Evening star., 1941-02-20
Milk Court Test
Is Threatened
Action Forecast at
Commission Hearing
In Alexandria
Special Dispatch to The Star.

Special Dispatch to The Star.
ALEXANDRIA, Va, Feb. 20.-Rep-
reSentatives of Virginia Milk Con-
sumers today threatened to attack
the constitutionality of the Virginia
Milk and Cream Act, as the second
day of hearings before the Virginia
State Milk Commission on moves
to abolish retail price fixing in
Northern Virginia got under way.
H. c. Fedderson, chairman OF a
volunteer consumers committee,
following the testimony of William
G.. Sullivan of the Agricultural
Department, told the Commission
the Arlington-AleXandria group
would appeal before high judicial
tribunal unless the commission Of
fered parity with Washington milk
prices to Virginians.
Encouraged by Decision.
"a committee" he said, "has
offered conclusive evidence that re-
tail price-fixing is harmful to the
interests of both consumers and
producers. If the commission, in
spite of this evidence, refuses to re-
move this price fixing, the commit
tee will continue its efforts to OBJ
tain justice for the consumer.
I'VE shall attack this problem
along the line We shall organize
the customers in these areas to take
uniform advantage of the lower
prices for milk in the District; we
shall resort to these courts and chal-
lenge the constitutionality of the
Virginia Milk and Cream Act. The
recent decision of the Michigan
Supreme Court gives US some en-
couragement that we might sue
ceed in this endeavor, and we shall
resort to the Legislature of Virginia
to repeal the section of Virginia Milk
and Cream Act which authorizes the
commission to fix retail prices"
Officials Clash at Hearing.
Yesterdays hearing was marked
by frequent clashes between Will
liam G. Sullivan, Agriculture De-
partment milk economist, testify
ing for the Milk Consumers Com
mittee, and Maj. E. H. Gibson, rep
reSenting the Virginia Attorney
Generals Office as counsel for the
Milk Commission.
When Mr. Sullivan declared that
abolishing fixed milk prices would
attract new firms into the area and
that their first step would be to
gain patronage by charging less,
Mai Gibson asked:
would that not be a price WARP"
Mr.. Sullivan retorted:
II would call that good, healthy,
sound American competition"
Maj. Gibson later told the econo-
mist that he was trying to make
it appear" that the Milk Commis-
sion is regulating prices only for
the benefit of distributors.
Says Virginia Fosters Monopoly.
Mr.. Sullivan said this apparently
was the commissions aim. but that
in fact only Washington firms and
not Virginia dairies benefited. He
reported that a recent question
naire survey in Alexandria showed
so per cent of those answering buy
milk in Washington regularly or
frequently to avail themselves of
lower prices across the river.
A monopoly" is sustained by the
Milk Commission in the Virginia
area, he charged.
In reply to commission question
ing, evidence was produced intended
to show that cheap Washington milk
has as high food value as more ex-
pensive milk
DR.. George P. Sanders of Airing
ton, an Agriculture Department
chemist. told how on February II he
ran butterfat tests on milk samples.
Results of Chemists Tests.
Milk sold by large District gro
cery chain at 10 cents for two quarts
showed 405 per cent butterfat. he
said. Milk delivered in Arlington
by a well-known Washington dairy
at IA cents per quart showed 3,95
per cent butterfat.
The Consumers Committee had
sought unsuccessfully to have an Of
fetal representative of the Arlington
County Board attend the hearings.
When its request was refused on the
grounds that the board had no Of
fetal authority for such participa-
ton. the committee made a further
study and reported it found ample
statutory authority for the naming
of representative.
The committee also pointed out
that in similar hearings involving
the public interest the board has
named an official representative
The group cited as an example the
naming of a representative to par
ticipate in a 1888 hearing before
the Interstate Commerce Commits
sion on bus rates.
Defense of existing regulations
yesterday took the form of frequent
cross-examination by the attorney
for three Virginia dairies, David
Greer, who SAID he was brought
from Boston because of his special
lied experience since 1888 in argu-
ing milk controversies before State
and Federal commissions. At sew
eral points he questioned accuracy
of facts advanced by the Consum-