loyal manufacturers; (10) recommending or procuring the circulation of scurrilous trade papers and/or defamatory attacks on manufacturers selling indiscriminately to jobbers and retailers among the retail customers or prospective retail customers of such manufacturer; (11) cooperating with nonmember wholesale grocers or with associations of wholesale grocers in other parts of the United States to further any of the practices prohibited in the foregoing portions of this order.

Resale price maintenance-Standard Oil Co. of Kentucky.—A typical order on the subject of resale price maintenance is the one entered by the commission on November 28, 1925, against the Standard Oil Co. of Kentucky in connection with the sale of oil stoves and heaters manufactured by the Cleveland Metal Products Co. The respondent was charged with following the practice of, and required by order of the commission to cease and desist from, (1) entering into contracts, agreements, or understandings with its dealers or prospective dealers to the effect that respondents' stoves and heaters, manufactured by the Cleveland Metal Products Co., are to be resold by them at prices specified or fixed by respondent; (2) procuring from its dealers or prospective dealers any promises or assurances that its said stoves or heaters are to be resold by them at prices specified or fixed by respondent; (3) inviting or requesting its dealers to report the names of dealers who do not maintain respondent's specified resale prices on said products or who are suspected of not maintaining the same; (4) acting upon reports or communications from its dealers concerning price cutting on said products by other dealers, or manifesting to its dealers any intention to act thereon; (5) requesting the cooperation of its dealers in the ascertainment of the source of supply of said products on the part of a price cutter or suspected price cutter, or in any other manner seeking the cooperation of dealers in the maintenance of prices specified or fixed by respondent on said products.

Misrepresentations-Furniture cases.--A number of orders were issued by the commission during the fiscal year against various furniture dealers requiring them to cease and desist from falsely representing themselves as furniture manufacturers by use of such trade names and slogans as "Factory-to-You Furniture," "Factoryto-You Furniture Store," "Direct from the Factory," "Factory Manufacturers Show Rooms (Inc.)," "Associated Furniture Manufacturers Warehouse Co.," "Grand Rapids Furniture Manufacturers Association (Inc.)." Several of the concerns involved in these cases were also directed to cease and desist from applying the words "Grand Rapids " to furniture manufactured elsewhere than in the well and favorably known furniture manufacturing center of Grand Rapids, Mich.

Marking commodities with fictitious and exaggerated retail pricesClayton F. Summy Co. case.-This company, a publisher of sheet music, was charged in the complaint of the commission with using unfair methods of competition in the stamping of its publications with fictitious and exaggerated retail prices, thereby tending to mislead and deceive the uninformed public as to the actual value of respondent's product. An order was entered by the commisison on December 7, 1925, requiring the company to cease and desist from (1) printing, stamping, or marking on its musical publications sold in commerce a price mark which is 33% per cent higher than the price at which it intends that its musical publications shall be sold, and at which said publications are in fact commonly and actually sold at retail; (2) printing, stamping, or marking on said musical publications any fictitious price mark in excess of the price at which it intends that its musical publications shall be, and at which said publications are in fact usually and commonly sold at retail.

Commercial bribery.-In this case the United States Oil Co. (Inc.), and seven individuals engaged in the sale of textile oils and allied products to mills and factories were charged in the complaint with paying secret bribes to employees of customers and prospective customers as an inducement to such employees to recommend and secure the purchase of respondent's products by such employees and principals in preference to similar products of respondents' competitors. In the order entered by the commisison on April 28, 1926, the respondent company and four individuals connected therewith. were required to cease and desist from giving, paying, offering, or agreeing to give, or pay, to an employee or employees of purchasers or prospective purchasers, without their knowledge or consent, money or other valuable consideration as inducement to such employee or employees to recommend or procure the purchase by their respective employer of employers in commerce between States of the United States, of fulling and scouring oil or other textile oil or oils or allied commodities or any of them offered for sale or sold by said respondents.

Misreperesentation of coal-Franklin Coal Co.-Respondent, a shipper of coal throughout the State of Illinois and adjoining States, was charged in the complaint with misrepresenting and selling coal produced from mines in Bond and Clinton Counties, Ill., as "Mount Olive coal" and "Mount Olive district coal," thereby tending to mislead the public to believe that it is of the well-known high-quality coal which has for many years been mined at Mount Oliv, Ill., and in a small coal-producing district immediately contiguous thereto and known as the "Mount Olive district." The order entered by the commission directed the respondent to cease and desist (1) from using in advertisements, or by or through any other

means whatsoever, in connection with the sale or offering for sale in interstate commerce of coal produced at Pocahontas, Bond County, Ill., and/or Breese and Beckemeyer, Clinton County, Ill., the words or phrases "Mt. Olive," and "Mt. Olive district" as trade names for, or as descriptive of said coal; (2) from using the words or phrases "Mt. Olive " and "Mt. Olive district" as trade names for, or as descriptive of, any coal marketed by respondent in interstate commerce, unless said coal has been produced at Mount Olive, Ill., or in the small geographical section contiguous to said Mount Olive, including Staunton, in said State.

