HARDWOOD RECORD 



29 



ecutive committee occurs in this room directly 

 after the adjournment of tliis session, and any 

 member of tlie board of managers not on tlie 

 executive committee is cordially requested to 

 meet with us. 



M. M. Wall : Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, 

 that paper of mine on forestry seemed to take 

 pretty well, and I was not sat upon very hard. 

 I have another paper here, along about the same 

 line. I am almost afraid to read it, because 

 somebody may think it is a little out of place. 

 It is very dear to my mind, and if I have made 

 any mistake, I hope the members of the asso- 

 ciation will forgive me. It is not done with 

 malice or intent to trample on the toes of any 

 member of the association, but it goes almost 

 hand in hand with the forestry question. That 

 I may not be misunderstood or incorrectly 

 quoted, I have jotted down a little memorandum 

 of this, w'hich I will read. 



Address of M. M. Wall on Lumber Tariff. 



Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen : I would like to 

 say a word about the lumber tariif. 



The National Hardwood Lumber Association 

 has never figured in political measures, being 

 entirely non-partisan in its character. Individ- 

 ually we are made up of protectionists and free 

 traders, and it is with hesitancy that I even 

 mention the subject of the prevailing lumber 

 tariff, as you may accuse me of trying to drag 

 you into politics. 



At the time of the enactment of the law im- 

 posing a duty of $2 a thousand feet on lumber 

 imported into the United States, there was an 

 excuse for the excitement. It was in a dull pe- 

 riod of commercial history and the majority of 

 manufacturers of lumber were pretty well load- 

 ed up with the coarse end of their product and 

 were having strong competition from the Do- 

 minion of Canada. It was felt that the imposi- 

 tion of this duty would contribute to the better- 

 ing of values for at least the coarse end of the 

 United States wood product. Perhaps to a con- 

 siderable extent it did at that time, but today 

 the country is in very short supply of lumber 

 of all kinds. 



There possibly is some excuse for a manufac- 

 turer of northern wliite pine and hemlock, of 

 southern yellow pine and of Pacific coast fir, 

 cedar, pin'e and redwood being an advocate of 

 the continuance of an import duty of ,$2 a thou- 

 sand feet on lumber, but I can scarcely believe 

 any hardwood producer or dealer, if he has 

 thoroughly analyzed the subject, can be a be- 

 liever in the justice of the law. 



In short, this is the proposition : This protect- 

 ing government of ours presumes to protect the 

 manufacturer of oak, of hickory, of cypress, of 

 poplar and of cottonwood with a duty of $2 a 

 thousand feet against competition in these 

 woods (which grow nowhere, in commercial 

 quantities, on God's green earth, save in the 

 United States) from the possibility of having 

 our market encroached upon by foreigners. 



In exchange for this mimificent alleged pro- 

 tection, we are allowed to participate in a 

 scheme of tariff enactment, whereby we are 

 cheerfully permitted to pay $10 a tou more for 

 the steel rails we use in our railroad operations, 

 and perhaps twenty-five per cent more for the 

 machiuor.v with which we manufacture lumber, 

 and possibly a like sum for many of our food 

 products, ail items increasing the cost of our 

 hardwood lumber product. 



As a matter of fact, I believe that we hard- 

 wood manufacturers and dealers of this country 

 are being used to pull the chestnuts out of the 

 Are, for the benefit of the manufacturers of 

 iron, steel and food products. 



I believe this is an important question and 

 one well worthy the consideration of this asso- 

 ciation. I don't believe %ve want any protection 

 on woods that don't grow anywhere else on the 

 face of the earth. I can't figure out how we are 

 being benefited. I am of the opinion that pos- 

 sibly we will find that the hardwood trade of 

 this country is not remarkably astute, and It 

 would be proper for this association to go on 

 record as being in sympathy with an absolute 

 readjustment of existing tariff laws and to say 

 to our law makers that we don't want protection 

 of lumber, we want lumber. 



