Reo Distillers, Inc.

Text (OCR of the scan at left; may contain errors)

IN THE MATTER OF REO DISTILLERS, INC.

COMPLAINT, FINDINGS, AND ORDER IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF SEC. II OF AN ACT OF CONGRESS APPROVED SEPT. 26, 1914, AND OF SEC. 3 OF TITLE I OF AN ACT OF CONGRESS APPROVED JUNE 16, 1933,1 Docket 2410. Complaint, May 24, 1935-Decision, Jan. ~8, 1931 Where a corporation engaged as re<!titler. and· wholesaler of spirituous liquors, in purchasing, rectifying, blending, and bottling whiskies, gins, and other such Ilquors, and in the making of gin, with a still which it used therefor, by redistUiation of purchased alcohol, not produced by lt, over juniper berries and other aromatics, and in selling its aforesaid various products to wholesalers and retailers ln other States and ln the District of Columbia, ln substantial competition with those engaged in the manufacture by distillation of whiskies, gins, and other spirituous beverages and in selling same in trade and commerce among the various States and In said District, and with those engaged 1n purchasing, rectifying, blending, and bottling such various beverages, and similarly selling same, and including among said com· petitors those who, as manufacturers and dist11Iers of whiskies, gins, and other such beverages sold by them by process of original and continuous distUiatlon from mash, wort, or wash, through continuous closed pipes and vessels until manufacture ls complete, truthfully use words "distillery," "dist11Ieries," "distillers," or "distilling" as a part of their corporate or trade names and on their stationery and advertising and on the labels of the bottles In which they sell and ship their said products, and those who, engaged In purchasing, rectifying, blending, bottling, and selling such various products, do not use aforesaid words as above set forth- Represented, through use of word ''Distliiers" In its corporate name, printed on Its stationery and advertising and on the labels attached to the bottles in which It sold and shipped its said products, and in various other ways to its customers, and furnished same with the means of representing to their vendees, both retaUers and ultimate consuming public, that it was a distlller and that the whiskies, gins, and other spirituous beverages contained in such bottles were by it made through process of distillation as aforesaid, notwithstanding fact it did not thus distill said various beverages, thus bottled, labeled, sold, and transported by It, through aforesaid process or original and continuous dlstlllatlon as above set forth, as long definitely understood !rom word "dlstlller" used in connection with llquor Industry and products thereof In the trade and by the ultimate purchasing public, and did not own, operate, or control any place or places where such beverages were made by process of dlst1IIatlon from mash, wort, or wnsh, and was not a distiller, for the purchase or the bottled liquors of which there is a preference on the part of a substantial portion of the purchasing public; With etrect or misleading and deceiving dealers and purchasing publlc Into tbe belie! that It was a distiller and that the whiskies, gins, and other spirituous 1 Count Two of the complaint, under the National Industrial Recovery Act, dismissed bY reason of decision tn .d.. L. A. Schechter Poultr11 Corp, v. U. 8., 2915 U. S. 4915. REO DISTILLERS, INC. 555 Complaint bevernges sold by it were by it made and distilled from mash, wort, or wash, as aforesaid, and of inducing dealers and such public, in such belief, to buy Its said whiskies, etc., bottled and sold by it, and of thereby diverting trade to it from its competitors who did not, by their corporate or trade names or in any other manner, mlsrepresen.t that they were manufacturers by dlst1llation from mash, wort, or wash of such products; to the substantial Injury of substantial competition in commerce: Held, That such acts and practices, under the conditions and circumstances set forth, were to the prejudice of the public and competitors and constituted unfair methods of competition.

Before Mr. John L. Hornor, trial examiner.

Mr. PGad B. Morehouse for the Commission.

Kessler & Kessler, of Newark, N.J., for respondent. Complaint Pursuant to the provisions of an Act of Congress approved September 26, 1914, entitled "An Act to create a Federal Trade Commission, to define its powers and duties, and for other purposes," the Federal Trade Commission, having reason to believe that Reo Distillers, Inc., a corporation, hereinafter referred to as respondent, has been and is using unfair methods of competition in commerce, as "commerce" is defined in said act, and in violation of the act of Congress approved June 16, 1933, known as the "National Industrial Recovery Act," and it appearing to the said Commission that a Proceeding by it in respect thereof would be in the public interest, hereby issues its complaint, stating its charges in that respect as follows:

