Document 23: Lumberman Paul Page Testifies about the Timber Industry, 1914

U.S. Senate, Commission on Industrial Relations, Industrial Relations: Final Report and Testimony, 64th cong., 1st sess. (1916),
senate document 415, vol. 5, p. 4249-4260.

Return to Document Concordance

Seattle, Wash., Thursday, August 13, 1914—9:30 a.m.
Present: Commisioners Commons (acting chairman), Garretson, O'Connell, and Lennon; also W. O. Thomspon, Esq., counsel. [Mr. Thomspon was a lawyer hired by the U.S. Senate to work as an investigator for the Commission on Industrial Relations.]


Mr. Thompson. Will you give us your name?

Mr. Page. Paul E. Page.

Mr. Thompson. Your business address?

Mr. Page. Buckley, Wash.

Mr. Thompson. And your business?

Mr. Page. I am president of the Page Lumber Co.; in the lumber business.

Mr. Thompson. What branch of the lumber business are you in?

Mr. Page. In the manufacture of lumber and logging.

Mr. Thompson. That is the manufacture of the raw material; are you making shingles?

Mr. Page. We don't make shingles, and we are not what is called a finishing mill. We try to get our lumber on the cars as near the log as possible—do as little finishing as possible.

Mr. Thompson. How long have you been engaged in the lumber business?

Mr. Page. Nineteen years.

Mr. Thompson. In this country?

Mr. Page. In this State.

Mr. Thompson. About how many men during the height of the season would you employ?

Mr. Page. Our force [workforce] to-day is 138 men.

Mr. Thompson. Is this the season now for the work?

Mr. Page. That is our regular working force. We keep that force the year around.

Mr. Thompson. What wages, as far as you know, are generally paid for the different classes of work in this State in the lumber industry?

Mr. Page. In our sawmill—this is sawmill work, and does not include the yard—the minimum wage is $2.50, and the maximum is $6, and the average wage is $3.62 [per day].

Mr. Thompson. What would be the wage in the yard, as you have it?

Mr. Page. The wage in the yard has a minimum of $2.25, and a maximum of $2.25, and the average is $2.25 [per day].

Mr. Thompson. What would we understand by the yards; do you do any logging?

Mr. Page. The yard is where the lumber is handled after it is manufactured. In the logging camp the minimum is $2.50, and the maximum is $5.75, and the average is $3.48; that is, for the loggers. The railroad has a minimum of $2.25, and a maximum of $2.25, and an average of $2.25 a day.

Mr. Thompson. Then, according to that statement, Mr. Page, the lowest wage you pay to any of the labor is $2.25 a day?

Mr. Page. This statement is made up on the last six months' operations. At that time the lowest wage we paid was $2.25. That was on the logging, and on the railroad, and in the mill yard. We are now paying $2 on the logging railroad; that is, railroad work—the laying of the ties and work of that kind, $2 now.

Mr. Thompson. What, so far as your observation has gone, Mr. Page, is the condition of labor in the lumbering industry in this State?

Mr. Page. Well, I have not noticed any more uneasiness in the labor in the woods and in the mills of late than there has been at all times since I have been in the business for 19 years, with the exception of the hard times in 1895, 1896, and 1897. At that time there was not so much unrest. And at that time we paid in the yard 90 cents a day, and we did not pay it in money.

Mr. Thompson. Have you had any conflicts with labor, what is ordinarily called strikes?

Mr. Page. None whatever.

Mr. Thompson. Has the Page Lumber Co. had any?

Mr. Page. Never.

Mr. Thompson. Do you know whether the men working for you are organized at all?

Mr. Page. I have never seen any organization. It has never come to me. I do not believe they are.

Mr. Thompson. With reference to the wages you pay, you mean to say that is the ordinary wage that the workers get in the industry in this State?

Mr. Page. Yes, sir.

Mr. Thompson. What would you say—were you here yesterday?

Mr. Page. Yes.