I therefore offer the following : 



Resolved : That this association favors the 

 readjustment of our tariff laws in as far as 

 hardwoods at least are concerned, and that we 

 recommend to our law-makers that they enter 

 into negotiations with Canada and other coun- 

 tries interested, with a view to reciprocal rela- 

 tions to the end that hardwood lumber may be 

 admitted free of duty, and for this concession 

 they take off the export duty on logs and make 

 our country such other concessions as may be 

 considered fair and equitable. 



President Palmer : Mr. Wall, do you move 

 the adoption of that resolution? 



Mr. Wall : I move the adoption of the resolu- 

 tion. 



Mr. McMillan : I second the motion. I 

 think Mr. Wall has lost sight of the fact that 

 we are trying to get to the Pacific coast with 

 our hardwood lumber. I think he has lost 

 sight of the fact that we have been unable to 

 do it, for one principal reason, that the Austra- 

 lian cherry is taking the place of our hardwood, 

 coming to the East from the Pacific coast. I 

 do not think it is wise for this association to 

 deviate one Iota from its former position of 

 keeping out of politics. It is enough to have 

 Memphis forever dabbling in politics, and I do 

 not think it is desirable to have this association 

 go on record when there are only about two 

 hundred in the house out of a membership of 

 five hundred. I think we ought to consider 

 those who are away before we go to mixing 

 in politics. I think it is a mistake, and I am 

 opposed to the resolution. 



Mr. Clark : The location where I am, Min- 

 neapolis, is such that I am not familiar with 

 the effect the duty has in the East and West, 

 between Canada and the United States. I 

 would like to ask Mr. Wall the conditions of 

 the birch market, and also any of 'the eastern 

 members whether the birch from Canada and 

 Ontario at this time is shipped into the United 

 States under the two dollar duty he speaks of. 



II. C. Humphrey : There is no duty on hard- 

 wood. It is on sawed wood — $2 on all lumber. 



Mr. Clark : The position that we are in in 

 the Northwest is such that I agree that while 

 it might be far better if the duty was taken 

 off of pine and all other lumber for the states 

 of North and South Dakota, Minnesota and 

 Wisconsin, yet they have a duty of twenty-flve 

 per cent on all maple flooring that goes into 

 the Northwest territory. When Canada made 

 the proposition to take off the tariff the United 

 States did not respond promptly or make any 

 advancement along that line. I was in Canada 

 week before last and had a talk with a great 

 many dealers in that section of the country, 

 and they tell me today that Canada is in better 

 position to take care of its own trade with- 

 out asking odds of the United States than ever 

 before. With the scarcity of all commodities 

 in the shape of lumber and the demand in the 

 Northwest, it seems to me it would be better 

 for the United States to take the duty off of all 

 lumber coming into the United States from 

 Canada, except, possibly, birch. The scarcity 

 of birch is appalling. Thirty years ago, under 

 the same conditions that exist today, and with 

 the increased population of the United States 

 and no increase in the production of timber, 

 it seems to me the increase in the consumption 

 of the wood will decrease the pine materially. 

 Canada has not any lumber to speak of that 

 enters much into competition with the United 

 States. The pine lumbermen have a big trust 

 and they raised the prices, so that they would 

 be better off with competition in Canada. 



Theo. Fathauer : I fully agree with the senti- 

 ments and opinions voiced by Mr. McMillan, that 

 this association should not dabble in politics, 

 and that is what you mean by the resolutions. 

 It is a dangerous one. If we recommend any 

 tariff reduction, or $2 per thousand feet on 

 lumber from Canada to this market, it simply 

 means an increased value on stumpage in this 

 country, and when you touch the pocketbook of 

 the stumpage holders in the states of Wisconsin, 

 Minnesota aud Michigan, especially considering 

 that we are trying to increase the membership 

 of the association, I feel that we are in danger 

 of reducing the membership in the future. 



Mr. Thompson : You can touch a man's fa- 

 vorite black horse or say his automobile is 

 second-hand, but when you touch his pocketbook 

 he begins to squirm. This is a political ques- 

 tion, and it seems to me if there is anything 

 we ought to protect it Is the forests. As Mr. 

