22 



HARDWOOD RECORD 



August lu. l!i:;i 



Cause and Prevention of Blue Stain 



Ulur stuiii is tlic most tr(nil)l('s(iiiic of tlic sajj stains wliirli dis- 

 lolor wood. It is causcil hy a fiinjins wliicli germinates on the saji- 

 wniiil and jicncl rates its cells in seareli of starches and sugars. 

 Tliis action of tlie I'nagiis caases tio perceptible weakening of the 

 wood, but the discoloration which results lessens tlie value of the 

 lundicr for many jnirposes, such as interior iinisli, tloorinj;. and 

 Ijasket and lio.x veneers. The st.iin at first may lu' no more than 

 a bluish spot or streak oii the surface, but later, as the fniigus 

 develops, the discoloration niay invohi' all of the sapwood anil 

 become too deeji to surfaci' olT. 'I'lie lilue st.iin finifjus can revive 

 in timbers after loiiy iicriods ol in.-iction bronnlit mi by lack of 

 moisture. 



W.-irm weather .uid a i-oiM|iar.il i vely high moisture coiiteat of the 

 wood an' the ijiost favorable conditions for the growth of the blue- 

 stain fungus. Most of the infection <icrurs in jireen liimbi'r which 

 is piled without ample vent il;it inn lietween the boards, in the mill 

 yard or during, shipment. 



As yet no .absolutely dc|>en(l,ible means of preventing blue stain 

 has been llound by the I'. S. Forest I'roilucts Ij.aboratory, other 

 than kiln drying the lumber. The ordinary kilndrving process is 

 entirely effective against blue st;iin. but tlu're are many cases in 

 which this means of )u'evention is not feasible. Staining during 

 air seasoning can be largely controlled by open piling. This affords 

 Sree circulation of the air .-nid so hastens drying, but not always 



suHiciently under .adverse weather conditions to discourage the 

 stain fungi. 



The treatment of the green Ininber with antisej)tic dips is the 

 ULost effective method which is generally ap[>licablc at the ]iresent 

 time. For this jjurpose the chemicals commonly used are sodium 

 carbonate (soda ash) and sodium bicarbonate (ordinary baking 

 soda). Neither is a sovereign reme.ly under severe conditions, such 

 . as continuous rainy periods during the warm months, but will go 

 f;ir tow.arils keeping the stock (dean. In r.-iinj- seasons an 8 per 

 cent solution of sodium carbonate is desirable, but in drier weather 

 lialf this strength should suffice. A high grade of soda ash should 

 coiifaiiL .ibout .58'^ per cent alkali, and every effort should l>e made 

 to conform to this standaril of i)urity. When sodium bicarbonate 

 is used, an 11 per cent solution should be employed in wet weather 

 .■ind ") to li per cent in dry weather. This diemical when dry should 

 cont.iin aljoul M7 jier cent alkali. 



Jn the use of tliesi' chemical dips, the following ])oints should be 

 kejit in mind: (1) The solutions should be carefully mixed and 

 the concentrations in the dipping tanks should be kept uniform by 

 means of a hydrometer. (2) The solutions should be he.ated when 

 applieil. tlio bicarbonate .solution not above 120° F., however. 

 because it is l)roken down into the carbonate by excessive iicating. 

 (3) The stock should be dijipi'd as it comes from the saw. (4) 

 After di]ii)ing it should lie carefully jjiled so as to insure ample 

 ventil.'itiou. Narrow, cliemically-treated cross strips are prefer- 

 able til the wide untreated stri^is commonly employed, since treated 

 crossers teml to eliminate stain at the point of contact. 



Lumber Trade Customs 



*As F.sttihlishcil by the Arbittaiioiv^Departmevt of- the Aineiican Wholesale 

 L II III her Associaticni. Chiauia 



Liability for Delivery and Acceptance of Stock. Decision No. 22, 

 Docket No. 81 

 Thv Favt.s: A snsli uiitl iloor iu;imU';u-turor puicliasrd rrom a -wholL'salL'r 

 tilt' following Ciilifftniia white piiip shop lumber, on tlie dates and in llie 

 quantities and for the various deUverios shown below : 



Oriter No. 2tiir.li w;is ciniiijlctcd witlv slupincnt made on .N.in-il 10, 1020. 

 Onicr No. 2I11(>0 WHS ciini|jlotcil witli shipuicnt made on .Vpril 30, 1020. 

 Order No. 2()l(il wns loiuplotert with shipment made on May 25, 1920. 



On May 28, 1920. Iniycr wrote seller requesting that shipments be strunj;- 

 out witli (lie idea nl' iiMuplcting Ids orders liy -August 1 tn 1."). Shipments 

 were accordingly nintinucii uutil tlic remaining orders were iimiplctoii. 

 witli liual sliiimicuts tlicri'uu as follows: 



Order 2<;234. .Inly 20 ; unler 20298, .July 13: order 2G2n9. .Tnly 28. 



i'he lollowiug shiiinicnts on these orders were re.iectcd 

 arrival, on the gixmnil that the stock contained therein wiis n 

 dry. in acc<»rdance. witli the orders and was wet and stainei! : 



Order 



Nil. 

