44 



HARDWOOD RECORD 



E, A. LANG, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS DIKECTOR 



E. T. SCOTT, METROPOLIS, 

 DIRECTOR 



ILLINOIS 



r. Form, ciikago, Illinois director 



r,wing to Its liabilit.v to alisoi-b oil, grease, etc. ; it is readily accessible 

 to vermin, rats or mice ; aud in every sense of the word takes prefer- 

 ment over the wooden box. 



Aside from tlie opposition of this committee and the work which it 

 has done for the past year 1 can tind no logical reason why any shipper 

 of commodities should utilize the wooden box as a shipping container under 

 the present existing conditions. The paper container costs from iO to 80 

 per cent less than the wooden box. Commodities packed in a paper con- 

 tainer owing to its weighing less than the wooden box save in freight 

 from 2(1 to 40 per cent. The railroads give commodities packed in the 

 paper container preferred handling and pay claims on commodities packed 

 in the paper container on the same basis as similar claims are paid on 

 commodities packed in a wooden box : and obligate themselves in every 

 way on commodities packed in a substitute container, and in the same 

 manner as they do on commodities packed in a wooden box. Keeping this 

 in mind, I reassert that there is no logical business reason which can be 

 shown tinder existing circumstances for the use of the woo<len shipping 

 container. We liave a report from one of our boxmen who has been 

 selling a large shipper of patent medicine his boxes for a number of years 

 at $21.50 per hundred. This container had proven satisfactory until the 

 advent of the substitute container. He reports that his customer has 

 ordered the substitute container, guaranteed in every way to be equal to 

 the wooden box, at .$3.10 per hundred. It does not take a philosopher 

 in this instance to' tell where the boxman gets off. 



As an illustration of the difference in weight on goods jiacked in a 

 wooden container and like goods packed in a paper container, let us take 

 the case of No. 2 lamp chimneys. I have chosen this because lamp 

 chimneys and fruit .iars were among the first commodities for which the 

 paper container was adopted, and the largest movement of merchandise 

 in the paper container is in these commodities. 



The gross weight of a case of No. 2 lamp chimneys packed in a wooden 

 container is fifty pounds. The gross weight of a case of No. 2 lamp 

 chimneys jiacked in a paper container is thirty pounds. The minimum 

 carload weight on No. 2 lamp chimneys is 1.5,000 pounds in wood or in 

 paper. On the minimum basis a carload of No. 2 lamp chimneys in wood 

 is 300 cases, and a minimum carload in paper is 4GS cases. The rate on 

 No. 2 lamp chimneys from the point we have selected in this example 

 to destination is 43 cents per hundredweight in paper or in wood. The 

 original minimum was fixed on 300 cases in wood and the rate of 43 

 cents was fixed upon this commodity' in wood, and on a basis of 300 cases. 

 You will discover by these statements that when these lamp chimneys 

 are packed in paper IGS cases of tlie No. 2 lamp chimneys are practically 

 carried for nothing. It is true that 468 paper containers packed with this 

 commodity approximate in weight to 16,000 pounds, the same as 300 cases 

 packed in wood, bul it must be i-eniembered that these 168 cases are of 

 excess bulk. Let it be renn'inliei-ed that a case of No. 2 lamp chimneys 

 is approximati'Iy Ww same in size as if the commodity was packed in a 

 wooden box. 



On the 43-cent freight rate liasis, a paper container filled with No, 2 

 lamj) chimneys produces 13.76 cents per case revenue to the common 

 carrier, while this same comaiodit.v in a wooden container, on the 43- 

 cent freight rate basis, produces 21% cents per case revenue to the 

 common carrier, or a difference of 7% cents per case more than the 

 productivity ]>er case on the same commodity packed in paper. This, 

 you will readily observe, is pra<-lically 33i;'i per cent loss to the com- 

 mon carrier, not tjiking into consideralion the added cost of labor 

 and hazard. 



This is only one of the many illustrations I could give you, and from 

 this it must become apparent that the common carriers have sacrificed 

 an enormous tonnage on classified commodities by virtue of Rule 14-B, 

 Western Classification Nos. 48-49, and, in addition, have added enor- 

 mously to their hazards, claims and labor charges. 



In the early part of the year 1910 we were confronted by the spectacle 

 of the railroads operating under Western Classification Nos. 48-49, and 

 who were responsible for this Rule 14-B, demanding the privilege of ad- 

 vancing freight rates on all classified commodities, giving as a reason their 

 increased labor charges, and stating that the shrinkage in their revenues 

 made it unprofitable to carr.v freight on the present freiglit rate basis, 

 I do not think it takes excessive intelligence to analyze this situation. 

 Reduced to the closest anal,vsis, this demand by the common carriers 

 merely means that they have realized the enormous loss to themselves, 

 and the enormous increase in their labor charges, but have not realized 

 the real cause. In other words, the.v are dealing with effects, and 

 propose to make the shipping public responsible for these effects, with- 

 out making the slightest eft'ort to remedy the cause. I do not believe the 

 common carriers are entitled to any advance in rates of freight until 

 they have first revised their classification regulations, and have expur- 

 gated and eliminated all unbusinesslike and illogical rulings. It costs 

 to carry freight in just the same manner as it costs to manufacture lum- 

 ber, and if the common carriers, by reason of their own fallacious acts, 

 find themselves burdened with an unprofitable business, they have no 

 more right to demand an additional tax, in the form of increased rates 

 of freight, on the general public to compensate themselves, than the lum- 

 ber manufacturers would be entitled to an arbitrary advance in the price 

 of lumber to compensate themselves for their acts of extravagance. 

 Therefore, I say, if the common carriers seek to reduce expenses and to 

 carry freight on a more satisfactory profit basis, they should first elimi- 

 nate Rule 14-B, Western Classification Nos. 48-49, or modify it so as to 

 place commodities packed in paper containers in the advanced class to 

 which they belong. If commodities packed in paper containers take pre- 

 ferred handling and produce a loss of 33^{; per cent in classified ton- 

 nage, these factors should he considered in classifying commodities so 

 packed before the general public should be asked to pa.v the bill. 



The common carriers should get nowhere in their fight for advanced 

 freight rates until they can show a willingness on their part to throw 

 out the inadequate and unbusinesslike system now employed by these 

 common carriers, and to restore their revenxies by the assumption of 

 up-to-date business methods. 



This committee has worked unceasingly for the past year in an effort 

 to show to the retailers, the .iobbers, the consumers and the shippers, 

 and to the common carriers, the fallacy of Rule 14-B, Western Classifi- 

 cation, Nos. 48-49, and by its activity and continuous efforts has in- 

 creased an improvement in general conditions far in excess of what Its 

 expectations were a year ago. One year ago the congestion of the low- 

 grade lumber market was a talking point. Today we have reports in our 

 office showing that there is an actual scarcity of low grades in some 

 directions. This committee has accomplished this work with the support 

 of a few broadminded lumber and box men, but it has not received the 

 support to which it is entitled, and unless such support is immediately 

 given its work must cease : and if its work does cease, and the effect is 

 no longer felt, I unhesitatingly state that the conditions which con- 

 fronted you in 1908 and 1900 will bo revived, and disorganization will 

 occur in the low-grade lumber market, with its reflective effect upon 

 the market for high-grade lumber. 



