Cotton ginners, compressors, warehousemen and others.-A cotton compress and warehouse company and a number of ginning companies, were charged with a combination and conspiracy to restrain competition and create a monopoly in the compressing and storing of cotton, and in the sale of burlap bagging and steel bands used in compressing cotton. (4090.)

Wholesale liquor distributors' association and others.—An association of wholesale liquor distributors, and others engaged in the liquor business, were charged with conspiring to suppress competition in the wholesale liquor trade in the "Northern California Territory" by preventing cooperative buying associations and others classified by them as "irregular" distributors from obtaining supplies. (4093.)

Monopoly of trade in dates.-Several concerns, some English and some American, and their agents, were charged with having combined and conspired to gain a monopoly in dates. It is alleged that a large share of the dates consumed in the United States are imported from the country of Iraq; that that government entered into an agreement with a London concern whereby it was given the exclusive right to dispose of the entire crop of dates grown in Iraq; that the London concern entered into an understanding with two British firms, and an American corporation, whereby these three organizations agreed to dispose of specified quantities of dates in the United States and Canada in return for exclusive rights in those two countries. The other concerns named in the complaint allegedly cooperated in carrying out the plan. (4105.)

Association of confectioners, its officers and members.—A complaint issued against a western association of confectioners and its members alleged a combination to restrain price competition and to establish uniform prices. The complaint charged that the respondents sought to accomplish their purposes by adoption of a minimum price, adopting arbitrary figures as cost figures, arbitrary classification of various dealers, uniform discounts, uniform price lists, advance notices of price changes, and threats of prosecution under the California "Fair Trade Act." (4132.)

Association of fur coat pattern style designers.-A complaint was issued against a designers' league or association and 10 New York producers, members of the league and the dominant factor in the fur coat pattern trade, alleging a price-fixing conspiracy in the fur coat pattern business. (4136.)

Association of manufacturers of chemicals, fertilizers, insecticides, fungicides, and related items, its members, and others.-An unlawful price-fixing conspiracy in the sale of chemicals, fertilizers, insecticides, fungicides, and related items was charged against an association of

manufacturers of such products, its members, and others. Activities included the use of "White Lists" or "Distributor Guides" containing names of dealers to whom to sell on a wholesale basis, to the exclusion of other dealers, and the maintenance of an open price filing system. (4145.)

National association and State and local associations of retail liquor package dealers.—A national association of retail liquor package stores, its officers and members, comprised of state associations, in turn comprised of local associations, were charged with fixing prices for the sale of packaged liquor, with compelling distillers, importers, and wholesalers to sell only by means of "Fair Trade" contracts and with fixing the differentials to be provided for in such contracts. The alleged coercive methods used against distillers, importers, and wholesalers included boycott and threats of boycott. (4168.)

Manufacturers of rubber erasers.-A combination and agreement to fix and maintain prices, terms, and bids in connection with the sale of rubber erasers was charged against six corporations constituting practically all of the manufacturers of such products in the United States. (4170.)

Bakery products dealers and labor unions.-Four separate complaints were issued against four groups of dealers in bakery products, charging them with combining to restrain competition. In each case a local labor union was charged with being a part of the combination and with using intimidation and force in assisting in the accomplishment of the purposes. The means used were allegedly to prevent peddlers and so-called "independent routemen" from obtaining supplies for resale.

The four groups named in the complaints were eight dealers and a labor union in the Sioux City, Iowa, area; six dealers and a labor union in the Des Moines, Iowa, area; eight bakery companies and a labor union in the Omaha, Nebr., and Council Bluffs, Iowa, area; and nineteen bakery companies and a labor union in the Minneapolis (3900, 3999, 4139, 4140.)

area.

B. ALLEGED FALSE ADVERTISING AND MISREPRESENTATION

A total of 220 complaints issued during the fiscal year ended June 30, 1940, charged false and misleading representations in advertisements and labels, and otherwise. They may be classified broadly as follows:

Fifty-three complaints alleged false and misleading representations as to the therapeutic value of various medicinal and food preparations and devices; 45 alleged misrepresentations as to the potency,

273596-40

performance, or results to be obtained by the use of various prodncts; 28 charged misrepresentation as to composition, quality, ingredients, construction, or condition, including alleged misrepresentation of old products for new; 17 alleged passing off of products as possessing quality or qualities they did not have or as being made of material of a different character from that of which they actually were composed, the latter classification embracing principally leather goods or furs; 7 complaints alleged misbranding of pocket knives to indicate they were standard Boy Scout equipment; 13 alleged passing off of domestic products as imported or of imported products as domestic, and three complaints charged misrepresentation of correspondence schools or home-study courses.

Fifteen complaints alleged misrepresentation as to business status such as business connections, and size and extent of plant or business. This category also included the representation by distributors that they were producers. Eleven complaints alleged use of fictitious price markings, including in some instances also alleged misrepresentation us to the character of the product. Other complaints alleged appropriation or simulation of the trade name of a competitor or of a wellknown manufacturer, disparagement of a competitor's product, or misrepresentation of the advertiser's as compared with competing products; misrepresentation of financial returns to agents or to purchasers; misrepresentation of methods of doing business, involving prices, terms and conditions, ingredients used, and quality of work; misrepresentation of the value of products and coupons, of the terms under which coupons are redeemed, and with respect to prize contests; misleading practices in the issuance of guarantees and seals of approval, and publication of exaggerated claims for products advertised; false representation that a patent was pending, and misleading use of the name "Junior League."

