federal Trade Com- 

 mission being able to realize to anv degree the hope 

 which its sponsors had in their minds when the law 

 creating it was enacted. This, time alone can tell. 

 Nevertheless, the sjiecial data, as well as the testi- 

 mony gi\ en by distinguished lumbermen at the hear- 

 ing, men who have devote<l a lifetime to the industrv 



and who know its every ill and need, was replete 

 with facts which it is well for the Government to 

 know and consider, and ]iarticularly so by reason of 

 the previous governmental antagonism to the in- 

 dustry. This hearing and testimony rendered should 

 result in some good irrespective of whether the 

 Federal Trade Commission is alile to accord any 

 material relief." 



With a distinct legal trend of mind is the editorial 

 expression of the Lumber Trade Journal, of New 

 Orleans, relative to the powers of the Commission. It 

 emphasizes the fact that these powers are vague and 

 in.definite. 



"Xo one is in position to say that the Commission 

 has i)ower to grant aiifirmative relief, so that the 

 agreements sought can be put into effect," it says. 

 "An able brief was presented which argues that the 

 Commission has such power. The act, however, is 

 indefinite. If the Commission has the power to say 

 that certain acts are legal, is it not jjlaced on a parity 

 in power with the United States Supreme Court? 

 Action is begun by the Government in the courts to 

 test the validity of the order of the Commission, 

 the case reaches the Supreme Court, which decides 

 that the Commission has made a mistake, that it has 

 no power to decide that the acts it authorized were 

 not violations of the anti-trust laws, while in fact 

 they were. Isn't the Supreme Court the highest au- 

 thority ? There is no appeal from its decisions. Then 

 what authority has the Federal Trade Commis- 

 sion? It is stated that the Commission naturally 

 will not make any orders without consulting the De- 

 partment of Justice, so that its orders will really 

 have the sanction of the Government, and that no 

 legal action will follow. There are others who main- 

 tain the Commission can only investigate, draw con- 

 clusions, suggest remedies for the action by Congress 

 into laws. If Congress will act on such recommen- 

 dations, granting the relief requested, the money 

 that is spent by the Commission will have been well 

 spent, but if the Commission cannot do anything 

 that will benefit the business of the country, all will 

 be wasted." 



Some hope of relief is voiced liy the Mississif^f^i J'allev 

 Lumberman in saying: 



"If the Federal Trade Commission takes the only 

 logical action which can follow from this exposi- 

 tion of the situation in the lumber manufacturing 

 industry, the hearing will result in the greatest good 

 that has come to the lumbermen of the country 

 in the history of lumbering. The situation will soon 

 become intolerable unless some step is taken to 

 relieve it, and we believe that recommendations to 

 Congress on the part of the Commission will be 

 heeded and the needed relief granted. In connec- 

 tion with the study of the industry recently under- 

 taken by the Departments of Commerce and of 

 Agriculture, the need of the lumber trade for legis- 

 lation of a constructive character will be plainly 

 set forth." 



939 



