■ DisuTiiniiintion " lias an umiomocratic, uu-Aiiioricnn sound to it, 

 ml the idea wliioli it roiivovH is ncnprnlly objectionnblo. Wlioii one 

 luars thi> norj. ttii> association is with ratoH that arc lowered by the 

 railroad for one shipper and raised for another; of laws which pro- 

 tect one cla>s and persecute ancillier; and of prices which arc juggled 

 by the merchant in favor of one customer and to the detriment of 

 .■mother. Consequently to suggest discrimination seems, on the face 

 of it, to suggest something which is umlesirable. 



But, leaving the matter of association out of it, it must bo ad- 

 niitte.1 that discrimination is exercised all the time by everybody. 

 When you sit down at your mi<l<lay meal, you discriminate in order- 

 ing your lunc^i. When you go into a store or a tailor's shop to buy 

 clothing of any kind, you are necessarily going to discriminate in 

 its selection. Discrimination, therefore, is merely the process of 

 exercising judgment; of rejecting the unfit and selecting the fit. 

 In this .sense, which is the i)roi(er way to consider the word, intelli- 

 gent discrimination, instead of being objectionable, becomes a very 

 high attribute. 



It must be confessed, after looking over the lumber field and 

 regarding the men in it, that few of them exercise discrimination of 

 tho intelligent sort in nmtters that concern themselves most closely. 

 One would think that, like other business men, they would weigh 

 carefully each separate factor affecting their business, and make a 

 point of dis?riminating against those things which arc unfavorable 

 to it, realizing that if they do not exercise such discrimination, as 

 the interested parties, nobody else should bo expected to. 



It is a fine thing to be absolutely above self-interest, and to 

 weigh contending factors judicially, passing an opinion that is not 

 shaded or formed in any way by personal likes or dislikes. It is a 

 fine thing, considered ethically; but as a business proposition, it is 

 • ' mox nix ouse, ' ' as Elbert Hubbard delicately phrases it. The man 

 who doesn 't discriminate in favor of his own, who doesn 't smite his 

 enemies hip and thigh and cleave to his friends, is either a molly- 

 coddle or an ignoramus — or ethically perfect. Few lumbermen are 

 long on ethics. 



Lumbermen have been attempting, through the medium of the 

 Forest Products Exposition, to turn the attention of the country to 

 the desirability and utility of wood, and to convince owners, archi- 

 tects and contractors of the fact that they should use more wood. 

 This was a spectacular and effective method of presenting the cause 

 of the industry. It put before the community at large, m a big way, 

 that pco])lc could hardly avoid being impressed by, the case for lum- 

 ber and wood in all its form.s. 



Regarded thus, it was a splendid method of exploiting wood, and 

 this article is not to suggest in any way that it did not fulfill its 

 purpose magnificently. The thing to'eonsider is whether or not lum- 

 bermen, as a class, do not rely too much upon such measures, instead 

 of realizing that it is the gradual, persistent, never-ceasing effort 

 of every person in the busine.«s that is required to meet the opposi- 

 tion that has been formed against wood products of all kinds during 

 the past few years. 



Do lumbermen and other workers in wood really carry on the 

 sort of aggressive personal campaign that should be expected of themf 

 Do they co-operate daily to help the cause of wood? Or do they 

 foUow the bne of least resistance, and rely on big, impersonal forces 

 like the Forest Products Exposition to overcome the tendencies that 

 have been built up through the course of years! One exposition is 

 a big help; but it is one exposition. With thousands and thousands 

 of people directly interested in lumber manufacturing and distribu- 

 tion and woodworking, a mighty force could be engendered in behalf 

 of wood, provided every one of these were talking not merely for 

 his own little part of the business, but for the business as a whole. 



