Evening star., 1933-11-11
Declares Ford Car Dealers
Financially Liable if Pacts
Are Broken.
BURDEN OF PROOF PUT
ON u. S. IN DECISION
All Auto Plants, Including Ford,
Abiding by Wage and Hour Pro-
visions, N. r. A. Announces.

| FInra decision resulting from Henry
Furd,s controversy with the Recovery
Administration, Controller General Nc
Carl today upheld the validity of ex-
ecutive orders imposing code adherence
as a requirement in contracts made
with the Government.
The controller general further ruled
that Ford dealers are financially liable
for any breach of contract by the
manufacturer or themselves, The bur.
den of proof to- establish such breach.
however, was placed upon the Govern
ment
The result of the decision is that
Ford-or any other contractor-accepts
a Government contract with the under
standing that he complies with the ap-
plicable code and that n-observance
allows the Government TO cancel the
agreement and recover from the con-
tractor for reimbursement for any ex-
cess cost that may be incurred as the
outgrowth of such cancellation.
Case Arouses Wide Interest.
The case, which has aroused wide
interest, developed locally when R. F.
Sabine, head of the Northwest Motor
Co. Of Bethesda, a Ford dealer, filed
protests with the Secretaries of Agri-
culture and Commerce and the Con-
troller General, because he said he had
learned his bid-though low-for Con-
servation Corps trucks had been set
aside because of the Ford controversy.
The initial order incidentally, involves
/ 200 vehicles, which are to be procured
1rom several concerns
Mr.. Ibine contended he was bidding
in his Individual capacity, rather than
as Ford agent, and thaS as he him.
self was operating under the N. r. A.
dealers code, Ford's non-acceptance of
the manufacturers code did not figure
In the picture. This contention is up
set by McCarl.
The controller generals decision came
day after the Recovery Administration
had announced that all motor manufac-
turers, including Ford, apparently we're
abiding by the wages and hours pre-
scribed by their code.
Not Final Test of Standing.
This statement was made on the basis
of figures transmitted through the Ma
tional Automobile Chamber of Com
merce. At the same time, however, it
was pointed out this was not a final test
of Fords standing. The Detroit man.
ufacturer is represented as opposing
collective bargaining.
At the outset of his decision, which
was rendered to the Secretary of Agri-
culture, McCarl cites the provisions ap-
pearing in the truck specifications
which require % the contractor to
comply with the code, or, where there
is no code, the Presidents re-employ-
ment agreement, and CD the penalty
provision: IF the contractor fails to
comply with the foregoing provision, the
Government may, by written notice to
the contractor, terminate the contrac-
tors right to proceed with the contract,
and purchase in the open market the
undelivered portion of the supplies
covered by the contract. and the con-
tractor and his sureties shall be liable
TO the Government for any excess cost
occaSioned the Government thereby"
Then he continues: I'm the conSid-
Grafton of the bids received in this in
stance Question appears to have
arisen as to whether the fact that the
Ford Motor Co. had not signed the
Presidents Unemployment agreement
or the assent form" signifying affirma-
lively its assent to the code of fair
competition for the automobile manu-
featuring industry precludes acceptance
OF the Northwest Motor Co.'s bid.
The Presidents Unemployment
agreement is not for consideration here
because there has been approved by the
President code of fair COM
petition for the automobile manufactur-
ing industry and also a code of fair
competition for the motor vehicle re-
failing trade.
Signing Held Unnecessary.
There appears nothing in the code
for the automobile manufacturing in
dustry nor In the act of June 16, 1888.
pursuant to which said code was
adopted and approved, to require that
persons or ArmS engaged in the in
duStry sign or otherwise aff1rmatively
signify their assent to the approved
code. On the contrary, it seems clear
from the plain terms Of said act and
the procedure under which codes are
prepared and approved that no such
signing or affirmative assent is neces-
Sary"
"There is likewise for observing that
there appears nothing in the code for
motor vehicle retailing trade to re-
quire that persons or firms engaged in
Continued on Page 2, Column ~