Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1897-11-05
Issue Of Trading Stamps a Violation
of Statute.
CLASSED As A GIFT ENTERPRISE
Prosecutor Pugh Has No Doubt of
the Law.
! LEG ISL ATIV ACT


Prosecuting Attorney Pugh this morning
to a Star reporter, that trading stamps
come within the inhibition Of the statute
in reference to the conduct of gift enter
prises in the District Of Columbia
The discussion of the trading stamp fad
aroused by the publications concerning it
in The Star has led to an investigation of
the laws bearing upon such enterprises in
the District of Columbia, with the result
of the conclusion above stated in the words
OF the prosecuting attorney.
An examination of the laws enacted by
the legislative assembly of the District of
Columbia discovered one approved August
L, IoI, entitled, AN act imposing license
on trades, business and professions prac-
tlced or carried on in the District of CO.
lumbia."
The twenty-f1fth paragraph of this act
reads as follows:
The proprietors Of gift enterprises shall
pay $1,000 annually. Every person who
shall sell or offer for sale any real estate
or artlcle OF merchandise of any descrip-
ton whatever, or any ticket of admission to
any exhibition or performance, or other place
of amusement, with PROMISE expressed
or Implied, to give or bestow, or in any
manner hold out the promise of gift or be-
stowal, of any article or thing, for and in
consideration of the purchase by any per-
son of any other article or thing, whether
the object shall be for Individual gain or
for the benefit of any institution, of what
ever character, or for any purpose what
ever, shall be regarded as gift enterprise:
Provided, that no such proprietor in con-
sequence Of being thus taxed, shall be ex-
empt from paying any other tax imposed
by law, and the license herein required
shall be in addition thereto"
Further examination developed that Con-
gress In 1913 passed law which was ap-
proved February II, and which may be
found or page AGA of volume II of the stat
utes at large. 1t Is also contained in sec
tions 1176 and 1177 of the Revised Statutes
OF the District Of Columbia, which read as
fellows:
Sec. 1175. So much of the act of the
legislative assembly of the District of Co.
lumbia entitled An act imposing license
on trades, business and professions prac-
ticed or carried on the District of Colum-
bia,' approved August %, 1871, as author
lies gift enterprises therein, and licenses
to be issued therefor, is disapproved and
repealed. and hereafter it shall be unlaw-
full for any person or persons to engage in
said business in any manner as defined in
said act or otherwise.
Sec. 1177. Every person who shall in any
manner engage in any gift enterprise busi-
ness in the District shall on conviction
thereof in the Police Court, on information
filed for and on behalf Of the District, pay
fine not exceeding 1000 or be imprison-
ed in the District jail not less than one
nor more than six months, or both, in the
discretion of the court
The act of assembly defines as gift en-
terprise the giving of "any article or Thing
Ca trading stamp or the merchandise rep
resented by iD "for and in consideration
of the purchase by any person of any other
article or thing. The act of Congress pro-
nounces illegal the gift enterprise thus de-
fined and Furnishes it with fine and impris-
onment.
perusal of these laws will doubtless
convince the merchants who have unwit-
tingly, perhaps entered into the agreement
with any of the trading stamp companies
by which they give away per cent of
their gross cash receipts in return for the
privilege of issuing trading stamps that
to the penalties provided by 1t. and that
their contracts thus to violate the law are
void.
A case was brought under the law at the
July term of the Police Court against Sig
mund Berger and Frank GumpertZ who
We're charged in engaging in the business
of a gift enterprise in the District in viola
ton of section 1177 of the Revised Statutes
of the United States relating to the District
of Columbia. The witnesses in the case
were Detective Joseph Carter, Kate Ray
nor, who was the prosecuting witness; Mrs.
Sarah Mack and Mrs. Cook. The case was
nolle pressed by Prosecuting Attorney
James L.: Pugh, jr.. because the defendants
were ignorant that their offering of gifts
in connection with the business they con-
Quoted was against the law. Mr.. Pugh's
announcement, coupled with the publica-
tion of the laws, is pointed hint that
those who after this warning violate the
law against gift enterprises by issuing trad
ing stamps or any other articles to pur-
chasers will be rLientlessly prosecuted.