Febi-uar.v 10, 1921 



HARDWOOD RECORD 



points in Southern and Southwosteni territory, to the possible dis- 

 advantage of members of the organization who have plants and 

 interests in Central Freight Association and Eastern Trunk Line 

 territory. The association proposes to approach the question of 

 readjusting rates in such manner that the interests of the entire 

 membership and not of only part thereof shall be served in the best 

 manner possible. 



It has developed that some of the railroads arc just a little 

 opposed to the proposition of putting lower rates into effect unless 

 good reason can be shown therefor. The reply of Lincoln Green of 

 the Southern Railway perhaps illustrates this point more forcibly 

 than that of any other railroad official. He suggests opposition to 

 lowering rates unless it is shown that the railroads will be cur- 

 tailed in their revenues from the lumber industry b.y virtue of rates 

 that are so high as to restrict the movement thereof. It is quite 

 apparent that the contention of the association that the railroads 

 will receive less revenue from the lumber industry on the basis of 

 present rates than they received from the same industry on the 

 basis of the old rates, because of the severe reduction in tonnage 

 moving on the former as compared with that moving on the latter, 

 is making a deep impression on tlie carriers, and that this argument 

 promises to have more effect, in bringing about a satisfactory 

 adjudication of the rate controversy than any other that can be 

 advanced. 



The following, in part, is the request, made by Mr. Wellford to the 

 ])residents of thirteen railroads, for a conference to consider tlio 

 lowering of rates on hardwood lumber: 



It is undoubtedly true that a most serious situation coiifrouts the hard- 

 wood industry of the South and Southwest today, due largely to the exist- 

 ing adjustment of freight rates. 



In shipping hardwoods from Soutliern ami Southwestern territories to 

 tlie great consuming marliets in Central Freight Association and Eastern 

 territories, etc., our shippers are unable to dispo-^^e of the larger portion 

 of their product, which is of the lower grades, due to competition with 

 Northern woods, which are able to reach these markets at much more 

 favorable freight rates. 



An increasing displacement of hardwoods produced in the South and 

 Southwest by substitutes produced in the North and East is also having 

 its influence on the movement. 



The last advance in freight rates on hardwoods from Southern and 

 Southwestern territories has also resulted in more favorable transportation 

 costs on similar traffic moving from other territories to important con- 

 suming markets via water or water and rail routes. 



The disturbance of important comjietitive relations resulting from the 

 commission's decision in Ex Parte 74, rendered in an emergency, has 

 resulted in a handicap to the movement of hardwoods from Southern 

 and Southwestern territories, of such increasing importance as to now 

 warrant some nullification. 



As a consequence of these various conditions, such business as is mov- 

 ing from the producing territories in question is of the higher grades of 

 hardwood, and more ol^ the lower grades have been accumulating at the 

 nulls with no apparent outlet. 



An increase in the export movement will not cure the situation, and 

 an,v considerable displacement of the comparatively longer haul domestic 

 traffic by short haul export traffic in this territory will operate to the dis- 

 advantage of the carriers. 



In stating the effect of the existing adjustment of freight rates on the 

 movement there is no disposition to discount the effect of the general 

 business depression prevailing: luit the competition encountered with 

 respect to other traffic enjoying much more favoralilc rates is an actual 

 condition daily confronting us iu tlic marketing of our product, ami it is 

 the well-considered conviction of our shippers tliat a normal How of busi- 

 ness cannot be restored without a fair downward revisi(m of their freight 

 ra tes. 



Unless some relief can be obtained the operations of our mills must 

 necessarily be severely handicapped and their output unreasonably cur- 

 tailed if, indeed, they can continue to exist, all of which means heavy 

 losses of tonnage to lines, such as yours, that have lieen largely Imilt up 

 on the forest products' traffic. Further, it must be obvious that Where the 

 hardwood operators in this territory can onl.v dispose of their highest 

 grades, the medium and biwer grades of logs will be deadened in the woods 

 and represent not only a total loss in tonnage, but also a total economic 

 loss. 



We realize the .serious problems confronting the carriers and shippers 

 alike, in the matter of transportation during this period of readjustment, 

 bnt we also realize that our respective interests are identical. We hope, 

 therefore that this matter may be approached with an open mind, recall- 

 ing that a level of rates which retards to jin unbearable extent the move- 

 ment of such an important volume of traffic as is here involved may well 

 be consiilered a poorer investment from every standpoint than a somewhat 

 Uiwer adjustment, which will move the business and may fairly be made 

 to yield a reasonable transportation profit. 