Mr. Thompson. Did you hear the testimony regarding the mill down in Centralia . . . [that paid $1.35 per day]?

Mr. Page. Yes, sir.

Mr. Thompson. If those facts were true they would be exceptional, would they not?

Mr. Page. Yes. But I do not think they are true. I have not seen that time statement, but I think the face of that time statement will show the wage [of $1.35 per day] was paid to a boy, not to a man. You can not hire men in the State of Washington to work anywhere for $1.35 a day. The employment offices here are posted. Anybody can read on the outside, on the bulletin boards, $2.25, $2 a day. I do not know why a man would work for $1.35 when he can step into the employment office and get a job for $2.25 a day, and hire [higher] if he is a skilled lumberman.

Mr. Thompson. Have the lumbermen got an association?

Mr. Page. Yes, sir.

Mr. Thompson. Are you an officer of that association?

Mr. Page. Yes, sir.

Mr. Thompson. Do they keep pretty well in touch with the general conditions of the trade throughout the State through their association?

Mr. Page. Yes; that is the object of the association.

Mr. Thompson. Do they through this association know in a general way of the wages paid all over the State for the labor?

Mr. Page. No, sir; the association as an association has nothing to do with that.

Mr. Thompson. I mean through that would the men keep pretty well informed with the labor market?

Mr. Page. Yes; you would in talking with members of the association as you meet them at the association meetings.

Mr. Thompson. What kind of men usually work in the logging camps and in and around the mills?

Mr. Page. In the logging camps—that is, in the logging camps proper that get out the logs—that is skilled labor, and it is composed of largely of young men and mostly of unmarried men. They are a high-strung class of fellows and reckless; they are in a reckless business, a risky business, and they throw their money away; they are men of that kind.

Mr. Thompson. Well, take the men that work in these lumber camps generally, how long a year do they have—how much work do they have in the camp?

Mr. Page. Why, most of the logging camps run the season through. Here in the [Puget] Sound country as the winter approaches and as the timber is cut off on the lower levels, we are going back into the mountains, and conditions are changing here somewhat now. A good many of the camps are up in the mountains where the snow compels them to stop logging in the wintertime, but as a general thing the camps run the year around.

Mr. Thompson. Could you make an estimate as to about how much work—take the lumber camps as a whole—the men would have during the year? It has been stated here it is seasonal work.

Mr. Page. No, sir; it is not seasonal work in this State. Last year we did not lose a day; we worked during the whole winter.

Mr. Thompson. There seems to be a pretty fair consensus of opinion of all the witnesses so far who have come on, that the men come down to Seattle during the off months in the lumber season. Where would these men come from?

Mr. Page. No, sir; that is not true. The men come to Seattle in this way: Take our best men in the logging business, take the best men in the logging camps of all the lumber industry and they work, say, 30 to 60 days, and then they stop work and draw their pay and come to Seattle, and a good deal of that money—a great deal of that money—is simply thrown away, and then that man gets work in another camp and works there 30 to 60 days and repeats the operation and comes back to us. They are rovers, they are restless; they want to travel from camp to camp; those are the best men; those are the skilled men. We have them and they keep coming back to us. Men that have worked for us for 17 or 18 years, they keep repeating that—going from one camp to another, and coming back to us.

Mr. Thompson. Well, would that be true of the average man?

Mr. Page. That is true of practically all of them; 90 per cent of them.

Mr. Thompson. Ninety per cent. What are the conditions surrounding the lumber camps? Are they such that a man could establish himself and have a family, or is it necessarily the work of single men?

Mr. Page. Well, some of the lumber camps are so situated that family men could work in them, but most of them are off at a distance [away from cities and towns]. While they all have families, I don't suppose there is a camp in the State that has not more or less families in the camp, but as a general thing the loggers are single men.

Mr. Thompson. Well, in your opinion, looking at family life as you live it probably, and as you know it, and as you believe it ought to be, do you think the men in the lumbering industry in this State could carry on that kind of life and be engaged in that work under the present conditions?

