"'White" Pine Controversy Goes to F. T. C. and Courts for Settlement

After long controversy and bickering among lumber manufacturers, the now famous question of what is and what is NOT white pine, will presently be decided in the courts.

The Federal Trade Commission, r'vhich recently filed a complaint against more than fifty lumber manufacturers in southwestern territory for calling Pinus ponderosa "'White" Pine, announced July 5th, as the date for a preliminary hearing of the case. It has already been announced and the mills have been advised that the hearing rvill be postponed, but the new date has not yet been set.

A meeting was held in San Francisco on June 20th, of defendants in the case. Twenty-fir'e of the big mill men of the west were in attendance. and about 9O per cent of the Pine production of this territ'ory was represented at the meeting. Plans were made at this meeting for fighting the case to the finish, the courts of final adjustment to be called upon for a decision in case the Federal Tracle Commission decide against the defendant.

A committee headed by Willis J. Walker, Red River Lumber Company, San Francisco, was selected and advised to obtain counsel for general defense of the case. This committee met June 21st and appointed Allan Mathew, of the firm of McCutcheon, Olmey, lVlannon & Greene, of San Francisco, to represent them at the hearing. Mr. Mathew is an attorney ol-outstanding prominence among the legal profession of California.

He will represent the defendants in general at the hearings. It is understood that he rvill be supported by counsel representing' some of the individuals, also.

The defense, so says Willis J. Walker, rvill simply be that this wood is light and rvhite and has all the characteristics of white pine, and has been called rvhite pine for fifty years; that there is no intent ancl purpose to deceive; that the three needles instead of five is the chief difference between it and the so-called "true" rvhite pines.

Several of those present at the San Francisco meeting expressed the opinion that they u'ould r,vin the case on its merits.

Shortly after the news of the Fecleral Tracle Comrnission complaint was received, three rvell knorvn clefendants, Willis J. Walker, H. R. Herves, and D. H. Steinmetz, of San Francisco, g'ave out the follor,r'ing statement for publication:

We think a decidedly wrong impression will be receivecl by the public from the notices just published regarding the hearing that will be held before the Federal Trade Commissi'on as to the use of the name "California White Pine" for the product of the California, Oregon and Arizona mills cutting the tree Pinus ponderosa.

White pine and yellow pine are two general family names used by the trade and by botanists to designate a large number of species of the pine family; and in general the yellow pines are hard and heavy and the white pines are soft and light; and botanically the lvhite pines tend to fiveneedle leaves and the yellow pines to three-needle leaves.

The wood of the California trees of the "California rvhite pine" has been solcl under that name for a periocl of fifty years or longer and is well known to the trade under that designation; and the western mills feel that there is no danger of the public being deceived under these conditions into believing that "California white pine is botanically the tree Pinus strobus, which was the principal white pine sold throughout the eastern States in the past."

S'ome of the mills handling the eastern white pine have registered a complaint before the commission that by reason of the three needles on the Pinus ponderosa, it is technically not a r,vhite pine, even though all of the characteristics of the woocl are lvhite pine. and in no way resemble the hard. heavy yellow pines; and the u'estern mills, therefore, believe the designation "California White Pine" is the nearest description that can be given to this wood; and l>elieve, as stated by one of the trade commissi'on investiga- tors recently, "No question but what your wood is pine, and it is white." This is rvhat the western lumbermen claim.

The argument is really one betrveen the lumbermen themselves. as to 'ivhether a technicality based on the threeancl five-neeclle item allorvs the competing lumbermen to rnonopolize the name "White Pine" as a description of their product.

Here is the gist of the Complaint of The Federal Trade Commission. rvhich is entitled "llnited States of America Before Federal Tracle Commission in the matter ofCompany, its officers and agents, docket No. 1621."

PARAGRAPH THREE: Respondents in the conrse ancl conduct of their ltusiness as described in Paragraph Two hereof, for more than five years last past, have manufactured and sold. ancl now manufacture and sell, among other products, forest products produced from that certain species of tree native to the mountainous regions of Pacific slope, botanically clesignated "pinus ponderosa" under the name and designation "rvhite pine", with or without-the addition before said name and designation of one or another of the words, "California," "Arizona," and/or "\Alestern" and/or of the rvords "New Mexico," and during said period of time respondents, in advertisements insertecl in trade journals and other media of national circulation, together with other forms of advertising, and,/or circular letters. and/or correspondence u'ith purchasers and prospective purchasers thereof, and/or on their respective letterheads, billheads and invoices and orally through their respective sales forces, have designated and described such forest products as "White pine," rvhereas in truth and in fact, said Pinus ponderosa does not. either botanically or by common name or in the character of lumber made therefrom, belong to that group of pine species known as rvhite pines, as set forth in Paragraph Four hereof.

PARAGRAPH FOLfR: There is a certain group of pine species knorvn both popuiarly and botanically as "white" pines. There are species of the genus Pinus, having certain botanical marks of clistinction from other pines; and are further characterizecl by light, close-grained, soft wood in

(Continued on Page 32)