niurh'<li»i-u!tsed hnrdnood );rndiug rulox ngitutioii, n.s tliprc ih Bocni- 

 iiigly nutliing to \)e accomplinliod by long-rnngo argumpiit«, and hnd 

 lioi>od nftcr Htatiiig it$ position oditorially in the issuu of Miiy 25 

 to Ik- utile to forogo further dixcuiuion in its reading matter pages. 



In order to I* [lerfei-tly fair in the controvery, however, there is 

 herewith puhlijihed a comniiinii-atlon from one of the men most 

 actively interested in tlie grading rules proposition and in Uie forma- 

 tion of the recently organized furniture federation, and also excerpts 

 from the address on grading rules delivered before the furniture 

 manufacturers at the sj'ssion at which the federation was formed. 



The letter referred to was written in nn effort to refute a state- 

 ment contained in our editorial of May 25, in which Hardwood 

 Rkcokd maintained that the consumers had not shown the [)roper 

 spirit in the controversy ; had not made proper efforts to get together 

 with the promulgators of the National hardwood rules, and are not 

 now showing the right attitude in attempting to force the issue, 

 simply because of unfavorable circumstances in the lumber business. 

 The letter follows: 



I mo.'it dislike to draw anyone Into a controversy, or be drawn Into one. 

 You. however, in your May tm Issue, editorially make some statements 

 under the title "RcgardlnE the Furniture Federation," that as secretary 

 of two of the larite furniture lines and the casket manufacturers, I can 

 hardly let pass. 



Before our late friend Rlbson"s death. I was for several years In 

 i|iiite close touch with him nn hardwood matters, and I found him always 

 ready to stand squarely on all matters as he saw them. I believe that It 

 Is your present purpose to do so. and therefore feel free to address you 

 In criticism on above mentioned article, 



Vou state, in re the late federation meeting. "It was frankly sug- 

 gpstcd that the real purpose of the meeting was to force the hand of the 

 Notional Hardwood Lumber Association." 



This surely will sound like "startling news." A sort of a Chicago 

 .American headline, and has as much truth In It as the said paper's 

 recent article In three-Inch headlines that fourteen Chicago Bremen were 

 killed at that West Madison street lire, where none was killed. 



For your information let me say emphatically that that was not the 

 real purpose of said meeting, but was merely a question Incidental to 

 a meeting of manufacturers of all lines of furniture and users of 

 hardwoods. 



The real purpcsc was "to consider the efforts and effectiveness of the 

 work being done by Individual association of different lines of furniture 

 and to show the advantages of a federated movement." 



Incidentally to this effcrt was this subject of 1012 and 1913 grades 

 rules Included, since all these (some 400) were virtually interested as 



You further say that "the consumers have not shown the proper spirit 

 In working out this question." Y'ou also say that, as is the present tend- 

 ency, a spirit of arbitration and compromise ought to have been exhibited 

 by said consumers. That they did not do so, you point to the statement 

 that consumers held they were barred from consultation In making up 

 the 1913 rules, and that this was absolutely false, but rather that they 

 failed to take advantage of Invitation to participate. 



I think I am correct when I say that your flies of last summer and 

 the records of the grading committee, as well as the National Hardwood 

 Lumber Association secretary, disprove this. A petition was last year 

 filed by this office with above. Just prior to the Milwaukee meeting, where 

 these 1013 rules were to be considered. To my knowledge in the n»lgh- 

 borhood of from 500 to 600 printed forms of protest were also filed by 

 various consumers with Mr. Fish. Though we looked for reference to 

 these protests In the proceedings of said meeting, we found none, and 

 In fact we were told that the convention never heard of them. 



Further, a committee of consumers requested a hearing on the subject, 

 but we are advised that they were refused "through parliamentary 

 objection." 



Would this Imply that the consumers "did not exhibit a spirit of con- 

 sideration or desire to take it up with the lumber producer"? 



You further state, "as further evidence Indicating lack of desire to get 

 together, the officers of the National Hardwood Lumlwr Association were 

 not luvited to attend the federation meeting, and the secretary was even 

 debarred from the privileges of the floor." 



Sure, this ls>true, for contrary to your statement, the consideration 

 of this question was not the Issue or purpose of said meeting. Its pur- 

 pose was as stated, and the program precluded the consideration or 

 lengthy discussion of any one subject. This grade question could well 

 take a full half or In fact a whole day, but as it was only an incidental 

 question on said program. It was given but an allotment of time suffi- 

 cient to make the statement that was made. To have permitted discussion 

 by consumers or the respected lumber secretary would have defeated the 



—20— 



time (or that program. 