Have you ever noticed whether lumbermen ride in automobiles with 

 wooden bodies, — or accept ears that are properly described as "tin 

 boxes?" Yet the lumberman who buys a car of the latter kind is 

 encouraging the manufacturer to build that type of body. He is 

 — .30 — 



approving the course that indirectly at Iciisl is Imrting his businew. 

 lie is failing to discriminate in the way that ordinary liorso senae 

 would suggest. Ho is lowering his guard ami asking his opponent 

 to soak him on tho point of the jaw. 



Lumbermen, ns far as hns ever been noted, ilo not discrimlnalv 

 in tho matter of sleeping cars. They d<> not insist on riding in I*ull 

 mans of wood construction, but meekly let the company sell them 

 berths in cars that are not proof against even a can-opener. The 

 lumber papers and later on journals in other fiehls long ago ex 

 ploded the merits of tho steel car as ]iroti>ctinn against accident, 

 fire or any other traflic danger; but the railroads go on using steel. 

 A few complaints, and a few suggestions that wood cars bo providcil. 

 would have an effect, even though they came from an interesteil 

 source, on the manufacturers of lumber. Hut as it is, no one has 

 risen up personally to cxpre.'^s himself on the negative sido of the 

 .steel car proposition. 



Do lumbermen comment favorably on infcrinr finish of wood, as 

 seen in ofiice buildings and elsewhere, and argue its cause when 

 metal has beeu used? Or do they ignore both, allowing tho inference 

 to be made that it doesn't make any difference to them what kind 

 of material the owner and arcJiitect <lecide on for tho interior finish f 

 It does make a difference, of course; when single buildings can 

 take upwards of 250,000 feet of lumber in millwork only, it is bound 

 to make a difference. A little discrimination hero would help a lot. 

 simply by tending to educate the public on the subject, and by show 

 ing that the lumbermen themselves appreciate the use of wood, and 

 take note when it is absent. 



How about the use of metal office furniture? Do you tell your 

 friends why wood should be used instead of steel, inasmuch ns it is 

 proof against the average fire, and because the fire which would 

 burn the contents of a wooden desk or cabinet must consume the 

 desk or cabinet itself, whereas a steel container, once heated, burns 

 its contents even though the case itself may not be destroyed. Do 

 you have the courage of your convictions in this matter, or by keep- 

 ing hands off do you admit that you concede the superiority of sub- 

 stitute materials? 



Tho whisky people are among those who have been hard hit by n 

 rise of prohibition sentiment. Exclusive of the moral question in- 

 volved, they are a good deal like the lumbermen, who see their busi- 

 ness getting away from them. But the whisky manufacturers are a 

 little too aggressive to sit supinely twiddling their thumbs, when- 

 thc vital matter of public sentiment is concerned. They have the un 

 popular side, but they don't intend to let that interfere with the 

 business of stating their case whenever they have an opportunity. 



Their chief organization for publicity is the National Model License 

 League, which proposes regulation instead of destruction. The presi- 

 dent of this association keeps in touch with what people are saying 

 about whisky, and if somebody says something that isn't so, or is 

 merely a half-truth, the organization sends out a reply which, be- 

 cause it is courteous, temperate and logical, is nearly always used. 

 Tho result is that the papers and periodicals which are constantly 

 printing things about the demon rum are likewise constantly printing 

 rejoinders .from the National Model License League, intended to 

 show that it is a demon only when it is improperly used. 



But let any sort of misstatement you like get into print about 

 wood or lumber or any proposition affecting the industry, and it is 

 taken up and repeated and garbled and quoted in one way or another 

 without anything being done to meet the issue or show that the whole 

 fabric was raised on a foundation of untruth. The lumberman &.]•■ 

 pears to be so mentally inert that he cannot even rise to defend hi^ 

 own business. He reminds one of the man who walks around on 

 April Fool's Day with a tag pinned to his coat which says t^i 

 passersby: "Please Kick Me." And in this case the passerby, in- 

 cluding the public and competitors of wood, have promptly proceeded 

 to kick. 



The lumber trade can afford to a<lopt a little more aggressive at- 



