364 UNITED STATES FOREST POLICY 



benefits of cooperative action, and at the same time would protect the 

 public from monopolistic exaction.'*^ 



The fact that some lumbermen have been willing to have the govern- 

 ment step in and regulate prices, indicates clearly their sincerity in 

 asserting that they have not been making a reasonable profit. Even 

 the attorneys for the National Lumber Manufacturers' Association, 

 in their brief before the Federal Trade Commission in 1916, asserted 

 that the lumber industry would welcome government observation, or 

 even government regulation, if deemed expedient. ^^ 



It is true that government regulation of prices is not the most 

 important item in the proposal of the lumbermen, or of Dr. Van Hise. 

 They are primarily interested in so amending the anti-trust laws as 

 to permit more effective cooperation; but it seems inevitable that if 

 the present competitive system is to be seriously altered, some form 

 of government regulation of prices must be adopted. 



The idea of price regulation, perhaps by means of a commission, 

 seems attractive in many ways. It has a directness, a finality, an 

 apparent simplicity even, which presents a strong appeal to certain 

 minds. It is perfectly conceivable, too, that if the government is to 

 engage in the regulation of prices at all, lumber prices might be as 

 good a point of attack as any. The industry is based on a natural 

 resource, and is fairly well centralized. It is true that considerable 

 difficulty has been encountered in fixing satisfactory standards of 

 some woods, but this difficulty would be met with in any industry. 

 Finally, the cost of production, as far as that might enter into the 



52 Am. Lumberman, Aug. 28, 1915, 32; Sept. 25, 1915, 35; Nov. 6, 1915, 32: 

 Proceedings, National Lumber Manufacturers' Assoc, 1916, 27. In the American 

 Lumberman of December 22, 1917, the lumberman's attitude toward anti-trust 

 activity is well expressed: "Incidentally, it might be well to call the attention of 

 the state authorities to another very suspicious circumstance, in connection with 

 the sale of lumber. One would naturally suppose that under free competitive con- 

 ditions it would be sometimes sold by the thousand feet, sometimes by the cord, 

 sometimes by the pound, sometimes by the bushel, and in occasional cases, by the 

 lineal foot and yard. Instead, it appears to be almost universally sold upon a 

 single standard of measure, per thousand feet board measure, and the buyer who 

 wishes to buy according to any other standard of measure is thereby limited in his 

 ability to purchase. This seems to have been overlooked and should at once be 

 investigated and corrected." 



53 Brief on Behalf of the Lumber Manufacturers' Association, May, 1916, 13. 



