HARDWOOD RECORD 



21 



16 and on the ImIi were given a hearing by 

 [he Transcontinental Freight Bureau. An op- 

 portunity was given each member of the com 

 tnittee to Btate our rase, and on account of 

 statements made to us by a number of the 

 individual members of t lie freight bureau we 1. It 

 sure that we would secure some concession; 

 advised, however, a few days later that 

 our application had been rejected, and that no 

 reduction would be made. 



Your committee again met in Chicago on 

 August if, to outline a plan of action. We 

 found that certain new developments appeared 

 to warrant continued action among the indi- 

 vidual members of the Transcontinental Freight 

 Bureau, and we have recently been led to be- 

 lieve that some of the through lines in the 

 Northwest are preparing to put on a tariff of 

 60 cents per 100 from Chicago and common 

 points in the Pacific coast, based on a minimum 

 weight of 50,000 pounds. If tbis is done we 

 feel safe in saying that other lines will take 

 similar action, and it will result in our securing 

 the desired rate. 



Report of Inspection Rules Committee. 



The chairman of the Inspection Rules Com- 

 mittee, Theodore Fathauer, called attention 

 in his report to differences in opinion over 

 the construction of various rules in the code, 

 and stated the judgment of the committee 

 on certain questions. 



Gentlemen of the convention : It seems to me 

 quite appropriate that on an occasion of this 

 land your chairman should advise you how he 

 interprets the rules of inspection as adopted by 

 this association. It is apparent to everyone in 

 the hardwood lumber business that even with 

 the greatest care and study it is very difficult 

 to describe all defects plainly in the rules of 

 inspection. I am well aware" of the fact that 

 some of the members of this association differ 

 with your chairman, especially as to the Inter- 

 pretation of that rule as printed on page 10, 

 -under caption "General Instructions." viz.: 



"All fractions of three-quarters of a foot or 

 over must be counted up to the next higher fig- 

 ure. All fractions of less than three-quarters of 

 a foot must be counted to the next lower fig- 

 ure." 



Of course, there can be no possible misunder- 

 standing as to the measure, for that is expressed 

 very plainly, but your chairman contends that 

 if you call up the measure you must also rail 

 up the grade. For example, if a board is 1 inch 

 thick. 5% inches wide and 12 feet long, and 

 otherwise up to the grade of firsts and seconds 

 demanded of a board f» incites wide, then this 

 hoard measured C. feet first and second and not 

 6 feet No. 1 common. 



Likewise I contend that a hoard or plank 

 T->4 inches wide will carry tie- defects of a 

 board or plank S inches wide, and so on. In- 

 asmuch as we measure 34 of a foot as 1 foot. 

 we must also concede the fact that % of an 

 inch is 1 inch, for the unit and basis of lumber 

 measure is 1 inch by 12 feet long. 



I have reeeivi-d a number of communications 

 in which I have been requested to describe sea- 

 son checks, stain and wane. These are three 

 defects which rim- committee has always found 

 it difficult to describe to its own satisfaction in 

 its inspection rules. That must be left entirely 

 to the judgment of the inspectors. No one can 

 pass judgment on these three defects without 

 seeing them, and T am unable to be of any 

 service to anyone addressing me on that subject. 

 It may he of some interest to you to know- 

 that your committee has even been requested to 

 describe a season cheek by giving the length, 

 width and depth of same. It has also been 

 suggested that as regards stain we should have 

 photographic impressions of what we termed 

 slightly discolored sap, etc. We also have ex- 

 perimented with the definition of wane, hut 

 have never been able to formulate one that 

 seemed satisfactory. 



I have read statements in which the inspec- 

 tion rules were generally criticized, mainly that 

 they left too much to the judgment of the in- 

 spector. It has always been the aim of your 

 committee to be as concise and plain in forming 

 these rules as possible, and both manufacturers 

 and dealers were represented on the inspection 

 rules committee. I think anyone, whether or 

 not he is a member of this association, must in 

 all fairness admit that we have a set of in 

 spection rules that is more definite than any 

 Other in print today. 



I have also read the comments and criticisms 

 in the American Lumberman, which were pub- 

 lished some time age. Practically all of their cor- 

 respondents were in favor of Inspecting lumber 

 on the good side. Their contention was sup- 

 ported by the statement that a very large per 

 centage of lumber in Its finished state showed 

 but one face. The latter statement Is undoubt- 

 edly correct. I must confess, however, to mv 

 surprise, that none of the correspondents ad- 

 mitted the fact that lumber In Its finished state 



bowing inn one fail- is clear. Tbis well-known 

 fact was deftly avoided by till correspondents 

 I think it would I"- a very difficult matter to 

 find lumber in its finished state other than clear. 

 and as all hardwood lumbermen know, admitting 



"in', two. tin anil four defects, according to 



widths, on the j i' -id.', does not by any 



means mean that the good side is clear." Man- 

 ufacturers and dealers are well aware of this. 

 All hardwood lumbermen know that to in- 

 specl particularly thick lumber on the good side 

 would be practically ridiculous. Even with tic 

 greatesl care in manufacturing hardwood lumber 

 it is not unusual to find 2 inch, 2%-inch, 3-inch 

 and 4-inch planks that are firsts and seconds 

 on the good side and No. 2 and even No. :: 

 common on the poor side. What would be the 

 result if all lumber were to be inspected on the 

 good side? It would not be a very difficult 

 matter, especially in sawing thick lumber, to 

 box your hearts, and yet you could produce 

 lirsts and seconds in that manner and under that 

 system of inspection. A system of that kind 

 would be ruinous to all interested, and I fail 

 to see bow any practical lumberman, after due 

 deliberation, can advocate such a system. Some 

 of the associations, whose membership consists 

 of none but hardwood lumber manufacturers. 

 have provided a rule, and refer to the fact 

 that in inspecting lumber both sides should be 

 taken into consideration, hut do not state defi- 

 nitely which side determines the grade. 



