20 



THE HARDWOOD RECORD. 



The Me^n About To\vi\. 



HISTORY OF THE NATIONAL HARD- 

 WOOD LUMBER ASSOCIATION. 

 (CONTINUED.) 

 In our last issue we recited the fact 

 which led up to the organization of the 

 National Hardwond Luniljer Association 

 arid in this issue we will begin a narration 

 of tJie rise and iHVgre.ss of that assuciatiun. 



I hesitate to go on with this narrative 

 for the fact that in giving it 1 must make 

 mention of my own part in it. This my 

 extreme modesty renders repulsive to me 

 and it will doubtless prove tiresome to you. 

 but there is no way of giving the history 

 of the National association without doing 

 so. From tbe fact that it was a portion 

 of my business ai' a representative of the 

 Hardwowl Uec jrd to travel alxmt the coun- 

 try to ^et aciiuainted with the lumber- 

 men, and incidentally separated them 

 from a portion of their money; and from 

 the further fact that I could go almost 

 anywhere on passes, I have done much of 

 the held worli for the assoeiatijn, and in 

 the beginning of the organization field 

 work was very essential to its success. 

 Almost all this work, however, was done 

 under the direction and guidance of Presi- 

 dent W. A. Bennett and Secretary A. K. 

 Vinnedge. They would outline the work 

 and send me forth to execute it, all they 

 asked being that I should do the work and 

 do it well, and pay piy own expenses. I 

 caimot take the credit of i>ayiug tlie ex- 

 penses to myself, however, as ilr. C. V. 

 Kimball, the present propreitor of the Rec- 

 ord, is entitled to half of it, the Hard- 

 wood Recjrd, of which I at that time was 

 part owner with Mr. Kimball, paying the 

 exijenses and ftirnishiug transxwrtation. 



So if in the following narrative I am 

 forced to give myself some prominence, 

 you will understand that it is veiT painful 

 to me to do so and nothing but necessity 

 could drive me to do it. 

 * * * 



The^rst move in the direction of a na- 

 tional assoeiatijn of hardwood lumbermen 

 and a uniformity in inspection was made by 

 Chicago, when the hardwood committee of 

 the Chicago I^umbermen's Association, in 

 December, I8O0, learning that the Wiscon- 

 sin Hardwood Manufacturers' Association 

 proix>sed making a set of rules, appointed 

 a committee and requested a conference 

 with the Wi&'consin Hardwood Manufac- 

 turers' Association for the purpose of at- 

 tempting to secure a uniformity in inspec- 

 tion rules. Further develiipmeut!:' rather 

 tend to show that the Chicago contingent's 

 idea of seciu'ing uniformity was to have 

 the AViseonsin people adopt the Chicago 

 rules. However that may be, Chicago is 

 entitled to the credit of making the first 

 move. 



The result of Chicago's correspondence 

 with Wisconsin was that, after the Wis- 

 consin association had adopted a set of 



rules, so as to be on an equal footing with 

 the other associations, it issued invitations 

 to Cheago, Minneapolis and Miehgan to 

 meet at M'arshfield. Wis., for a conference 

 looking to a uniformity in inspection rules 

 on northern lumber. 



The meeting was called for Mars'htield. 

 Wis., on Tuesday, .January 21. and Chi- 

 cago was represented by H. S. Ilayden, 

 E. F. Dodge. R. T. Witbeck. L. B. Lesh, 

 M. A. Vinnedge and F. W. Upham. Min- 

 neapolis was represented by M. H. 

 Coolidge. president of the Northwestern 

 Hardwood Association; .1. H. Hiscock. 

 W. H. Sill, A. H. Barnard and D. F. Clark. 

 Michigan sent only one delegate, Mr. 

 .James Cameron of Central Lake, Mich. 

 Wisconsin was' represented by about a 

 dozen of her best hardwood lumbermen, 

 ably led by Mr. C. S. Curtis of Wausau. 



Nothing resulted from tliis meeting, ap- 

 parently. 



The Wisconsin association had adopted 

 a set of rule.v which the Minneajjolis and 

 Chicago contingent would not even con- 

 sider. "The l)e.s-t of gaod feeling prevailed, 

 however, and it was recognized that this 

 was only the beginning. 