Mr. Page. Why, it would be pretty hard for the logger to do that. I don't think he has any inclination of that kind. It is the high-strung, reckless man that gets into the logging business. They are all the same.

Mr. Thompson. You mean that includes the common laborer, as you call them.

Mr. Page. Well, you must segregate the logging end of the business from the mill end. It is entirely different; the mill end is entirely different from the logging. Different class of men entirely.

Mr. Thompson. Well, take the mill end, are the conditions around mills and mill towns such that married men could work in the mills?

Mr. Page. Oh, yes; married men could work in the mills.

Mr. Thompson. And in the yards?

Mr. Page. Not so much the yards, though? The yardman is a rover—the is worse than the logger.

Mr. Thompson. Is there anything in the conditions around the yard or in the work there that would prevent a man from carrying on family life?

Mr. Page. Yes. Well, now, let me explain this rover. We have a vast number of men in this State, swarms of them, as I suppose there is in other States, who work at a low wage. They are men who work at the construction of logging railroads, and they are the men who do the work in the yards of the lumber mills. Now, these men as a class won't work more than three or four days a week. That is all they want to work; and they are the rovers. They keep coming and going all the time. Now, let me illustrate that to you just a minute while we are on that.

Mr. Thompson. Yes.

Mr. Page. To show you how that, what that roving propensity is. Now, in working a crew of 138 men in January we worked 186 men, in February 222, in March 224, in April 229, May 234, and June 170. Now, those figures mean a little bit more than that. Now, the month of January 186 men were on the payroll to work 138 [jobs]. That means that their means [money] had been exhausted for the Christmas holidays, and they went to work for a stake. In February they commenced to rove; March, April, and May, and June, before the 4th of July, in order to accumulate a stake for the 4th of July, we worked 170 as against 234 in May. That is the—

Acting Chairman Commons. [John Commons was a professor at the University of Wisconsin who went on to become an influential advocate of worker' compensation, unemployment compensation, and other labor reforms.] Mr. Page, does that mean so many men hired, new men hired?

Mr. Page. Yes; our crew is 138 men. Now, in order to work that 138 men, constantly we have on the payroll 234 men; you understand?

Acting Chairman Commons. Constituting how many men that you have to hire during the year to keep up the force [workforce]?

Mr. Page. That is what I am telling you. We use 138 men. But in order to work 138 men every day there are 234 men coming and going to take these places. One man works to-day and he drops out; another man takes his place to-morrow.

Mr. Thompson. Let me illustrate. If you have 138 men working steadily you hire 238 men during the month or have 238 on the payroll , which means you hire 100 extra men during that month to keep up your regular force.

Mr. Page. That is it exactly.

Mr. Thompson. Now, referring to the matter which has been stated here, Mr. Page, that most of the work on the Pacific coast in this neighborhood is seasonal work—fruit picking is seasonal work. It has been stated also that the lumber business is more or less seasonal; that the railroad work is seasonal. What do you know about that? What would you say; would you say that is true?

Mr. Page. There is a good deal of seasonal work in these industries; a good deal of it.

Mr. Thompson. Well, have you ever studied the effect on man's economic nature where he engages in seasonal work, as to whether it breaks down that steadiness, that continuous working habit that we see formed among other workers?

Mr. Page. Why, to my mind, seasonal work don't enter into the proposition of the idle man at all.

Mr. Thompson. No; but would it enter into the proposition of the habits of the man—of some men who work steadily in factories down east, and work there year in and year out, they have the habit of going to work every day—of staying at work. Now, men who necessarily go into the fruit industry, they work for three or four weeks, and their work is done, and they have a business that calls them to search elsewhere for work. Now, what would that have in the way of an effect of giving a man the roving habit? Do you think it would?

Mr. Page. Yes.

Mr. Thompson. Whether they wanted it or not?

Mr. Page. Yes. I think the more a man roves the more he wants to rove. And I do not think it is the seasonal work that causes the roving.