Misbranding of penknives-The Long-Koch Co.-This company, a manufacturing jeweler, was charged in the complaint of the commission with unfair methods of competition in that it mounted with gold and base metal large quantities of penknives on which were branded the marks "10 K" and "14 K," thereby tending to mislead the public to believe that the entire mounting of the knives were made of 10-karat or 14-karat gold, when in fact said mounting consisted of base metal covered, faced, or veneered with a thin layer of gold. The order entered by the commission on May 4, 1926, required respondent to cease and desist from using the marks, symbols, or brands "10 K" and "14 K" (1) upon or in connection with any gold-mounted knife when the karat fineness of the entire mounting of such knife is less than the number of karats indicated by the number in such respective mark, symbol, or brand used; (2) upon or in connection with any knife when the mounting thereof contains any base metal, covered, faced, veneered, or otherwise concealed with gold unless such marks, symbols, or brands be accompanied by words or other marks clearly indicating and showing the quantity of gold of such karat fineness represented by said marks, symbols, or brands which is actually used in said mounting.

Beacon Knitting Mills (Inc.).—Orders in a number of cases prohibiting the misuse of the word "Mills" were entered by the commission, typical of which cases is the proceeding had against the Beacon Knitting Mills (Inc.). This concern was engaged in the business of wholesaling machine-made and handmade knit garments. The machine-made garments were produced for it under contracts by other concerns who operated knitting mills. The handmade garments were produced by a large number of home knitters or persons engaged in knitting garments in their homes. The complaint charged the respondent with an unfair method of competition in the use of the words "Knitting Mills" in its corporate name and advertising statements of similar import which tended to mislead purchasers into the alleged false belief that respondent is the operator of knitting mills and the manufacturer of its garments selling direct to pur chasers to the exclusion of middlemen. An order was entered in the

case on March 15, 1926, by which respondent was required to cease and desist (1) from using the words "Knitting Mills," or either of them, or words of like import, in or as a trade name or corporate name for carrying on the business of selling and distributing machine-made knit garments in interstate commerce unless and until the respondent actually owns or directly controls or operates a mill or mills in which said garments are manufactured or produced; (2) from making, in connection with the sale and distribution of knit garments in interstate commerce, representations through advertisements, circulars, business stationery, trade names, or in any manner whatsoever, to the effect that respondent is the manufacturer or maker of the garments dealt in by it (a) when such garments as may be machine made were in fact not manufactured in a mill or factory directly controlled or operated by respondent, and/or (b) when any of such garments as may be handmade were produced by persons who are commonly known in the knit-goods trade as "home knitters" and "home crocheters."

DISMISSAL OF COMPLAINTS

Up to June 30, 1926, the commission had dismissed 487 complaints. While the commission in many instances does not include its reasons in an order of dismissal, a study of the records indicates the following elements were given weight:

Seventy-one cases are listed as being dismissed because of controlling decisions. Of this number, 39 were cases held in abeyance until the decision of the Supreme Court in the Beech-Nut Packing Co. case, 257 U. S. 441. There was reason to believe that the respondents in these cases had violated the law, but the respondents contended that, as the decision of the Supreme Court constituted in reality new law on the subject, they should be given an opportunity to conform their practices in accordance with that court's decision. Complying with this request, these cases were dismissed after the Beech-Nut case, with notice that the commission would cause new

investigations to be instituted to ascertain whether the respondents conducted their business in line with the Beech-Nut decision.

Those complaints dismissed without prejudice were cases in which it was generally found that because of the age of the case or the fact that the practice was not employed extensively or had been discontinued it was thought best to dismiss without prejudice with the right to renew the action in the event the respondent continued the acs complained of. Forty-three cases were dismissed because upon final hearing the respondents either could not be found or had gone out of business. In this class of cases evidence was usually available to sustain the charges of the complaint. In 43 cases the complaints were dismissed because the practice condemned had been discontinued and in 32 cases because of lack of public interest. These were the less important cases and were dismissed because of the age of the cases and the lack of funds with which to reinvestigate the more or less minor matters involved for the purpose of ascertaining conditions prevailing at the time of dismissal, and it was decided that to proceed further would not be in the public interest. Thirty-one cases have been dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because it could not be proved that the acts complained of were done in interstate commerce, thus leaving the commission without jurisdiction. Those disposed of because of civil litigation are cases in which the respondent had already been proceeded against in the courts prior to the commission reaching these cases, but not prior to the institution of the commission's case. In these eight cases the respondents were successfully proceeded against in the courts.

The foregoing indicates that only a small percentage of complaints have been dismissed because the respondents were not found. to have violated the law as charged. In some of those cases noted as being dismissed for lack of proof the commission was unable to proceed with trial within a reasonable time after the original investigation. Later, when these cases were taken up for trial, it was found that the facts disclosed by the original investigation could not be substantiated, oftentimes by reason of the disappearance of witnesses. The number listed as being dismissed for lack of proof are those in which public announcement was made of the fact.

COURT CASES

Appeal may be made to the United States Circuit Courts of Appeals, either by the commission to enforce its order or by the respondent to have the order set aside. The number of court proceedings in which the commission has been involved during the year,. as well as a cumulative showing of this work throughout the com