2'76 REPORT ON COOPERATION IN AMERICAN "EXPORT TRADE.

country from which orders for the goods of any one of them might be promptly
filled? The fact that most of the members of this association would not combine
for such a purpose because of well-established individual arrangements already
perfected does not affect the value of the illustration in the least.

John L. Lawrence, member of the firm of Lawrence &amp; Co., Boston,
Mass., cotton merchants, mentioned wages and the standardization of
styles as of importance 1n the textile industry:

Wages, as you all know, in the United States are higher than in most countries,
 and it is only possible for us to compete abroad through effective organization
 and efficiency. This is especially true in the textile industry where wholesale
 production and standardization are required. Foreign manufacturers offer
a very much larger variety of styles of goods, and accept orders for most any
kind of detailed assortments and standards required, while we are considered
arbitrary in seeking markets and requiring that they adhere to the standards
which can be best adapted to our own methods of production—and we must
change, if we want to continue to compete in the future. * * *
H. P. Davison, of J. P. Morgan &amp; Co., bankers, New York City,
said *

I think that if we are going to compete with foreign countries—that is, with
the older countries having established trade in foreign centers—some form of
combination must be had. That is to say, our units here, while they may be large,
are not large enough, in the main, to carry on an important foreign trade
without some form of association. Of course, there are some large corporations
 which are developing their trade, and they are competent to do it, but
speaking generally of the average manufacturer, of the average producer, I
do not see how he can expect to get into the foreign market and meet the
competition there alone. In other words, if it were legal, it seems to me it
would be very wise that some organization should be effected whereby certain
corporations might combine purely for the export business, sharing the overhead
 charges incident to that business, and having their common representative
in these various centers in the foreign countries. In that way they could
economize in ‘their methods of doing business—that is, they could minimize
the expense of that—and could very materially enlarge and develop their business
 by reason of that; whereas, as I say, I do not see how the average manufacturer
 can get into that foreign field without some such combination.
I believe that there are certain lines of business in which, if combination
rould be effected through a selling agency, tremendous benefit would result to
the stockholders in this country. That is to say, the economies that would be
oracticed, the lack of competition against each other in a foreign city or center,
would result in better prices, which must, of course, result in the benefit of
the stockholder in this country, or wherever he may be, so far as that is concerned
 ; but, assuming that these corporations are owned in this country, the
benefit must come to this country. I appreciate that that seems to be a little
bit at variance with our moral principles, as recognized, and particularly
with the Sherman law as it is now on the statute books, but I do not see anything
 immoral in endeavoring to provide a joint interest here to sell to a foreign
 buyer.
Roger W. Babson, of the Babson Statistical Agency, Boston, Mass.,
stated that:
I do not see why the large corporations need to combine for such a purpose.
* * * [Citing those in oil, flour, cash registers, and sewing machines.}
* # =» The smaller manufacturers do need it. Now, if it is given both to
the smaller manufacturers and to the bigger manufacturers, I somewhat question
 whether the ultimate result may not be about the same as it is now, because
 the large manufacturers have such a predominance over the smaller
manufacturers in their combinations that the combination of the smaller
manufacturers would practically be put out of business. For instance, if the
Standard Oil Co. and the Texas Co. and the Mexican Petroleum Co. were allowed
 to combine, what possible chance would a combination of little independent
 ofl producers stand?