Federal Tra de Commission Enioins 39 \Testern Mills from Calling Ponderosa "\fhtte" Pine

A little over two years ago the Federal Trade Commission at Washington filed a complaint against 50 lumber manufacturers of the west for calling the products of Pinus ponderosa "White" Pine. Later eleven of these cases were dismissed, leaving 39 defendants.

The hearings in the case began July 5th, 1929, and were held successively at various points including San Francisco, Flagstaff, Albuquerque, Portland, Spokane, Madison, Chicago, Indianapolis, Detroit, New York, and Boston.

On June l5th, 1931, the Commission issued a Cease and Desist Order calling on these 39 defendants to cease and desist from selling and advertising Pinus ponderosa products, variously called California White Pine, Western White Pine, etc., by th9 name of "\Mhite".

The following are the defendants in the case against whom this order is issued:

Algoma Lumber Co., Klamath Falls, Ore.; Big Lakes Box Co., Klamath Falls., Ore.; Braymill White Pine Co., Braymill, Ore.; George E. Breece Lumber Co., Albuquerque, N. M.; Cady Lumber Corporatlon, Albuquerque, N. M.; California Door Co., Diamond Spring, Calif.; Califr-rrnia Fruit Exchange, Sacramento, Calif.; California-Oregon Box & Lumber Co., Ashland, Ore.; Castle Crag [.umber Co., Castilla, Calif.; Chiloquin Lumber Co., Chrioquin, Ore. ; Clover Valley Lumber Co., Reno, Nev.; DaviesJohnson Lumber Co., Calpine, Calif .; Diamond Match Co., Chico, Calif.; Ewauna Box Co., Klamath Falls, Oregon; Feather River Lumber Co., Delleker, Calif. ; Forest Lumber Co., Kansas City, Mo.; Fruit Growers Supply Co., Los Angeles; Hobart Estate Co., San Francisco; Kesterson Lumber Co., Dorris. Calif.; Klamath Lumber & Box Co., Klamath Falls, Ore.; Lamm Lumber Co., Modoc Point, Ore.; Lassen Lumber & Box Co., San Francisco; Likely Lumber Co., Likely, Calif.; Long-Bell Lumber Co., Kansas City; McCloud River Lumber Co., Siskiyou County, Calif.; Owen-Oregon Lumber Co., Medford, Ore. ; Paradise Lumber Co., Paradise, Calif.; Pelican Bay Lumber Co., Klamath Falls, Ore.; Penman Peak Lumber Co., Blairsden, Calif. ; Pickering Lumber Co., Kansas City; Quincy Lumber Co., Quincy, Calif.; Red River Lumber Co., San Francisco; Shaw Bertram Lumber Co., Klamath Falls, Ore.; Siskiyou Lumber Co., Mt. Hebron, Calif. ; Spanish Peak Lumber Co., San Francisco; Sugar Pine Lumber Co., Pinedale, Calif. ; Swayne Lumber Co., Oroville, Calif.; Tomlin Box Co., Medford, Ore.; and White Pine Lumber Co., Bernalillo, N. M.

No announcement has yet been made as to what the defendants in the case will do in the matter. They have 60 days in which to file their answer, and have not yet had time to meet and arrive at a decision. The general opinion expressed informally by Pine manufacturers of California is that the case will be carried on and thrown into the courts for adjudication. This matter will be determined in the next few weeks. The knowledge of the very frequent reversals of these Federal Trade Commission decisions would indicate that the lumbermen will not drop the case where it is. As one Pine manufacturer said to The California Lumber Merchant, offering his personal opinion, "'We are manufacturing Pine lumber that is white in color and making it in the State of California and if we can't call it California White Pine, what can we call it?" This same gentleman expressed the opinion that with the precedents of the Linoleum, Singer Sewing Machine, Asperin, Castile Soap, and other cases to cheer them on to defend what they consider their rights and the rights of the buyers and users to a trade name established by long usage and used with no intent to defraud or deceive, the California White Pine people have very firm ground to stand on in appealing their case to the courts. The courts have held in various instances that to deprive the buyer and seller of a name for a product thoroughly established, was an injury greater than the damage to holders of the original name rights.

The decision of the Pine mills in the matter will be awaited with interest.

In releasing its decision to the press, the Federal Trade' Commission said:

In deciding these .cases the commission observed that pine trees have long been divided by wood technologists and the public into two groups, the "white pine" and the "yellow pine," the rvhite pine including such commercial species as northern white pine (Pinus strobus), sugar pine (Pinus lambertiana), and Idaho white pine (Pinus monticola).

W-hite pine has a high degree of uniformity of lumber qualities, averaging high in durability under exposure to weather, lightness of color and weight, softness and evenness of texture, closeness and fineness of grain, freedom from resinous content and from shrinkage "ihecking" (the forming of minute fissures in the grain of the wood), and warping. The white pines have great ability to stay in place and exceptional ease of working.

The yellow pine products generally are harder, heavier, stronger, rnore subject to shrinkage and warping, darker in color, more resinous, denser in fibre, coarser and more difficult to work than members of the white pine group. Typi- cal species of the yellow pine group are valuable where structural strength of timber is required. The white pines are not adapted to heavy construction.

In contrast with white pines the yellow pines vary widely. Longleaf yellow pine (Pinus pal,ustris) is the most typicil and commercially important. It grows in the southern States. It is the hardest of the group. These yellow pines vary from the longleaf yellow to Pinus ponderosa wtrictr produces the softest lumber of any of the group.

Annual production of Pinus ponderosa is 2,800,000,000 feet, B. M., while that of true white pine is 1,600,000,000 feet.

Lumber from the ponderosa species was given by ,.i spondents and other producers, riames such as California rvhite pine, New Mexico white pine and Arizona white plne.

Ponderosa lumber came to be given terms which include the phrase "white pine" for local markets in California, New Mexico and Arizona about 1880. By 1885 it was being generally marketed under terms including "white oine" in California, Nevada and Utah points with oicasional ihip(Continued on Page 221

A. W. Bernhauer