REPLIES TO CARD AND SCHEDULE INQUIRIES. 369
The manager of a large cooperative export organization with
extensive experience abroad wrote:

Legitimate cooperation of manufacturers or jobbers, for the purpose of carefully
 and economically developing a market for their products in the export
field, is most desirable, as many concerns, by this manner of operation, secure a
satisfactory volume of business at a reasonable cost. Were each manufacturer
obliged to stand the total expense of the development the cost would, in many
cases, prevent the attempt and in other cases be too high for the volume of
business obtainable.
The large majority of those who answered the question under discussion
 gave more or less definite reasons why they thought combinations
 for export trade are or are not in the public interest. The principal
 reason assigned (speaking numerically), the reduction in expenses,
 has been treated above. The rest have been arranged as far
as possible by groups for presentation. Inasmuch as most replies
included more than one reason, a particular reply. may, of course, be
counted in each of several groups.
A small minority of replies assigned general reasons in addition
bo specific reasons, such as that combinations are in the direction of
industrial evolution, that they promote the general welfare, that
concentration produces better results than individual effort, ete.
Thus a middle western editor wrote:
{ believe it would be distinctly in the public interest, because the power of
organization would make possible a greater impact upon the world’s markets
than individual dealers could possibly make acting independently.
A middle western jurist wrote in part as follows:

If these combinations are economic, they will survive and deserve to, If they
are not, they will be short lived. The people of this country are interested in
seeing that manufacturers and producers prosper, and any economic measure
which will enable them to sell their goods abroad in competition with the world
ls desirable unless, as a result thereof, they may fasten a monopoly upon our
own people,
Efficiency— About 100 replies gave the reason that combinations
are more efficient, render better service for their members than each
can for himself (without specifying the service), are less liable to
make mistakes than individuals, can better adapt their products to
the needs of foreign markets, etc. Thus a Seattle attorney wrote:
ft was the efficiency of combination to secure its end which resulted in the
antitrust legislation, in protection of the consumer, who confessedly is not to be
considered (except to get his business). in devising ways and means of increas-Ing
 export trade,
A large manufacturer of canned goods, exporting one-third of his
product, wrote:
Whenever it can be arranged for one service of any description to do the work
of many services, without in any way limiting individual enterprise, a material
saving can be made while a better service is afforded, thus increasing the ¢ollective
 efficiency of the group. _
Ewport business increased. —The next group, nearly 450 in number,
comprises those replies stating, among other reasons, that combinations
 are in the public interest, because thereby the volume of our
export business can best be increased ; because combinations can best
secure new business, develop new markets, stand the expense of creating
 a demand in foreign countries for our products, ete.
27941°—pr 2—16——924