Oownt 1 PARAGRAPH 1. Respondent is a corporation organized, existing, and doing business under the laws of the State of New Jersey, with its office and principal place of business in the city of Newark, in said State. It is now, and for more than one year last past has been, engaged in the business of a rectifier and wholesaler of liquors, purchasing, retifying, ·blending, and bottling whiskies, gins, and other spirituous beverages and selling the same at wholesale in constant course of trade and commerce between and among the various States of the United States and in the District of Columbia. In the course and conduct of its said business, it causes its said products when sold to be transported from its place of business aforesaid into and through various States of the United States to the purchasers thereof, consisting of wholesalers .and retailers, some located within the State of New Jersey and some located in other States of the United States and the District of Columbia. In the course and conduct of its busi- Complaint 24F. T. G.

ness as aforesaid respondent is now, and for more than one year last past has been, in substantial competition with other corporations and with individuals, partnerships, and firms engaged in the manufacture by distillation of whiskies, gins, and other spirituous beverages and in the sale thereof in trade and commerce between and among the vari· ous States of the United States and in the District of Columbia; and in the course and conduct of its business as aforesaid respondent is, and for more than one year last past has been, in substantial competition with other corporations, and with individuals, firms, and partnerships engaged in the business of purchasing, rectifying, blending, and bottling whiskies, gins, and other spiritous beverages and in the sale thereof in commerce between and among the various States of the United States and in the District of Columbia. PAR. 2. In the course and conduct of its business as aforesaid respondent has, upon its premises, a still which it uses in the production of gin by a process of rectification whereby alcohol, purchased but not produced by respondent, is redistilled over juniper berries and other aromatics. Such rectification of alcoholic spirits does not make or constitute respondent a distiller, as defined by Section 3247 of the Revised Statutes regulating Internal Revenue, nor as commonly understood by the public and the liquor industry. For a long period of time the word "distillers" when used in connection with the liquor industry and with the products thereof has had and still has a definite signfi· cance and meaning to the minds of wholesalers and retailers in such industry and to the ultimate purchasing public, to wit, the manufacturers of such liquors by the process of original and continuous distilla· tion from mash, wort, or wash, through continuous closed pipes and vessels until the manufacture thereof is complete, and a substantial portion of the purchasing public prefers to buy spirituous liquors bottled by the actual distillers and manufll('Cturers thereof. PAR. 3. In the course and conduct of its business as aforesaid, by the use of the word "Distillers" in its corporate name, printed on its stationery and on the labels attached to the bottles in which it sells and ships its said products, and in various other ways, respondent represents to its customers and furnishes them with the means of representing to their vendees, both retailers and the ultimate consuming public, that the whiskies, gins, and other spirituous beverages therein contained were by its manufactured through the process of distillation from mash, wort, or mash, as aforesaid, when, as a matter of fact respondent is not a distiller, does not distill the said whiskies, gins, or other spirituous beverages by it so bottled, labeled, sold, and transported, and does not own, operate, or control any place or places where REO DISTILLERS, INC. 557 554 Complaint such beverages are manufactured by the process of distillation :from rnash, wort, or wash.

PAR. 4. There are among the competitors of respondent engaged in the sale of spirituous beverages as mentioned in paragraph 1 hereof corporations, firms, partnerships, and individuals who manufacture and distill from mash, wort, or wash, as aforesaid, whiskies, gins and other spirituous beverages sold by them and who truthfully use the '''ords "distillery," "distilleries," "distillers," or "distilling" as a part of their corporate or trade names and on their stationery, and on the labels of the bottles in which they sell and ship such products. There are also among such competitors corporations, firms, partnerships, and ·individuals engaged in the business of purchasing, rectifying, blending, and bottling whiskies, gins, and other spirituous beverages "'ho do not use the words "distillery," "distilleries,', "distilling," or "distillers" as a part of their corporate or trade names, nor on their stationery, nor on the labels attached to the bottles in which they sell and ship their said products.

PAR. 5. Representation by respondent, as set forth in paragraph 3 hereof, is calculated to and has the capacity and tendency to and does n1mislead and deceive dealers and the purchasing public into the belief that the whiskies, gins, and other spirituous beverages sold by the respondent are manufactured and distilled by it from mash, wort, or wash, as aforesaid, and is calculated to and has the capacity and !tendency to and does induce dealers and the purchasing public, acting ln such belief, to purchase the whiskies, gins, and other spirituous beverages bottled and sold by the respondent, thereby diverting trade to respondent from its competitors who do not by their corporate or trade name or in any other manner misrepresent that they are manufacturers by distillation :from mash, wort, or wash of whiskies, gins, and other spirituous beverages, and thereby respondent does substantial injury to substantial competition in interstate commerce. PAR. 6. The acts and things above alleged to have been done and the :false representations alleged to have been made by respondent are to the prejudice of the public and the competitors of respondent and constitute unfair methods of competition in commerce within the intent and meaning of Section 5 of an Act of Congress entitled "An Act to create a Federal Trade Commission, to define its powers and duties, and :for other purposes," approved September 26, 1914. Oownt ~ PARAGRAPH 1. Respondent is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under the laws of the State of New Jersey, with its 1467~6m--39--vol.24----38 Complaint 24F.T.C.