Mr. Thompson. You do not think that is the cause.

Mr. Page. I do not.

Mr. Thompson. Have you given any study, Mr. Page, to that matter?

Mr. Page. I am not a theorist, I don't believe. But I don't believe that is the cause.

Acting Chairman Commons. What would be the cause?

Mr. Page. I think the cause is that you have got 15 jobs and 16 men. That is the only way I can look at it at all times.

Commissioner Lennon. [John B. Lennon was treasurer of the American Federation of Labor.] What has the liquor habit to do with this condition of roving?

Mr. Page. I do not think the liquor habit is the cause of it. I think it is the result. I think men get to roving and then get into these liquor habits. That is my idea of it.

Mr. Thompson. Mr. Page, we have had some evidence here about a [workers'] compensation act in this State.

Mr. Page. Yes, sir.

Mr. Thompson. As a lumberman here, have you had anything to do with that?

Mr. Page. Yes, sir. The lumbermen were the people who started the first move toward passing a compensation act in this State.

Mr. Thompson. Now, tell us what you did when it was started, and in your own way tell us the story of the compensation act as you see it.

Mr. Page. In 1910 at the annual meeting of the West Coast Lumber Manufacturers' Association, the association adopted the legislative committee's report, and that report condemned the conditions that were at that time existing. There was a great deal of money paid by the employers to the liability insurance people. The man that got hurt got nothing, or got a small amount, and there were—there was a feeling in regard to the courts [that] they were unsatisfactory, and they [the association] asked for a mass meeting to see if we could not get the employers of labor and the laborers together and devise some means of remedying that evil. And that was followed by a mass meeting in Tacoma. And at that meeting there were representatives of labor, representatives of the employers. The governor of the State presided, and after a two days' session he appointed a commission to see what could be done to draft a compensation act. And in that connection I would like to say right here, contradicting some of the testimony that appeared here—and I am not saying this with any malice at all—but the Federation of Labor of this State refused at that time to meet with the employers, on the ground that it was impossible for the employer and the employee to get together on that proposition, and the employer was not acting in good faith, but was trying to put one over on the lumberman. That commission was appointed and the bill was drafted and presented to the governor, and in turn presented to the legislature and passed with practically no amendments except the elimination of the first aid. That is the history of the compensation act of this State. [Washington's law was the first workers' compensation act in the United States. The act affected only certain industries with high accident rates, such as logging and manufacturing. The law allowed injured workers to be reimbursed for most of their medical costs and lost wages. Employers paid half of the costs of the act, and employees paid a small payroll tax to cover the other half of the costs.]

Mr. Thompson. Well, were there any objections by labor raised to the provisions of the bill that you wanted passed?

Mr. Page. The lumbermen indorsed the bill, and the State Federation of Labor indorsed the bill without dissent [opposition], I think.

Mr. Thompson. The same bill?

Mr. Page. The same bill. There was a controversy in the house [the state house of representatives] when it came up before the house in regard to the first aid, and everything that was in the original draft of the bill that referred to first aid was taken out of the bill.

Mr. Thompson. Is there a bill pending relating to the first-aid proposition now?

Mr. Page. Yes; there is an initiative bill [Washington State's initiative process allowed voters to bypass the state legislature and enact laws directly. If an initiative bill received enough signatures from registered voters, it appeared on the ballot of the next statewide election, allowing voters to determine whether the bill should become a law.]

Mr. Thompson. What is the attitude of the lumbering interests toward that bill?

Mr. Page. We are opposed to the bill.

Mr. Thompson. What are the grounds?

Mr. Page. Personally, I am opposed myself to the bill on the principle of an initiative bill; I don't believe in it at all. Again, it is a loosely drawn bill. One of the provisions of the bill—the main provision of the bill—is that in case of an accident an employer is to pay $100, or whatever part of $100 is required, to give the injured employee service in the hospital. If it takes more than $100, the balance of that is to be paid from the accident fund, and the accident fund is secured by contributions from the employees [in the form of a small payroll tax]. It seems to me that it leaves an opening for a great deal of collusion between an unprincipled physician and the injured person, and there would be no end to the expense. It would be a great tax on the industry, and employees really get nothing out of it, any more than they get now.

