Pullman herald. [volume] (Pullman, W.T. [Wash.]) 1888-1989, 1920-05-14
THE IMPORTANT WORK OF THE
FEDERAL TRADE
COMMISSION
Continued from last issue.)

days after the issuance OF the COM
plant the party complained of
makes written answer. Trial of the
issue is then had with the production
of documentary and oral evidence,
examination of witnesses. There
after the commission considers all
the facts brought out at the hearing,
and if the commission then has facts
which confirm its original reason to
believe, the commission issues an
order to the man using the unfair
method of competition ordering him
to cease and desist such practice.
That is section s. And section 5,
my friends, enacted by congress,
and inspired by the people of the
United States who believe there
should be no artificial interference
with the natural flow of commodi-
ties from the producer to the con-
sumer is the cause of many calum-
NOUS things you hear about the COM
mission.
What are unfair methods of COM
petition? Under the old English
practice unfair methods of COMPETE
tion embraced stimulation of trade
mark and passing off of goods. If
the merchant who put up a popular
table sauce, for instance, had trade
mark and a competitor appropriated
the label, or passed off another sauce
for his, that was an unfair method
about all that an unfair method Of
competition meant in the old days
A great many other things have now
become unfair methods of competi-
ton. Take false advertising, for in
stance. There is not anyone here to-
day who will hesitate to say that a
man who falsifies in advertising is
unfair, to his competitors and unfair
to the public.
Now, what happens under section
3? A man writes in to the Federal
Trade Commission and complains
that Jones is unfair We docket
this as an application and it does
not make any difference whether 1T
comes from a business man or a
farmer using plain writing paper, or
from an attorney using legal phras-
eology. We administer that law i'm
partially without fear and without
favor. This complain is docketed at
once as an application and is given
a number. 1t then goes into the
hands of an examiner. The examin-
er makes a thorough investigation,
and brings his report back. That re-
port is handled by the chief examiner
who goes all over it and makes his
recommendation. That recommends
ton goes to board of review made
up OF two lawyers and one econom-
list, all learned men learned in the
law and learned in economics. They
study the complaint and reports.
First they ask: Is it in interstate
commerce? Because if it is not, we
can not touch it. Next, is it an un-
fair method of competition? Is it
competition at all? That point set
tied, then comes the important thing.
1t is true that Jones and Brown as
competitors may be quarreling. But
we can not settle all the private quar-
reis between competitors in the
United States. Is this act of Jones
unfair competition and in commerce
and even If it is, is the public inter-
est affected? If the public interest
is not affected we have nothing to
do with it. But if the public interest
appears, If the act is in interstate
commerce, If it appears unfair then
the board of review recommends that
a complaint be issued. Is it then
issued? Not at all The application
comes to commissioner; he takes
that case and reads it all over. He
reviews what the board has said and
what the examiner has said. Then if
he believes that it is in interstate
commerce, that it is an unfair meth
cd of competition, that the public in
terest appears, then he recommends
to the full commission that a conn
plant issue. Many of these cues
tions are difficult. If commissioner
disagrees with the board of review.
then they are invited in to defend
their position before the full COM
mission. Finally a vote is taken. II
complaint is ordered. complaint is
sues and for the first time the world
knows about it. Now so far we have
merely cited the respondent to an
pear and defend the practice. After
80 days there is complete hearing
and all the focfimocu 4; f.,,