Je veux savoir à propos de…

3958

F E D E R A L R E G IS T E R , T h u r s d a y , A u g u s t 7, 1941

$2.59 to $2.79 per cwt. on or about July 17, 1936; to $2.94 per cwt. on or about July 30, 1936; to $3.14 per cwt. on or about August 3,1936; to $3.34 per cwt. on or about August 19,1936, after which the price was reduced to $3.19 per cwt on or about August 25, 1936; to $3.04 on or about October 5, 1936, which latter price
remained until after on or about Octo ber 17, on which date respondent re ceived the last of the tank cars ordered on or about July 6, 1936.
Such extensions of the time within which such shipments were made were accomplished by respondent as herein above alleged.
By this method, in this one instance alone, respondent induced and received the benefit of price discriminations giv ing it an advantage over its competitors of from 150 to 900 per cwt. on approxi mately 40 tank cars of corn syrup or on approximately 38,000 cwt., the advantage on a substantial number of such cars being 900 per cwt. All of which respond ents well knew.
P ar. 10. The effect of said discrimina tions in price, knowingly induced and knowingly received by respondent in the manner and form as hereinabove alleged, was substantially to lessen competition and tend to create a monopoly in some of said syrup manufacturers by causing respondent to purchase from them and not from their competitors the large re quirements of respondent for corn syrup;
and to lessen competition, tend to create a monopoly as well as to injure, destroy and prevent competition with respondent, who received the benefits of said discriminations by decreasing the cost to it o f one of the principal in gredients of its said products which may give respondent a price advantage in the sale of said products, or some of them, and confer upon respondent a financial power to further the sale o f its said products by advertising and other forms of non-price competition.
P ar. 11. Each of said corn syrup manu facturers, during all the times mentioned herein, continuously and regularly in formed respondent by mail, telephone and personal visits of salesmen and brokers of the price at which each of them respectively was offering for sale and selling such corn syrup to the trade generally, including respondents com petitors.
Respondent also knew from the same sources the terms of sale o f each of said manufacturers, particularly the trade practice of accepting orders from pur chasers for five or ten days after the an nouncement of a price increase and the
old and lower price for such syrup to be delivered within a stated period after the announcement, usually thirty days.
The quality of corn syrup, as manu factured by said syrup manufacturers, is subsantially the same, and candy manu facturers, including respondent and its competitors, purchase and use the corn syrup manufactured by each of said manufacturers interchangeably with the corn syrup manufactured by the others.
As a result, the price o f each of said manufacturers and their terms of sale are substantially the same. A ll of which respondent well knew.
Respondent has for many years and since June 19, 1936, employed a director of purchases who has had charge of all of the purchases of corn syrup made by respondent and whose duty it is to keep and who has kept accurately and cur rently informed of the prices and terms of sale of such syrup; and all of the pur chases of corn syrup herein referred to have been made by him or under his di rection and with his knowledge.
P a r . 12. The foregoing alleged acts of said respondent, E. J. Brach & Sons, while engaged in interstate commerce, in knowingly inducing and in knowingly re ceiving in the course of such commerce, since June 19, 1936, discriminations in price prohibited by section 2 a of the Clayton Act as amended by the Robinson-Patman Act, approved June 19, 1936
U.S.C. title 15, sec. 13, are in violation of section 2 f of said Act.
Wherefore, the premises considered, the Federal Trade Commission, on this 28th day of July, A. D. 1941, issues its complaint against said respondent.
NOTICE

Notice is hereby given you, E. J. Brach & Sons, a corporation, respondent herein, that the 5th day of September, A. D. 1941, at 2 oclock in the afternoon, is hereby fixed as the time, and the offices of the Federal Trade Commission in the City o f Washington, D. C., as the place, when and where a hearing will be had on the charges set forth in this complaint, at which time and place you will have the right, under said Act, to appear and show cause why an order should not be en tered by said Commission requiring you to cease and desist from the violations of the law charged in the complaint.
You are notified and required, on or before the twentieth day after service upon you of this complaint, to file with the Commission an answer to the com plaint. I f answer is filed and i f your appearance at the place and on the date above stated be not required, due notice
to that effect will be given you. The Rules of Practice adopted by the Com mission with respect to answers or failure to appear or answer Rule I X provide as follows:
In case of desire to contest the pro ceeding the respondent shall, within twenty 20 days from the service of the complaint, file with the Commission an answer to the complaint. Such answer shall contain a concise statement of the facts which constitute the ground of de fense. Respondent shall specifically ad mit or deny or explain each of the facts alleged in the complaint, unless respond ent is without knowledge, in which case respondent shall so state.
Failure o f the respondent to file an swer within the time above provided and failure to appear at the time and place fixed for hearing shall be deemed to authorize the Commission, without fur ther notice to respondent, to proceed in regular course on the charges set forth in the complaint.
I f respondent desires to waive hearing on the allegations of fact set forth in the complaint and not to contest the facts, the answer may consist of a statement that respondent admits all the material allegations of fact charged in the com plaint to be true. Respondent by such answer shall be deemed to have waived a hearing on the allegations of fact set forth in said complaint and to have au thorized the Commission, without fur ther evidence, or other intervening pro cedure, to find such facts to be true, and if in the judgment of the Commission such facts admitted constitute a viola tion of law or laws as charged in the complaint, to make and serve findings as to the facts and an order to cease and desist from such violations. Upon appli cation in writing made contemporane ously with the filing of such answer, the respondent, in the discretion of the Com mission, may be heard on brief, in oral argument, or both, solely on the question as to whether the facts so admitted con stitute the violation or violations of law charged in the complaint.
In witness whereof, the Federal Trade Commission has caused this, its com plaint, to be signed by its Secretary, and its official seal to be hereto affixed, at Washington, D. C., this 28th day of July, A. D. 1941.
By the Commission.
seal O t is B. J o h n s o n , Secretary.
F. R. Doc. 41-5759; Filed August 6, 1941;
11:25 a. m.