382 REPORT ON COOPERATION IN AMERICAN EXPORT TRADE.
pleasure. Their answers, however, are usually qualified. Typical
replies follow:
Awoid legal restrictions.—The president of a company manufacturing
 railroad supplies having a vast export field, says:
Cooperation for export among manufacturers of competing products should
be permitted without any restrictions. It should not be obligatory on the part
of any cooperative export sales organization to take in all manufacturers of
any one product. The best results can only be obtained if such organizations
are formed on voluntary lines and are not obliged by law to take in other manufacturers
 of the same or other products. If the reverse is insisted upon, it would
give undue advantage to the inefficient manufacturers and handicap the efficient
ones, who, because of location, organization, and experience, are capable of
successfully conducting export business.
Should not be hampered by unbusinesslike legislation.—A manufacturer
 of farm machinery presents the following:
I think combinations, cooperative associations, or other methods employed by
all manufacturers and merchants not controlied by foreign interests should
have an open field in devising methods of handling export trade and should
not be hampered by legislation enacted by men ignorant of business requirements.
 People engaged in export trade naturally are better qualified to determine
 what is best for their interests than those gentlemen whose knowledge is
confined to the abstract.
Economy in shipping.—The officers of a large manufacturing
concern suggesting a combination of such dissimilar products as
iron or steel and cotton, write:
We think that such export combinations as above should be wholly voluntary
 and that they should not be open to all manufacturers or producers, but
that they should have the right to exclude any concern at pleasure, for the
reason that they will be voluntary combinations for the promotion of mutual
interests. If, for example, such a combination should be formed to promote
export of steel products from this district, it might be desirable to include
cotton producers, whose freight could be conveniently handled, occupying bulk
and little weight in steamers carrying heavy steel, which is not bulky, but it
would not be convenient to admit timber or coal producers to the same combination
 as their produets, including both bulk and weight, could not be conveniently
 harmonized with shipments of steel, and the way would open for dissensions
 and conflict of opinion in the management of such combinations as
to what products should be shipped on each particular steamer.
Voluntary grouping is logical and natural, and smaller concerns
have to be considered.—A member of a large smelting firm discusses
the question as follows:

Such combinations must be voluntary to be workable.” ‘Being voluntary,
they would be severally selective. They would group themselves of their own
accord. Every concern would get into the combination in which it naturally
belonged. The smaller concerns would have to be taken care of, for though
they might be excluded from a foreign trade combination, they could not be
pxcluded from the foreign trade. Acting independently in a field opened up
by large concerns, they would have peculiar advantages.
Diversity of business principles—One of the partners of a firm
gga for 66 years in foreign trade expresses the following opinion
based upon his 30 years of personal experience:

Manufacturers in combination should have the right to exclude any concern
at their pleasure because business principles and dealings of manufacturers
differ. If a number of manufacturers combine who have the identical or similar
 business ideas, they should not be compelled to admit another who has
different ideas, because it might harm their business.
Impractical from a business and ethical standpoint to admit all.—
The vice president of an establishment selling printing machinery