C. MISCELLANEOUS COMPLAINTS

Alleged lotteries or gift enterprises.-More than 50 complaints charged manufacturers and dealers in candy, novelty merchandise, cigars, peanuts, food products, pipes, clothing, furs and fur garments, liquor chests, radios, silverware, and kitchen utensils, with using schemes involving an element of chance or lottery in the sale of such products to the ultimate consumer; or with furnishing to dealers the means with which to conduct such enterprises. Novelty merchandise and confections constituted the principal commodities involved.

Alleged commercial bribery.-Unlawful payment of fees to certain officials and employees of their customers so as to induce the purchase

by such customers, through such officials or employees, of the respondents' products, was charged in a complaint issued against a corporation and its president and sales manager, manufacturing paints, varnishes, stains, thinners, sealers and other wood-finishing products. (For further details see Orders to Cease and Desist, p. 67.) (4048.) Alleged monopolistic practices.—A manufacturer of piston rings and other replacement parts for motor vehicles, was charged with practices having a tendency to create monopoly, and unreasonably restrain manufacturers of competitive products in disposing of their merchandise to jobbers and wholesale distributors. These practices, allegedly intended to lure away the distributors of competitors, included offering to buy up stocks of competing products or give credit for them in exchange for the products of the respondent, offering to lend money and to guarantee increases in profits to dealers, and disparagement of the products of competitors. (4030.)

Alleged misleading practices in the issuance of guaranties and seals of approval and publication of exaggerated claims for products advertised.-Complaint was issued against a magazine publisher alleging, among other things, that the respondent represented that its shopping service was a "free" service, when in fact the magazine received substantial commissions for the service from the sellers; that the repondent guaranteed generally all products advertised in the pages of its magazine when the guarantee provided only a "money-back" special guarantee; that the magazine had a number of so-called seals of approval which it authorized advertisers to use, both in its own and other publications, and that, because of similarity of text and the appearance of the name of the magazine in all of them, the public was confused and misled into the belief that all such seals indicated the products had been scientifically tested and approved by the magazine. In truth, it was charged, some of the seals were for use, and were used, in connection with the advertisement of products which had not been tested and approved. Further, it was alleged that use of these seals and of statements made and authorized by the magazine, had a capacity and tendency to lead the public to believe that the magazine accepted only truthful advertising, when in fact it had accepted advertisements that were false and misleading. (3872.)

II. COMPLAINTS UNDER THE CLAYTON ACT

3

ALLEGED VIOLATION OF SECTION 2 (A) OF CLAYTON ACT AS AMENDED BY ROBINSON-PATMAN ACT

For the purpose of brevity, the following summaries do not mention that each complaint contains allegations concerning a necessary ele

For text of Clayton Act, see Appendixs, p. 163.

ment in all price-discrimination cases, namely, the effects of the practices charged which "may be substantially to lessen competition or tend to create a monopoly in any line of commerce, or to injure, destroy, or prevent competition with any person who either grants or knowingly receives the benefit of such discrimination, or with customers of either of them."

(Complaints referred to are identified by docket numbers. Full text of any complaint may be obtained upon application to the Federal Trade Commission, Washington)

Spark plugs.-Two corporations, which together manufacture about 90 per cent of the spark plugs sold in the United States for all uses, were charged in separate complaints with discriminating in price in the sale of such products. Each corporation was also charged with violating section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act by engaging in unfair methods of competition in compelling its distributors to maintain prices fixed for retail and by entering into agreements with wholesalers, the effect of which has been to persuade and compel many of such wholesalers to refuse to sell the products of the respondents` competitors. One of the respondent corporations was also charged with violating section 3 of the Clayton Act by inserting exclusive dealing conditions in its contracts with distributors. (3886 and 3977.) Bakers' yeast.-Supplementary to complaints heretofore issued charging the largest manufacturers of bakers' yeast with discriminations in price in the sale thereof, the Commission similarly charged two of the smaller corporations engaged in the manufacture of such yeast. (3903 and 3926.)

Cigarette manufacturers.—Practically all members of the industry were charged in separate complaints with having discriminated in price in the sale of their cigarettes and other tobacco products largely through the use of methods of sale and distribution whereby some favored customers obtained additional quantities of goods for which no charge was made, thereby reducing the price paid for the goods purchased. Several of the manufacturers were also charged with the payment of substantial sums of money to chain stores for window and counter displays, which compensation was not made available to competing customers. The complaints further alleged that some customers were granted 60 days or more within which to pay for goods purchased, whereas competing customers were required to pay within 10 days to obtain the same cash discounts. Some of the complaints contained a charge that the cigarette manufacturer paid vending-machine operators a certain compensation for including such manufacturer's cigarette in the machines. (3912, 3913, 3914, 3915, 3919, 3921, 3922, 3927.)