.\side from the compelling practical necessity of readjustments which 

 will enable the mills to market their product, we call attention to the 

 commissions' decision in Ex Parte 74. on which the present rates stand, 

 and from which the following clause is quoted : 



"Most of the factors wdth which we are dealing are constantly changing. 

 It is impossible to forecast with any degree of certainty what "the volume 

 of traffic will be. The general price level is changing from month to month 

 and from day to day. It is impracticable at this time to adjust all of the 

 rates on individiuU commodities. The rates to be established on the basis 

 hereinbefore approved must necessarily be subject to such readjustments 

 as the facts may warrant. It is conceded by the carriers that readjust- 

 ments will be necessary. It is expected that shippers will take these mat- 

 ters up in the first instance with the carriers, and the latter will be 

 expected to deal promptly and effectively therewith, to the end that neces- 

 sary readjustments may be made in as many instances as practicalde 

 without appeal to us." 



Snell Bill Hearing Clarifies Forestry Program 



Tlic hearing given the National Forestry program by the House 

 of Representatives Committee on Agriculture, Jan. 26-27, resulted 

 iu a definite clarification of the measures proposed by the Snell 

 bill (H. R. 15327) through the presentation of briefs involving not 

 only individual sections of the bill, but presentations relating to 

 tlie broad public interest. 



Owing to the fact that Gifford Pinchot, former U. S. forester, 

 appeared to oppose the bill, the time assigned to the iwopoueuts of 

 the Snell bill was so limited that most of those who had come from 

 a distance, such as two representatives of the Union League club 

 of Chicago, and the representative of the American Newspaper 

 Publishers association of Cleveland, were not given an opportunity 

 to appear in person. 



Allegations made by Mr. Pinchot that the bill was designed to 

 jjromote a monopoly of timber, and references to his own past rela- 

 tions with lumbermen in which he said he had been led to favor 

 improper measures, drew the replies of Col. Graves former forester, 

 and Col. Greeley, present forester, with declarations that the policy 

 proposed by the Snell bill was originated under Col. Graves, and 

 perfected and formulated under Col. Greeley's administration and 

 tliat the Forest Service had not been used by the lumber interests; 

 the statements concluded with the declaration that the Forest 

 Service believing in the policies proposed, had welcomed support 

 from whatever quarter it might come. Attention was called to the 

 fact that some prominent figures in the lumber industry were 

 opposed to the policy as advocated. 



The hearing opened Wednesday, Jan. 20, with a prefatory state- 

 ment by Congressman Snell, in which he rehearsed the great and 

 varied support accorded the measure. He was followed by Col. 

 Greeley, who defined the policy proposed by Sections 1 and 2, as 

 providing co-operation between states and private owners, under 

 federal leadership. E. T. Allen, representing the Western Forestry 

 and Conservation Association, followed with a declaration that as 

 also representing the National Lumber Manufacturers association, 

 he asked that the lumberman be accepted as an ally in the effort 

 to provide for future forest crops, and not be considered as an 

 enemy. 



He was questioned by several congressmen, notablj-. Congressman 

 A'oight, as to his representation of lumber interests in Washington. 

 In effect he declared that he had no salary except a salary from 

 the Western Forestry association, and that his chief work iu Wash- 

 ington iu the last few years had been when called by the War 

 Industries board, the Internal Revenue bureau and similar agencies 

 to act as a neutral expert in matters affecting timber. He demanded 

 to be shown any charge in the Federal Trade Commission report 

 that he had received huge sums for representing lumbermen and tlie 

 challenge was not answered. 



Alfred Gaskill, state forester of New Jersey, representing the 

 state foresters of twenty-two states, declared the reasons why the 

 states favor federal leadership, hut state control. 



Mr. Pinchot 's attack on tlie lumber industry, and his reflections 

 upou the Forest Service followed, and closed the forenoon. The 

 congressional committee then granted the proponents of the legis- 

 lation additional time on Thursday to complete the presentation 

 of arguments, but the time granted finally narrowed down to thirty 

 minutes, and most of this was taken up by the statements of Cols. 

 Graves and Greeley in defense of the Forest Service position, and 

 Col. Greeley said that in his belief the gi'owing of trees for future 

 crops was not only the object of the legislation, rather than the 

 determination of the distribution of present supplies, but added 

 that this widespread growing of forests would be the most effective 

 preventative of monopoly. 



R. S. Kellogg, chairman of the Forestry Program Committee, 

 presented th« statements the second day in the absence of Mr. 

 Snell, and added his statement as to the history of the legislation,^ 

 declaring it was backed alike by manufacturers, converters and con- 

 sumers of forest products. 