 « * « 



It is curious to look over those old Wis- 

 consin rules and see that they are almost 

 identical with the present rules of the 

 National Hardwood Lumber Association. 



Firsts were 8 inches and over wide, 10 

 feet and over long, which is the present 

 rule of the National association. 



Seconds were 6 inches and over wide, 

 8 feet and over long, not to exceed 10 

 per cent of 10 feet, nor D per cent of 8 feet 

 in any lot. That is exactly the National 

 rule as adopted at St. Louis. At 7 inches 

 wide, the old Wisconsin ride says: "A 

 piece may contain some slight defect, sueli 

 as a small round knot that does not show 

 through on both sides, or if the knot is 

 within 2 feet of the end of the piece it may 

 show through. At 8 inches will admit of 

 defects equal to one standard defect," etc. 



Compare that with the rule adopted at 

 St. Louis on northern hardwoods: ""Sec- 

 onds must be inches or over v\'ide, 8 to 

 IG feet long; pieces 8 feet long must be 

 clear; piece 10 feet or over long, 6, 7 or 8 

 inches wide may have one standard defect; 

 pieces 9, 10 or 11 inches wide may have 

 two standard defects or their equivalent," 

 etc. 



The old Wisconsin rule which Chicago 

 and Minneapolis would not even con- 

 sider, made commons ."> inches and over 

 wide, feet and over long. The present 

 rule of the Natiimal Hardwood Lumber 

 Association makes commons in northern 

 woods 3 inches or over wide, feet or 

 over long. 



I remember that a largo portion of the 

 diseu&'sion at that meeting was as to 

 whether the cuttings in common should be 

 GO 2-3 or 75 per cent, the Wisconsin people 



favoring G6 2-3 and the other delegates 

 favoring 75 per cent. The present rule 

 of the National association on all woods is 

 OG 2-3. 



Most of the discussion aside from the 

 discussion of the percentage of cutting In 

 common was devoted to a discussion as 

 to ^^'lhether the standard knot should be 

 sound, Wisconsin contending that it should 

 be either sound or uus lund. the other dele- 

 gates insisting that it should be sound. 

 The present rule of the National associa- 

 tion admits knots sound or unsound as 

 standard knots. 



The foregoing comparisons show what 

 a change has been wrought in the senti- 

 ments of the trade. Tlie Wisconsin rules 

 were laughed at by those who had there- 

 tofore made inspection rules, and there 

 was some jesting remark made about the 

 tail attempting to wag the dog. That was 

 six years ago and the result of the St. 

 Louis meeting shows that the tail has 

 wagged the dog. for tlie national rules as 

 at present, although different in construc- 

 tion and phraseology, are practically the 

 rules offered by the Wisconsin association 

 at the JIarshtleld meeting in 189G. . 

 * * * 



That was the first move toward securing 

 uniformity of inspecting rules, and while 

 it apparently bore no fruit, it was. in 

 fact, the leaven which has eventually 

 leavened the trade. It set people to think- 

 ing and when Chicago revised her rules 

 shortly thereafter, some concessions were 

 made toward the Wisconsin rules, notably 

 the admitting of the unsound I'/i-inch Icnot 

 as a standard defect. This meeting als > 

 set other people to thinking and to con- 

 sidering if another conferenec on insijec- 

 tion rules might not produce a better re- 

 sult. 



H; ^. ^ 



Only those actively engaged in the hard- 

 wood lumber business at the time of the 

 Marshfield meeting can have any conce))- 

 tion of the conditions existing in the hard- 

 wood trade at that time. A man who 

 would enter the hardwood lumber business 

 to-day could not comprehend it and would 

 not believe it. Chicago had a set of in- 

 spection rules different from the inspection 

 rules of any other market; so had Min- 

 neapolis, St. Louis, Cincinnati, Cairo, New 

 York. and. in fact, every other market if 

 any consequence. And those rules were 

 interpreted and apjilied by the inspectors 

 in the employment of the different markets 

 and the resiUt was very unsatisfactory to 

 the shippers of lumlTer. Such a condition 

 of confusion existed in the grading of lum- 

 ber, and the opportunities for unfair and 

 dishonest practices were so great that the 

 feeling between the manufacturers and 

 dealers was one of extreme bitterness. 



This condition not only injured the 

 manufacturer.s. but it injured the dealers « 



