ber Co., and under the control and direction of its managing es

The wool products referred to in paragraphs 3, 4, and 5 hereaftr are manufactured by respondents Jack Takiff, Eddie Allen, and Pr Takiff and sold by them to respondent Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. California. Said respondents Jack Takiff, Eddie Allen, and Phis Takiff cause said products to be shipped from their place of busin in Los Angeles, Calif., to the purchaser thereof at its respective plum of business located in Los Angeles, Calif., Portland, Oreg., and Dece Colo.

PAR. 3. Respondents Jack Takiff, an individual trading and dez business as Studio Sport Modes, Eddie Allen, and Philip Takfer engaged in the manufacture for introduction into commerce, and alt said respondents are engaged in the introduction into commerce in the sale, distribution, and transportation of wool products as se products are defined in the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1989, 1 commerce, as "commerce" is defined in said act and in the Fed Trade Commission Act. Respondents' said wool products are posed in whole or in part of wool, reprocessed wool or reused wool, si those terms are defined in the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1 and such products are subject to the provisions of said act and the and regulations promulgated thereunder. Since July 15, 1941 spondents have violated the provisions of said act and said rules an regulations in the manufacture for introduction, and in the introd tion into commerce and in the sale, transportation, and distributi of said wool products in said commerce, by causing said wool produz to be misbranded within the intent and meaning of said act and sud rules and regulations.

PAR. 4. Among the wool products manufactured for introducti into commerce by respondents Jack Takiff, trading and doing busi as Studio Sport Modes, Eddie Allen, and Philip Takiff, and in duced into commerce and sold, transported, and distributed in s commerce by all of said respondents are said "loafer" coats. Ex plifying respondents' practice of violating said act and rules and re lations promulgated thereunder is their misbranding of the afores wool products in violation of the provisions of said act and the sc rules and regulations by failing to affix to said wool products a star tag, label, or other means of identification, or a substitute in I. thereof, as provided by said act, showing (a) the percentage of total fiber weight of the wool product, exclusive of ornamentari *! not exceeding 5 per centum of said total fiber weight, of (1) (2) reprocessed wool, (3) reused wool, (4) each fiber other than wod where said per centum by weight of such fiber was five per centum of more, and (5) the aggregate of all other fibers; (b) the maxim

entage of the total weight of the wool product of nonfibrous loadfilling or adulterating matter; (c) the percentages in words and es plainly legible by weight of the wool contents of such wool luct where said wool product contains a fiber other than wool; the name of the manufacturer of the wool product, or the manuurer's registered identification number and the name of a seller eseller of the product as provided for in the rules and regulations nulgated under such act, or the name of one or more persons ect to section 3 of said act with respect to such wool product. AR. 5. The aforesaid acts, practices, and methods of the respond, as alleged herein, were and are in violation of the Wool Products eling Act of 1939 and the rules and regulations promulgated thereer, and constitute unfair and deceptive acts and practices in comce within the intent and meaning of the Federal Trade CommisAct.

ismissed without prejudice by the following order:

n a memorandum to the Commission dated September 22, 1947, sented by Daniel J. Murphy, assistant chief trial counsel, and curred in by counsel for all of the respondents herein, it was made appear to the Commission that the practices charged in the comint as violations of law were due to the ignorance and carelessness the respondents' wartime employees, and that said practices have v been discontinued, and it was recommended that the respondents permitted to dispose of this proceeding by the execution of a stipuon as to the facts and agreement not to resume such practices. e Commission, having considered all of the facts and circumnces, and being of the opinion that disposition of the matter in matter recommended would be in the public interest, approved recommendation, and the case was referred to the director, divin of stipulations, for the negotiation of an appropriate stipulation agreement.

The respondents have now executed and submitted for approval tipulation as to the facts and agreement to cease and desist, and it pears that said stipulation and agreement covers all of the praces referred to in the complaint.

It is therefore ordered, That said stipulation as to the facts and reement to cease and desist be, and it hereby is, approved and cepted.

It is further ordered, That the complaint herein be, and it hereby is, missed without prejudice to the right of the Commission to take ch further action in the matter in the future as may be warranted the then existing circumstances.

See stipulation 7660, 44 F. T. C. 1315.

TE 1947

conc

to the

this

the formal record herein.

mission.

Allen, and Philip Takiff.

és further ordered, That the memorandum dated Septembe executed by Daniel J. Murphy, assistant chief trial couned arred in by counsel for the respondents, and the stipulatice facts and agreement to cease and desist, upon the basis of Proceeding is being disposed of, be included and made ap MT. J. W. Brookfield, Jr. and Mr. George M. Martin for the Mr. Ralph Rosenstock, of Los Angeles, Calif., for Jack Takif Whitlock & Howrey, of Washington, D. C., for Firestone Fir Mr. Thomas S. Markey, of Akron, Ohio, and Sanders, G Rubber Co. and Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. of California. A. C. BECKEN Co., AUSTIN N. CLARK AND JOSEPH L. MCNAB. C plaint, April 19, 1946. Order, January 15, 1948. Charge: Advertising falsely or misleadingly as to "list" or "at Prices (through use of quoted, arbitrarily fixed "Keystone" p and as to nature and qualities, properties, or results of produc connection with the sale and wholesale distribution of jewelry,

ware and related products.