Commissioner Garretson. [Austin Garretson was president of the Order of Railway Conductors of America.] Mr. Page, you state that you are opposed to that because it is an initiative bill and you oppose the initiative.

Mr. Page. Yes, sir; I do.

Commissioner Garretson. Is it the law in this State that the initiative is permissible?

Mr. Page. Yes, sir.

Commissioner Garretson. Do you take the position that even though a law is in effect, if it don't suit you, you refuse to be bound by it.
Mr. Page. Oh, no; oh, no. I am not a lawbreaker; but there are a great many laws that I don't agree with. . . .

Mr. Thompson. Now, Mr. Page, referring to some testimony that has been given with reference to the influence on legislation which both sides bring to bear in this State, what have you to say about that, if anything.

Mr. Page. Well, there has been a great deal said here of how the employer in this State rules the legislation of the State. I can give you one example of what the employers of this State went after in the last legislature and what they got, and that is in relation to the compensation act.
We have got a lot of theorists in this State—a swarm of them—and we are raising them every day in our educational institutions. They never hired a man in their lives, and they never worked as laborers. But they have a got a solution for all of these difficulties that come up between capital—or the employer and the employee. They know all about the compensation question. . . . Each and every one of them has a pet amendment that he thinks, or she thinks, should be tacked onto our compensation act and if that amendment was put on the compensation act it would be a perfect act. Well, if we would turn that bunch loose at our compensation act, before they got through with it, it would look like a crazy quilt. We would have no act. The lumbermen as an association decided that the only way to find out whether we did have a [good] compensation act or whether we did not was to let the compensation act work out its own salvation, and the only way to do that was to leave it alone; and we tried to devise some means of doing that.

I was instrumental in organizing what was called the general legislative committee. I was made chairman of it, and I have been chairman of the legislative committee for the lumbermen's manufacturers' association of this State for the last eight years, and nothing that the lumbermen have done as an association in politics in this State—every particle of it has gone through my hands. I know all about it. This is not hearsay I am giving you; I know what I am talking about. This general legislative committee . . . agreed upon what we wanted to have done with our compensation act, and that was to have it left alone—nobody to bother with it at all; make no amendments; let it work out its own salvation. As chairman of that committee I went to the governor and I presented the proposition to him and asked him to appoint a commission to investigate the compensation act, and if that commission decided that there were any amendments [needed], to draw up the amendments and present them to the legislature—that is, this coming legislature—for passage.

The governor didn't seem to warm up to that proposition; sort of noncommittal. And I went to the industrial insurance committee. That was a committee appointed by the house to handle all bills that were introduced that had to do with the compensation act. I talked to the members of that committee as members, as individuals, and I talked before the committee as a committee, and stated what I wanted. . . . All we wanted was that the compensation act be left alone until it could work out its own salvation. The industrial insurance committee turned in their report, and the minute it was turned in there were 20 men on the floor [of the state house of representatives] each with his own amendment to the other fellow's amendment, and the friends of the bill got it off from the from the floor, and it was sidetracked.

Now, there was the employers of this State. This iniquitous sawdust ring that controls the policies of the State of Washington in politics—we were down there asking for as simple a thing as that, and we could not get it. I don't think we control the politics of the State of Washington.

Mr. Thompson. How do you view the industrial conditions? I mean by that the relations in employment between the employer and the employee in this State?

Mr. Page. In what way?

Mr. Thompson. I mean as far as things go in this world. Is it satisfactory to you?

Mr. Page. Why, we have had no trouble with our men whatever.

Mr. Thompson. Do you think that the workers in this locality have any reasonable cause for complaint?