You may say lliot this would point with ridiculous rcflccllun on the 

 action taken, without due conkideration. That might be ao wore II not 

 Ihnt prnciically every one of the fourteen furniture assoclatlona had 

 Individually dlscuHscd the subject of thew 1013 rules pro and con and 

 they were practically united on a common Hcnliment, a« wan clearly 

 demonstrated by the aclion of the federated meeting. There was no 

 need of further discussion. 



As to inviting the lumbermen In for discussion, even though there had 

 been time, why should It have been necessary? The lumlM-rmcn, In the 

 face of over .lOO or 000 protesls and nn appeal by a committed', naw fit 

 to attempt to enforce the new rules, go was It not proper for them, the 

 consumers, to go ahead lnder>endeatly? 



The fact is that consumers demand that II lumbermen need higher 

 |)rlccs. as they have staled repeatedly, thry want them to change their 

 prices, hut not constantly tinker with the rules, which inakeB It hard for 

 them to keep posted on. them. The 1013 rules were purported to have been 

 drafted because of the condition of the product. Be this as it may. the 

 consumers testify that It had the effect of greatly enhoncing the price, 

 and since Incle Sam prohibits agi'eement on the latter, to summarily lo 

 arronge the rules lo bring the same effect, gives consumers a Just cause 

 for action. 



In the face of this position of the consuiper on this question do you 

 believe that your editorial was Just? 



Y'ou having given publicity to your beforementioned opinion on behalf 

 of the associated consumers, I beg to request your publicity lo this, their 

 position on the subject. 



The following is the address on lumber grading delivered before 

 the furniture federation meeting at Cliicago on May 14: 



In discussing lumber grading rules, it will probably be well to give a 

 short history of the reason for the protests against the 1013 rules of the 

 National Hardwood Lumber Association. 



About a jear ago a dozen large consumers of hardwood lumber pro- 

 tested against the changes that the lumber association proposed to make 

 In Its 1912 rules, at Its 1013 .lune meeting. A fair analysis of what these 

 changes meant to the consumer of lumber was gotten out in pamphlet 

 form, and a copy of It was sent to practically every manufacturer using 

 hardwood lumber east of the Rocky Mountains. 



Something over six hundred protests from lumber consumers were filed 

 with the lumber association, protesting against any further change In 

 the rules of grading. So far as the committee having this in charge 

 could see, from the treatment accorded them, these numerous protests 

 were ignored. The committee was never given an opportunity to be 

 heard. No mention was ever made of the protests, by the secretary or 

 the officers, to the delegates of that convention! The delegates went 

 home believing that the people who paid them for lumber were satisfied, 

 while the officers of the association knew that practically every con- 

 sumer was dissatisfied. 



The committee, of which the writer is one. nt once took up the matter 

 of the inspection rules with different furniture manufacturing organiza- 

 tions, and at least nine of them have passed resolutions condemning the 

 1013 rules of the lumber association and have agreed to buy only under 

 the 1912 rules, and right here I want to say, we have no trouble what- 

 ever getting all the lumber we want. 



So strong has become this protest that the officers of the National 

 Hardwood Lumber Association are now alarmed and have Issued a bulle- 

 tin urging their manufacturers to be loyal and stand fast lo the 1013 

 rules, and denounced as "perniciously acllve" a small bunch of manufac- 

 turers, who are "disgruntled and who for selfish purposes arc fighting the 

 1013 rules." 



FEW POBNITUBB MANCPACTDBEnS INSPECT LUMBER 



By constantly changing the rules the lumber consumers' inspector Is 

 confuted and takes on poorer lumber than he should accept. Very few 

 furniture manufacturers are qualified to Inspect lumber under the National 

 Hardwood Lumber Association rules. I make no claim whatsoever, myself, 

 as being proficient In that direction. It is a profession of Itself, and It 

 is no discredit to any of us that wc have to depend on the knowledge of 

 others In Inspecting our lumber. 



In the 1012 rules the smallest board In No. 1 common, in oak. must be 

 four Inches wide and six and seven feet long, and must be clear. Under 

 the 1913 rules It must be four Inches wide and four and five feet long, 

 and must be clear. The rules have sborlened up the size of the board 

 two feet, or about 30 per cent. 



Under the 1012 rules, firsts must be eight Inches wide and ten feet 

 long, and full width. Under the 1913 rules, they may be six Inches 

 wide and eight feet long and 10 per cent of them may be one-quarter of 

 an Inch scant In width to take care of the sawmill man's negligence In 

 sawing. This Is a reduction of 20 per cent in length and 2.'i per cent In 

 width. Where long clear cuttings are necessary. It Is needless to tell a 

 furniture manufacturer what a great reduction In the value of the grade 

 this reduction in length and width makes. 



