Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1894-02-10

entirely different. Our laws do not ALLOW
any TIMBER to be cut from public lands, an.
wherever logging operations are conductet
il 10 on land owned by individuals. Well
our Canadian neighbofs know . thing o
two; did they put an export duty on logs
Certainly net, but they increased the psic'
of the stumpage sold to the log operator
and in this manner got three dollars pc
thousand into their treasury lin othe
words the United States was loser to thu
extent of $s4l 900 in the year 1891 ant
the Canadian treasury was enriched
to that amount. Now, in face AMI
eyes Of this experience with the Mckinley
bill, it 10 proposed by the present COMMITTEES
on ways and means to abolish the entire
duty. An attorney for the Canadian gov
eminent told gentleman in this city re
Gently that the crown would in this manner
derive the full benefi. of the free lumber
clause so far as it applies to pine.
In New Brunswick aud Nova Scots
there is more land owned by railroads and
individuals and in these provinces there il
not much pine, mostly spruce, so the re.
moval of the duty will probably reduce the
price to that extent. Still even that is un.
certain, the natural law of supply and de-
mand is a potent factor in regulating the
price of all articles of commerce and spruce
lumber is not exempt from the law.
There are no statistics in relation to the
quantity of lumber that 10 or can be exported
from Canada. If the demand is good in this
country the quantity they would put in this
year would not perhaps materially affect
the price, but we give them our markets
without receiving anything in return. What
ever amount is sent here displaces just 50
much native lumber, virtually adding the
province mills to our own capacity, with
our mills handicapped by much higher
wages than paid over there.
A thousand feet of spruce lumber will
average to, cost sawed and piled ready for
shipment say Sll 80, the value of this thou
sand feet of standing timber is 50 so the
other 80 so is all labor, if mill men and
log operators beginning at the stump can
reduce wages 20 per cent. which would
amount to about the 50 they are down to
amount of present duty, but that is not all
there is to it, reduction of 80 in the cost
of getting that lumber into our markets
enables the Canadian to get in here, and
take all of our business he wants.
1 have here an extract from an editorial
in the Boston Herald of Jan. 81, as fol
lows:
sour correspondent inquiries further
what is to be the effect of free lumber upon
the benefit of the laboring classes. He
asks if it will not affect the wages of Amer
lean lumber cutters. American lumber cut
t,rs is pretty wide term. New England is
full of lumber cutters from Canada today
They are in Massachusetts, even as low
down as the vicinity of Boston. Nobody
among our high tariff friends proposes to
protect the American laborer against them.
We hold that it is better for us that they cut
the lumber at home and send it here
rather than come here to compete with our
native workmen. There, are a few rich
lumber dealers who are interested in cut
ting off the woods of New Hampshire and
of Maine, but their interest, as we have
said, is altogether against the general in
terest of millions Of people. Perhaps there
are more to be affected among their native
employees. These latter are still an insight
ficant fraction as compared to the rest. We
want to save our farms and our land
scapes, and preserve the safety of our eli
mate, and the universal testimony of those
who have studied the subject is that the
preservation of our forests is essential ia
this end. @-",'
"Let us look further into the subject in
the point of utility. We need cheaper
lumber. There is no more crying want in
the general interest than this. Free lum-
Der will give it to us. We hear much Of
the general reduction of prices that has
been going on for the last fifty years.
There has been a saving of so per cent
orf orfsn1oa Of mi
versal use. But there is one expenditure
in which there has been no reduction there
has been rather an increase of well-nigh q
hundred per cent. That expenditure
i, the expenditure for house rent
What makes house rent so much
higher in comparison with some
other things in our country today :?
The expense of building houses
What is the chief component
of house building? The lumber and
the other wooden material of which the
house is constructed. Are the interests Of
comparatively small number Of wood
cutters themselves largely Canadians-tc
be reckoned in the scale against this uni
versal need? The question only requires
stating to find its own answer.
at is the interest of the overwhelming
ma iorty of New England in every point OF
view that less of our lumber should Re pro
duced at home and more of it should be
imported from abroad There is really nc
room for any possible misconception on
this point"
The writer says he wants cheaper lumber
and that free lumber will give it to them
He wants cheaper rents. He says the ex-
pense of building houses causes the rent to
be high and that the chief article is lumber
and the high price of lumber has added l0C
per cent to the price of house rent.
Now let us investigate this free traders
statement.
A house that will cost with the lot in this
city $1,000 is good average house for peo-
pie of limited means to hire. Such house
would probably rent for 500 per year; II
would take about 20 900 feet of logs sawed
into the various kinds of lumber needed +"
construct such a house, frame. covering
boards, fioorboards, clapboards, shingles,
latbs and finish. Now suppose the capita :
ist that builds this house does receive the
full benefit Of free lumber, he saves 81 per
thousand on &c, 900 feet or S40,s in other
words the house costs him $500. Now he
has $40 less invested which at per cent
is 50, which amount he could deduct from
his rental of Sl00-but do you suppose he
will discount this l6 cents per month on the