Mr. Page. I will tell you what I think. I think the earnest working man who wants to get ahead and wants to be somebody and is looking for work and when he finds it works with the employer instead of working against him, I think that man is contended—reasonably contended and reasonably prosperous. While he don't have all the good things that there are in the world, there a whole lot of the employers that don't have all the good things. On the other hand, I think the fellow that is a rover and going from place to place and looking for a job and who is a grouch and who is listening to these agitators and reading all this stuff about the downtrodden laboring man and thinks that because there are idle rich in the world that never work, that society is all wrong, and he is abused because he has to work, I think that man is discontented and down and out most of the time, and my private opinion is that he gets just what is coming to him. The man that can't take pleasure out of an honest day's work, I don't think he fits in anywhere, and I think the man that wants to do that kind of work, while there are cases where he can't get it, I think in the majority of cases he can get it if he is looking for it.

Mr. Thompson. Then in your opinion, Mr. Page, the discontent which exists is mostly caused by agitators and by the rover, who really does not wish to be satisfied; is that it?

Mr. Page. I think that there is a great deal of it. As I said before, I think the main cause is that there are not enough jobs to go around. I think that is making some of the discontent.

Mr. Thompson. That cause would be a really serious cause of discontent?

Mr. Page. Yes; I think so.

Mr. Thompson. Take the country as a whole, take the industrial situation as you read about it in the papers and as you hear generally discussed, is there a really legitimate cause for discontent on the part of the workers?

Mr. Page. No, sir; I don't think so. . . .

Mr. Thompson. Did you hear the testimony of Mr. Brown yesterday in regard to the conditions in the lumber camps?

Mr. Page. Yes, sir.

Mr. Thompson. Have you anything you would like to add to what he said?

Mr. Page. Oh, nothing more than that he naturally would pick out the poorest conditions possible he could find and the poorest illustrations and the most illy [poorly] conducted camp.

Mr. Thompson. How are the housing conditions in the best camp? What is the arrangement in your camp, for instance? What kind of bunk houses have you? How are their beds arranged? What is the bedding that they have? How often is it changed? Who takes care of it? What are the toilet arrangements? What kind of food do they get?

Mr. Page. We have bunk houses. We have what we call bunk houses. They are large houses with a hall through the center and a room at each end, and on both sides of this hall are rooms with doors and windows, locks and keys on the doors so that a man can have privacy in those rooms. The bunks are supplied with a mattress and springs, but the employees furnish their own bedding. We have a man that is called the bull cook. Every camp has a bull cook.

Mr. Thompson. You will have to repeat that name. I didn't get that name.

Mr. Page. That is a good name, bull cook.

Mr. Thompson. Bull cook?

Mr. Page. That is one of the names. He is the flunkey that takes care of the bunk house. He goes in there and fills the lamps and sweeps the building and keeps it clean, and in cold weather he has the fires started and the house warmed for the men when they come in from work.

Mr. Thompson. Is there any special place provided for the drying of clothing?

Mr. Page. These two rooms at the end of the building, they use those for drying.

Commissioner Garretson. The same room they sleep in?

Mr. Thompson. No, sir; it is in the same building; there is a hall running down through the building the same as if you would run a hall down through here, and there is a room on each side.

Commissioner Garretson. Do they have any bunks in there?

Mr. Page. No; no bunks.

Mr. Thompson. What is the condition of the lumber industry in this State with regard to the business situation?

Mr. Page. Very bad.

Mr. Thompson. Well, is it temporary or has it been coming on for some time, or what?

Mr. Page. It is chronic.

Mr. Thompson. Chronic?

Mr. Page. Yes, sir; all the time. We have had some good spots, but most of the time it is a depressed business.

Mr. Thompson. What are the causes for that, if you know?

Mr. Page. Overproduction is one cause; keen competition, high freight rates to meet that competition, substitutes, lack of organization, high taxes.

Mr. Thompson. What influence does that condition have on the wages that are paid in the industry?

Mr. Page. They fluctuate. The wages fluctuate up and down.

Mr. Thompson. With this condition?