 2(il.-|!l 

 201. "lit 

 211100 

 20100 

 20100 

 20101 

 2010] 

 2(!234 

 20234 

 20298 

 202n,s 



ll" 



Car Nil. 



17001 



1111 



57530 



144702 



10,S044 

 1340O 

 42987 

 2409,-1 



■ Ili0."i4 

 40023 

 ."iIOOl 



Iiilte shipineiil 

 AprU 10 

 April 

 April 

 April 

 April 

 Alay 

 May 

 May 

 Jlay 

 May 

 May 



10 



2!l 



30 



30 



(i 



l.s 



1 



1 



19 



24 



l.iate received 

 Mav 2ii 

 May 20 

 .luni' 

 .Tune 

 .Tune 

 .Tune 

 .Tune 

 Juno 

 .Tune 

 June 

 June 



1 

 4 



n 



9 



15 



1 



11 

 24 



28 



i-ipl 



proniptl.v on 

 .1 tliiiroushly 



Feet 

 invoiced 

 20.J27' 

 21304' 

 1S559 ' 

 20820 ' 

 1840.-1 • 

 19237 ' 

 20920' 

 20135' 

 19924' 

 20714' 

 20944 ' 



221489' 



iiotiticil the 



111 ills lit" n\jcction tile seller pruuiptly 

 Iniyer to unload nil such sliipnicuts and hold same intact fur ufflcial iusin-c 

 tion, which the tniyer did. 



There was' considerable delay in the arrival of the Inspector and re-in- 

 spection was not ciuupletcd until .\ugust 9. The eoinhined ofticial reports 

 en tile 11 ears sli.iwed : 



109.584 ft. on grade 

 51,931 ft. rejected for stain 

 3.815 ft. used by buyer 



225,330 ft. total accounted for. 



rruinptly upon receipt of the inspector's reports tlie seller teuden d 

 ilelivcry on all up-to-grade stock shown therein liy invoicing same at 

 iiiiginal contract prices, and offered to remove the rejected or stained 

 stock. These corrected invoices amounted to $17,122,55. 



Tlic Dispute: The buyer returned all these corrected invoices and 

 refused to accept any portion of the stock covered by same. His conten- 

 tion was that his original orders called for thoroughly dry stock which 

 w.iuld be ready for use in his plant Ininiediately upon delivery tliereof. 

 .iiiil that, while not denying that it was dry when re-inspected some six 

 weeks alter it was received, he contended it was not dry when it arrived 

 and therefore not in accordance with contract. He furthermore con- 

 leudi'd that most of the stock was put on sticl<s when it was unloaded, 

 whidi enabled it to dry out before re-inspection took place, and intro- 

 duced several affidavits of his employes as proof thereof. 



The seller contended that the lumber was all thoroughly dry when 

 leceived, as evidenced by the railroad weights on same, which compareil 

 favorably with those on the other 44 cars 'shipped on these orders and 

 accciited. He explained the iiresenco of stained stock was due to careless 

 loading at the mill, where apparently some stock which had become 

 stained in drying had been leaded in by mistake. He also contended that, 

 even admittin.s that the stock was too damp for immediiite use upon 

 arrival, ho still had uutil August 15 in which to make delivery; and that, 

 there being no question as to its dryness prior to that time, the same 

 should be accepted on the several contracts as amended by the extension 

 agreement. He furthermore alleged that all except the stained stock was 

 close piled when unloaded, and introduced an affidavit from the official 

 inspector in support of this contention. 



The Dccixioii: Held, that the evidence submitted as to the condition 

 of the stock as to dryness upon arrival was contlictiug and not conclusive: 

 and that, therefore,' the report of the official inspector, which showetl the 

 Innibcr to he dry when reinspectcd liy hiiu. was tlie only conclusive evi- 

 dence submitted on this point. 



Held further, that the official inspection reports indicated a sufficient 

 liercentage of off grade stock in each car in dispute to justify the buyer 

 in rejecting same upon arrival. Also, that inasmuch as seller requested 

 that the stock from all cars be held intact pending official inspection no 

 delivery was really made or tendered thereon until after such inspection. 



Held further, that orders 20159 and 2G100 having called for earlier 

 deliveries and shiimients thereon liad then been completed* were not 

 included in the extension agreement of May 28. 



Therefore, and inasmuch as no delivery of the five cars shipped on those 

 orders was tendered within the time limit specified therein, it is held that 

 same wore properly rejected by the Iniycr as to their entire contents. 



Held further, that the time for final delivery on all or any portion of 

 erders 201C1, 2C234 and 2G29S, except such shipments as may have arrived 

 and been accepted thereon on May 28. was extended on that date to 

 August 15. 1920: and that bu.ver was privileged to tender such deliveries 

 at any time on nr liefiire that date. 



