Evening star., 1953-11-01
Fair I rode-
District Seen as Moior Toreet Of Those
Who Seek to Place Floors Under Prices
By Jock Jonas

The battle over fair trade is far
from ended. despite. the Supreme
Courts decision not to review a
Louisiana case which upheld the
fair-trade principle.
Fair traders, recognizing that
their position is anything but firm,
are preparing to push the advan-
tage won in the courts decision by
Tightening existing laws and by
pressing for laws in the few remain
ing places where none exist. OPP
ponentS say the courts decision was
a minor victory and that the issue
will be Joined in the courts again.
A fertile field for another skirmish
is the District Of Columbia, which
has no fair-trade law, but which is
sandwiched between two States
with such laws.
Fair trade. simply, is the princi-
pie which permits a manufacturer
to enforce minimum price on the
product he makes. If he decides
that an electric mixer, for example,
ought to sell for $40, then everybody
who sells the mixer in a fair-trade
State must charge at least $40 for it.
II a dealer decides to cut the price
to $40. he is not breaking any Grim
1nal law, but the manufacturer can
go to court and get an injunction
against the dealer to make him stop
selling at the lower price, and can
sue for damages.
One Dealer Provision
Under most fair-trade laws. II
one dealer in the State signs an
agreement to observe the manufac-
turer'S price, all dealers in that
State must abide by the agreement,
whether they sign it or not. It is, of
course, easy to get one signer on
almost any deal.
Encouraged by the Supreme
Courts decision not to review a
Federal courts ruling in the Iouisi-
ana case, the fair traders are likely
to exert pressure on Congress next
January for a fair trade law in the
District. Much Of the pressure is
likely to come from Virginia and
Maryland. Because fair-trade laws
exist in those States, dealers in
nearby areas are-theoretically, at
least-at a pricing disadvantage
with dealers in the District, who can
cut prices as much as they wish
without running afoul of fair-trade
law.
Actually, there has been a reluc-
tance on the part of manufacturers
to enforce provisions of the fair
trade laws in areas close to WASH
1ngton because of the obvious dis
advantage to dealers in those areas.
1851 Price Wars
But now. with a definite ruling on
the MCGUIRE act, their attitude may
Stiffen. The MCGUIRE act, up for
decision in the Louisiana case, is a
Federal law-passed in 1952-which
permits States to pass effective fair
trade laws. It overrode a 1851 Su-
preme Court decision to the effect
that fair-trade laws could not COM
pei those who did not sign agree
ments to abide by those agreements.
The 1851 decision led to drastic
price wars in some sections, most
notably among New York depart
ment stores. .. .-.
The "non-signer" clause has been
one of the chief bones of contention
in the fair;-trade argument. Op-
ponentS say it is unfair to bind a
dealer to an agreement signed by
some one else. Yet any fair-trade
law needs the non-signer clause to
make it effective.
Such law here also would mean
an end of discount houses which
sell nationally advertised products
at cut prices. These are particularly
active in. the electrical appliance
field.
Past attempts at District fair
trade law have failed. This is at
tributed to the stiff opposition
leveled by various organizations
here - both local and national,
groups. The opposition has been
more vocal in other areas. Lack Of