HARDWOOD RECORD 



15 



elms less than two hundreds years old in New England have 

 reached sizes that areat; Illinois' climate should produce larger 

 trees. It is, therefore, not unreasonable to claim that the most 

 durable monument commemorating Grant 's visit to Chicago — on 

 his trip round the world — is the elm in Washington Park. 



Free Trade in Lumber 



THE PROPOSED CHAXGE IX THE TARIFF, by which lumber 

 will be jilaced on the free list, has for its purpose, as an- 

 nounced by its authors, cheaper lumber for the consumer and con- 

 servation of forest resources by bringing in foreign wood and 

 cutting less of our own timber. If it accomplishes either or both 

 of these objects it will cut into the lumber business in the United 

 States by transfering activities to foreign countries at the ex- 

 pense of home industries. It is doubtful, however, whether free 

 lumber would accomplish either purpose. 



The lumber business is so large in this country, and so small 

 in others that can compete, that the proposed change cannot 

 much affect trade. Canada is the country which is expected to 

 furnish the free lumber. No one is disposed to consider other 

 countries as sources of supply in this connection. AVhile lumber- 

 men in the United States are trying to figure out where they are 

 to be hurt, the Canadians are equally busy figuring how they will 

 be helped. The most that the Canadians can see in it is a chance 

 — if it really is a chance — to ship some low-grade stuff across the 

 line; but it is doubtful if even that can be done except locally 

 and on a small scale. 



Canadian timber is not the enormous resource it is generally 

 supposed to be. Forests there are much below those of the United 

 States, and the annual lumber cut is much smaller. It costs about 

 the same to cut it, probably a little more to market it, and 

 operators there have no advantage over those this side the line. 

 They could not swamp American markets with lumber if they 

 should try. They need all they have at home, and have no cheap 

 surplus to dump on American markets. Canadians argue that in 

 times of business depression there, free trade might enable their 

 mills to unload on the United States. That is a remote chance. 



Canada has very little hardwood; not nearly enough to supply 

 its own people. It is impossible that hardwoods from that country 

 can have any effect on markets in the United States. More hard- 

 wood is cut yearly in the state of Ohio alone — a stricth- agri- 

 cultural state — than in the whole Dominion of Canada. It is, 

 therefore, evident that hardwoods may be dismissed from all con- 

 sideration as far as imports from Canada are concerned. 



The whole question regarding imports from Canada, concerns 

 softwoods. That country has not an important wood which does 

 not grow in equal or larger amount in this country. Lumber 

 that it can ship across the line, under free trade, will come into 

 immediate competition with lumber of equal or better quality on 

 this side. In many instances Americans are manufacturing lum- 

 ber at less cost than the Canadians are able to do. How, then, 

 will it be possible for Canadians to compete on our own ground? 

 The following cost figures are from the latest Canadian and 

 American reports. The mill yard cost of white pine in Canada is 

 $20.01, in the United States $18.93; Douglas fir in Canada $13.94, 

 in this country $13.09; western yellow pine in Canada $15.22, in 

 the United States $1-1.26; average for all lumber in Canada $15.42, 

 all in United States $15.80. Spruce is the only softwood that is 

 cheaper in Canada than in this country. 



Some Canadian lumber has always entered the United States, 

 after paying the duty, and there is no doubt that it will continue 

 to come, for the same reason under free trade. Imports have 

 been and will continue to be controlled largely by local conditions. 

 Near the border it is often more convenient for a consumer to 

 use Canadian lumber, which is near at hand, than to buy at a 

 greater distance in this country. Such transactions will conti^iue, 

 whether there is tariff or free trade. In other cases a certain 

 wood of good quality will be brought over the line, without much 

 regard to price. An important instance of this kind in the past 

 has been the use of Canadian white pine for shade rollers. 



Little consideration seems to have been given to Mexico as a 

 menace to American lumber markets under free trade. Two ex- 

 cellent and abundant pines grow there. One is the western or 

 California white pine (Pi)i«s ponderosa), the other the Mexican 

 white pine [Pinus strobiformis). In normal times these woods 

 might come into the United States at a cost suflSciently low to 

 displace some of the pine now in use, because, wages and stumpage 

 are very low in Mexico. 



It is not i)robable that free trade would bring in much more 

 Siberian oak than is now coming, because it is high priced and 

 has a wide market. Considerable imports from other countries 

 appear improbable. Cabinet woods will not be on the free list; 

 neither will furniture, casks, barrels, shooks, packing boxes, rail- 

 road ties, and paving blocks. It is expected that the duty will 

 be removed from practically all other forest products. 



Results as Predicted 



WHILE THOSE RESPONSIBLE for this department of H.«iD- 

 wooD Record take no more satisfaction out of the misfor- 

 tunes of others than do the majority of human beings, it is diffi- 

 cult to refrain from suggesting in this connection that the facts 

 recorded here conform precisely to the predictions expressed in 

 these columns five years ago, and reiterated at various times 

 since. 



John R. Markley and Isaiah B. Miller, promoters, and Colonel 

 Alfred G. Stewart, a director and commissioner; Charles M. Mc- 

 Mahon, secretary and treasurer and William H. Armstrong, Jr., 

 general manager of the International Lumber and Development 

 Company of Philadelpuhia, were found guilty of conspiracy in 

 the United States district court on April 12, on all counts. While 

 this notorious get-rich-quick concern was thoroughly exposed in 

 H-\RDW00D Record as suggested above, no efforts were ever 

 made to investigate its methods until Postal Inspector Cortelyou 

 took up the matter, with the result that the promoters and officers 

 were arrested, and a trial begun on March 3. At this trial these 

 men were indicted on three charges of eight counts each. All 

 were included in a general charge of conspiracy in devising a 

 scheme to defraud and to use the mails in furthering the con- 

 spiracy. The maximum penalty proscribed by federal statute is 

 a two years ' term in prison or a fine of $10,000 on each count. 



The charges against the defendants grew out of the exploita- 

 tion by the company of a 288,000 acre plantation in the state of 

 Campeche, Mexico. The concern in selling its $6,000,000 worth of 

 stock represented that the proceeds were to be devoted to the 

 clearing of the plantation, the exploitation of its timber and the 

 planting" of permanent crops, the profits from which were to pay 

 a guaranteed dividend of eight per cent. The government alleged 

 that in floating its stock issue, the company sent out voluminous 

 advertising "literature" through the mails containing fraudulent 

 and misleading statements regarding the actual and potential 

 profit, the producing value of the Mexican property. It was also 

 charged further that the eight per cent dividends paid to the 

 stockholders were taken from the stock subscriptions rather than 

 from the profits as represented. 



Immediately after the verdict was rendered, James Scarlet, 

 chief counsel for the defense, asked for. an arrest of judgment for 

 three days, in which to file reasons for a new trial. This was 

 granted by the court with the consent of District Attorney John 

 C. SWartley, counsel for the government. 



Northern Cut and Shipments 



THE CUT OP HARDWOODS AND HEMLOCK by fifty-two mem- 

 bers of the Northern Hemlock & Hardwood Manufacturers' Asso- 

 ciation during March was 48,588,000 feet, while during the same 

 month there were shipped 43,570,000 feet. The cut during March, 

 1912, was 50,977,000 feet and there were shipped during that month 

 49,678,000 feet. In hardwoods there was some noticeable excess 

 of cut over shipments, as the total production of hardwood lum- 

 ber by the fifty-two members reporting was 30,614,000 as against 

 shipments during March, 1913, aggregating 17,680,000. These fig- 