Theodore Fathauer, Chairman. 



.After the reports of the committees had 

 been read the chair stated that new busi- 

 ness would be in order, and Theodore Fath- 

 auer read a communication from the Lum- 

 bermen 's Club of Cincinnati stating that 

 the National rules of inspection governed 

 lumber in the rough aud made no provision 

 for dressed stock. The communication pre- 

 sented for the consideration of the meeting 

 a system of rules on dressed and worked 

 gum, dressed and worked poplar and on 

 maple and oak flooring. The rules offered 

 followed those of the Dressed Gum Lumber 

 Manufacturers' Association for gum; those 

 of the Maple Flooring Manufacturers' Asso- 

 ciation for maple; those of four large manu- 

 facturers of oak flooring for oak; and those 

 on dressed and worked poplar were pre- 

 pared by a committee of the Lumbermen 's 

 Club after correspondence with manufac- 

 turers in various parts of the country. 



In the discussion which followed the 

 presentation of these rules Gregory S. Stew- 

 art asked whethei it was in order to offer 

 the rules at the convention, as it appeared 

 that tlie rules, as they wire passed at Buffalo 

 on rough lumber, should remain just as they 

 are and govern all kinds of lumber, eithei 

 rough or dressed. 



E. E. Goodlander stated that thicknesses 

 should be specified on dressed lumber. Half- 

 inch lumber was dressed three-eighths tinder 

 the old rules and under the new rules it is 

 ihessei] one-sixteenth less. He stated that it 

 i- i In- same way with five-eighths. 



G. E. milliard said that the association 

 could in it inspect cypress under the rules of 

 the Southern Cypress Manufacturers' Asso- 

 ciation, because there are several grades 

 which it did not have, and suggested that 

 while the committee was working on the rules 

 pin]... so, | they should put in the balance of 

 tlio cypress rules which had been brought 

 down to date. 5e thought that the cypress 

 ml.- should be uniform with those of the 

 cypress association, but staled that there are 

 additions to these rules which had nut Mt 

 been adopted by the National. 



C. F. Korn called attention to a letter 

 from the secretary of the Dressed Gum 



Manufacturers' Association, which stated 

 thai they had added to the rules on the in- 

 spection of that ".urn ami requesting that 

 these rules be added in the National Asso 

 ciation rules. 



Karl Palmer made a t ion to t he i B 



that the action taken at Buffalo announcing 

 that the rules would not be changed for 

 three years be rescinded at this meeting. 1 1 

 v\ as objected to by Gardner I. Jones on the 



| e,| that the addition of the rules did not 



necessarily mean a change of rules, n, also 

 stated thai it would militate against the 

 stability of the association if the rules were 

 changed after having been fixed for three 



Mars. Tli loir Fathauer stated that in his 



opinion the adoption of the rules on dressed 

 lumber would not be rescinding the action 

 taken at Buffalo, but rather an addition or 



supplement to the rules on hanlw I lumbei 



in the rough. He thought that the rules on 

 hardwood lumber in the rough ought not to 

 1,.' changed, because they had been so widely 

 advertised and it would be a confession that 

 the association could not live up to its action. 



Thomas .7. Moffett followed along the same 

 line, urging that it would be a serious mis- 

 take for the association to go on record at 

 Buffalo and then within the specified time 

 recall its action. He thought that the pro- 

 posed rules on dressed lumber could be in- 

 corporated without a change in the present 

 rules of the association, and he hoped that 

 such action would be taken. 



An amendment to the original motion was 

 made by O. E. Yeager authorizing the com- 

 mittee to submit the rules to the different 

 markets, and it was seconded by ( '. E. Lloyd, 

 Jr. Mr. Lloyd stated that lie thought no 

 addition to the rules of the association ought 

 to be made without being submitted to every 

 member of the association, lb- thought also 

 that there was peed for rules on dressed lum- 

 ber, but that every member ought to see 

 them before tiny were finally adopted. In 

 replying to the amendment Ear] Palmer 

 slated that he concurred in it and in the 

 remarks made by Mr. Lloyd. He thought 

 that it would lie ample time for the com- 

 mit in to submil a set of rules on dressed 

 lumber til the .annual convention at Atlantic 

 City next year. 



The question if it was necessary to change 

 lie rules adopted tit Buffalo in order to add 

 inspection rules on dressed lumber arose, and 

 Presidenl W. 11. Eusse made a statement to 

 the effect that he did not lielieve any radical 

 change ought to be made in tic rules. In 

 reply to a request fin' :i specific ruling from 

 \\ . 1,'. Barksdale mi the question whether the 

 addition of the rules mi dressed lumber was 

 a change in the present rules the chair said 

 that personally lie did not think it was, but 

 that lie did not wish to decide it. lie left 

 that to be decided by the members. 



A motion was offered by Mr. Barksdale 

 that the addition of new rules was nut a 

 change in the old ones, and after con; 

 able discussion by various members w I 

 at times, was not exactly germane to 