(Docket 544

Record closed without prejudice by the following order:

This matter came on to be heard in regular

course upon motion of

October 31, 1947, by counsel supporting the complaint to close the case without prejudice and answer thereto filed by counsel for the

respondents on November 10, 1947.

The complaint herein charged the corporate and individual r spondents with unfair and deceptive acts and practices in the d tribution of a catalog containing illustrations and prices of the prod Iucts which they sold and distributed to retail jewelers. It alleged that retail jewelers exhibited this catalog to their customers, thereby conveying to them the impression that the prices shown therein were the prices at which the articles illustrated were ordinarily sold by retailers when in fact retail jewelers did not ordinarily charge the prices shown in the catalog, but often sold these commodities to 2 sumers at prices materially below those quoted in said catalog. The complaint further charged the respondents with the publication and distribution of an advertisement which represented simulated cr

imitation pearls as "LUSTROUS, INDESTRUCTIBLE PEARLS."

It appears to the Commission that the evidence adduced fails to support the charge that the respondent's catalog, which has been dis tributed to members of the retail jewelry trade, has been used by re tailers to represent to consumers that the prices shown therein were

r regular retail prices or the retail prices suggested by the reidents. The record discloses that the advertisement of imitation imulated pearls as "LUSTROUS, INDESTRUCTIBLE PEARLS" appeared in a publication limited in distribution to the retail jewelery trade does not indicate that any member thereof has been misled or is ly to be deceived thereby. In his motion to close this case the rney supporting the complaint stated that no further substantial ence could be developed in support of the charges contained ein.

is therefore ordered, That this case be, and it hereby is, closed hout prejudice to the right of the Commission to reopen and me trial thereof or to take such action as future facts may war

efore Mr. George Biddle, trial examiner.

'r. Morton Nesmith for the Commission.

'olmes, Dixon, Scott & Knouff, of Chicago, Ill., for A. C. Becken and Austin N. Clark.

NTERNATIONAL TRADING CORP. AND GEORGE W. NELSON. Complaint, uary 29, 1943. Order, January 21, 1948. (Docket 4896.)

harge: Disparaging and misrepresenting competitors as to enemy trol, history, status, nature, standing and prospects, and offering eptive inducements to purchase or deal; in connection with importand exporting and sale of various commodities, including certain atic hardwoods designated "Yacal."

'OMPLAINT: Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Comsion Act, and by virtue of the authority vested in it by said act, Federal Trade Commission, having reason to believe that Internaal Trading Corp. and George W. Nelson, individually and as sident of the International Trading Corp. hereinafter referred to espondents, have violated the provisions of said act, and it appearto the Commission that a proceeding by it in respect thereof would in the public interest, hereby issues its complaint, stating its charges that respect as follows:

PARAGRAPH 1. Respondent International Trading Corp. is a corration organized and existing pursuant to the laws of the State of ashington, having its office and principal place of business at 814 cond Avenue Building, Seattle, Wash.

Respondent George W. Nelson, president of the International TradCorp., is an individual having his office and principal place of siness at 814 Second Avenue Building, Seattle, Wash. The acts, actices and business of respondent International Trading Corp. are der the immediate control and management of respondent George

. Nelson.

P W. beer

busi

tiv

with the other.

R. 2. The respondents International Trading Corp. and elson, individually and as president thereof, are now, and for several years last past, engaged in the import andat interstate commerce. These respondents have been particula ress and in the sale and distribution of various commode Asiatic countries. At all times herein referred to, said respond in the importation, among other things, of hardwoods from carried on said business by concerted action and in cooperation PAR. 3. The respondents cause and have caused the products dled by them to be transported to purchasers thereof located infra District of Columbia, and between the United States of America foreign countries. At all times mentioned herein, respondents ha maintained and now maintain a course of trade in said prodot commerce among and between the various States of the United St to and into various foreign countries and from said foreign e

to and into the United States of America.

In the course and conduct of their business, respondents have and are in competition with other corporations, and with individ firms, and partnerships likewise engaged in the import and exports ness and in the sale and distribution of goods purchased in for countries in commerce among and between the various States of the United States and in the District of Columbia, and in the sale and tribution of various types of goods and commodities manufactur in the United States and shipped into or to various foreign countries PAR. 4. In the course and conduct of said business, respondents engaged in the practice of making false, misleading and deceptre statements, unwarrantedly disparaging some of its said competitor either directly or inferentially, and disseminating them to and ame the customers and prospective customers of said competitors, by meas of the United States mails, or other media in commerce. The substat of said statements and representations was as follows:

That The East Asiatic Company, Inc., a California corporation, is owned sal controlled by The East Asiatic Company, Ltd., of Denmark and, therefore, is unde the domination or control of the German government and that "the State other Departments in Washington are fully aware of the correct situation"; the the said The East Asiatic Company, Inc., is under investigation by the Feder Bureau of Investigation and by the Intelligence Division of the United State Navy Department; that said California corporation has had charters for ste ships cancelled by the United States Maritime Commission for the reason the said corporation was controlled by foreign interests; that said corporation is 1 "mere" brokerage firm with no sales organization and is not in a position to sell a certain hardwood designated "Yacal"; and that it, the said International