 Clark has said, the figures are simply appalling. 

 It is amazing to conceive that within one gen- 

 eration, at the present rate of consumption of 

 our forests, we shall actually be deprived of 

 any great ones in the United States. Canada 



doesn't allow us to get a log. We cannot Im- 

 port any logs. If we knew today the amount 

 of timber, in the way of logs, that we export 

 from the United States, we would be astounded 

 at the figures, and would be surprised at the 

 destruction of our forests. I think this Is one 

 of the most Important questions that has ever 

 come before us. I am a free-trade crank, but I 

 am not talking from that standpoint alone. We 

 are paying $15 a ton on our steel. We stand 

 here and allow a tariff on our own commodity 

 aud we are afraid to stand up and speak our 

 honest sentiments, just because we voted the 

 Republican ticket or some other ticket, and are 

 in favor of a high-protection tariff. It seems 

 to me that we ought to act on this question 

 and that we ought to spread this report of Mr. 

 Wall's on the records of our association. 



Mr. McMillan : Gentlemen, don't bring poli- 

 tics in here. This is a political question, and 

 the freer we keep from this the better off we 

 will be. I was never more in earnest In my 

 life than I am about this question of meddling 

 with politics. I admire this association because 

 it has always kept out of politics. I have 

 worked with it and I am going to continue to 

 work with it just as long as it will keep within 

 Its sphere and do the good work it has under- 

 taken. We all have different ideas about rates 

 and tariffs and duty. This is a commercial or- 

 ganization. I want to say that you are tread- 

 ing on very dangerous ice. I have the greatest 

 admiration for my friend Wall. He is the 

 noblest Koman of them all. I have admired his 

 work, but because he has always been right 

 before is no reason why he cannot be wrong 

 now. 



Mr. Pritchard : 1 move that we lay the re- 

 port on the table. 



The motion was seconded and carried. 



President Palmer: Mr. Humphrey, have you 

 anything to offer on the San Francisco rate 

 question ? 



Mr. Humphrey : At a meeting of the Wiscon- 

 sin Hardwood Lumbermen's Association at 

 Marshfield in March, a committee was appointed 

 to bring up the matter of the rates on lumber 

 from our section to Pacific coast points. As 

 you all know, the present rate is 85 cents, 

 which, in our opinion, is excessive. Prior to the 

 meeting last March we appointed a committee 

 to meet with the Transcontinental Freight Bu- 

 reau. Mr. Agler of Chicago was chairman of 

 that committee. He is here and can speak for 

 himself, but as I understood it the rate com- 

 mittee refused to allow him to appear before 

 them, but they would accept a written petition 

 from him. Our association is weak and we 

 thought the proper thlug to do was to come be- 

 fore the National association to see if we could 

 bring pressure on the Transcontinental Freight 

 Bureau to give the lumbermen of this country 

 some consideration. The rate to the Pacific 

 coast is 85 cents per hundred. The rate on 

 Pacific coast lumber to this section of the 

 country is 50 to 60 cents. There is a vast 

 amount of business waiting for the lumbermen 

 of Wisconsin and Michigan, and I think southern 

 lumbermen also, on the Pacific coast, provided 

 we can get a rate so as to put our products In 

 there in competition with foreign wood. 1«.»b 

 freight bureau meets in Chicago the 21st of 

 this month, and we would like to see this asso- 

 ciation take some action on this matter, either 

 appointing a transportation committee or bring- 

 ing it up in some other way whereby we can 

 go before the trafllc bureau with the National 

 Hardwood Lumber Association back of us, so 

 that we can tell them where we stand, giving 

 them an idea of how much lumber we can put 

 out in that section of the country if they can 

 make a rate. There is more lumber going east 

 than there Is going west, and I do not under- 

 stand why It is that a railroad company should 

 prefer to haul empty cars west in order to 

 haul that produce east on a 50-cent rate. In- 

 stead of hauling loads both ways. I do not 

 see why It should cost more to haul lumber west 