Mr. Page. Yes, sir. Now, to illustrate: In 1906 and 1907, while San Francisco was recovering, rebuilding from the fire and earthquake, previous to that time we were paying $1.75 [per day] for our cheap labor; that is the labor we are paying $2 for to-day, the man who works on the logging railroad and the man who works in the yard. During those years [1906 and 1907] we paid $2.75 for the same work. The price of labor goes up with the price of lumber, and it goes down with the price of lumber. I think that it goes up faster than it goes down.

Mr. Thompson. That is all, Mr. Chairman.

Acting Chairman Commons. Any questions?

Commissioner O'Connell. [James O'Connell was president of the metal trades council of the American Federation of Labor.] Yes.

Acting Chairman Commons. Mr. Page, Mr. O'Connell would like to ask you some questions. . . .

Commissioner O'Connell. Do the camps work Sundays?

Mr. Page. No; not as a rule.

Commissioner O'Connell. Not as a rule; but they do at times, do they?

Mr. Page. No; I don't know of any logging camp that works on Sundays. I don't know of any mill that runs on Sundays at all unless if it is some special—for some special occasion, some special thing.

Commissioner O'Connell. Then there is a recognition of one day in seven for rest?

Mr. Page. Oh, yes; yes.

Commissioner O'Connell. Does your company run a company store in connection with its business?

Mr. Page. Yes, sir.

Commissioner O'Connell. Are the men supposed to buy all of their supplies in this store?

Mr. Page. No; we don't care where they buy their supplies. We would rather not run the store. It is an expense to us.

Commissioner O'Connell. All the commissaries [dining rooms] are kept in that store for the feeding, and your cooking establishments are kept there?

Mr. Page. No, no; we have that somewhat divided. We keep the commissary for the benefit of the men and for the benefit of the families that we have there. We have quite a number of families at our place, although we are what you might call an outpost away up in the mountains, away from civilization—there is not a town within 20 miles of us.

Commissioner O'Connell. How do your prices compare where you are located with the prices in Seattle?

Mr. Page. They are the same. We can't ask any higher prices.

Commissioner O'Connell. You board [feed] all of your people?

Mr. Page. All but the married people; yes?

Commissioner O'Connell. What do they pay for board a month?

Mr. Page. Five dollars and a half a week.

Commissioner O'Connell. What are they fed generally?

Mr. Page. They are fed the best money can buy. We don't believe that a logger can do the work that he has to do unless he has the very best of food; that is all there is to it.

Commissioner O'Connell. Given meat three times a day?

Mr. Page. Do they eat three times?

Commissioner O'Connell. Meat?

Mr. Page. Yes; always—three times a day—and it isn't cow beef, it is beef—steer beef—the best we can buy.

Commissioner O'Connell. I suppose the proverbial bean is there on occassion? [Do you also serve beans?]

Mr. Page. Bushels of them. That is a business proposition, to feed your men well, even if we didn't want to.

Commissioner O'Connell. Well, is that same care taken in connection with their housing, their sleeping and resting opportunities?

Mr. Page. Why, I think so. You have got a funny class of men to deal with in these loggers. Now, lots of times we will get loggers that will go in and throw the mattress out the window and go up to the barn and get hay and straw and put it in that bunk. That is what he wants.

Commissioner O'Connell. Are they furnished their hay and straw free?

Mr. Page. Yes, sir.

Commissioner O'Connell. But they furnish their own mattress if they want one?

Mr. Page. No, no; they furnish their bedding. They furnish their blanket, we furnish the mattress.

Commissioner O'Connell. They buy the blankets in your stores?

Mr. Page. Why, sometimes; not very many. Most of them have their blankets with them when they come.

Commissioner O'Connell. That is considered part of their trade, I suppose, when they are seeking employment?

Mr. Page. That is the badge of their trade.

Commissioner O'Connell. Part of their tools, as it were?

Mr. Page. Yes, sir.

Commissioner O'Connell. That is all.

Center for the Study of the Pacific Northwest