Qffi.ce and principal place of business in the city of Newark, in said State. It is now, and for more than one year last past has been, engaged in the business of a rectifier and wholesaler of liquors, purchasing, rectifying, blending, and bottling whiskies, gins, and other spirituous beverages and selling the same at wholesale in constant course of trade and commerce between and among the various States of the United States and in the District of Columbia. In the course and conduct of its said business, it causes its said products when sold to be transported from its place of business aforesaid into and thro1,1gh various States of the United States to the purchasers thereof, consisting of wholesalers and retailers, some located within the State of New Jersey and some located in other States of the United States and the District of Columbia. In the course and conduct of its business as aforesaid respondent is now, and for more than one year last past has been, in substantial competition with other corporations and with individuals, partnerships, and firms engaged in the manufacture by distillation of whiskies, gins, and other spiritu· QUS beverages and in the sale thereof in trade and commerce between and among the various States of the United States and in the Dis· trict of Columbia; and in the course and conduct of its business as aforesaid respondent is, and for more than one year last past has been, in substantial competition with other corporations, and with individuals, firms, and partnerships engaged in the business of pur· chasing, rectifying, blending, and bottling whiskies, gins, and other spirituous beverages and in the sale thereof in commerce between and among the various States of the United States and in the District of Columbia.

PARs. 2, 3, 4, and 5. As grounds for these paragraphs of this com· plaint, the Federal Trade Commission relies upon the matters and things set out in paragraphs 2, 3, 4, and 5 of count 1 of this complaint to the same extent as though the several allegations thereof were set out at length and in separate paragraphs herein, and the said paragraphs 2, 3, 4, and 5 of count 1 of this complaint are incor· porated herein by reference and adopted as the allegations of para· graphs 2, 3, 4, and 5, respectively, of this count, and are hereby charged as fully and as completely as though the several averments of the said paragraphs of count 1 were separately set out and repeated verbatim.

PAR. 6. Under and pursuant to Title I of the National Industrial Recovery Act, approved June 16, 1933 (48 Stat. 195 C. 90), the President of the United States, by Executive Order No. 6182, of June 26, 1933, as supplemented by Executive Order No. 6207, of July 21, 1933, and Executive Order No. 6345, of October 20, 1933, delegated REO DISTILLERS, INC. 559 Complaint to H. A. ·wallace as Secretary of Agriculture certain of the powers vested in the President of the United States by the aforesaid act. Under and pursuant to the delegation of such powers, the said Secretary of Agriculture pursuant to Section 3 (d) of the act and Executive orders under the act, upon his own motion presented a Code of Fair Competition for the Distilled Spirits Rectifying Industry after due notice and opportunity for hearing in connection therewith had been afforded interested parties, including respondent, in accordance with Title I of the National Industrial Recovery Act and applicable regulations issued,.thereunder, to the President of the United States who approved the same on the 9th day of December 1933, thereby constituting the said code a Code of Fair Competition "Within the meaning of the said National Industrial Recovery Act, for the regulation of the aforesaid industry. · In his written report to the President, the said Secretary of Agriculture made, among others, the following findings with respect to the said Code in the following words, to wit: That said Code wlll tend to etrectuate the declared policy of Title I of the National Industrial Recovery Act as set forth in Section 1 of said Act In that the terms and provl~lons of such Code tend: (a) to remove obstructions to the free flow of foreign commerce, which tend to diminisl1 the amount thereof; (b) to provide for the general welfare by promoting the organization of industry for the purposes of cooperat!Ye action among trade groups; (c) to eliminate unfair competitive practices; (d) to promote the fullest po!lsible utilization of tbe present productive capacity of industries; (e) to avoid unllue restriction of production (except as may be temporarily required) ; (f) to Increase the eonsumptlon of Industrial and agricultural products by Increasing purchasing Power; and (g) otherwise to rehabilitate industry. Dy his approval of the said Code on Dl'cember 9, 1933, the President of the United States, pursuant to the authority vested in him by Title I of the National Industrial Recovery Act aforesaid, made and issued his certain written Executive Order, wherein he adopted and approved the report, recommendations and findings of the said Secretary of Agriculture, and ordered that the said Code of Fair Competition be, and the same thereby wasapproved, and by virtue of the National Industrial Recovery Act aforesaid, the following provision of Article V of said Code became and still is one of the standards of !air competition for the Distilled Spirits Rectifying Industry and ls binding upon every member of said Industry and this respondent; The following practlc~s constitute unfulr methods of competition and shall not be engaged Jn by any member of the Industry: Section 1. False .Ad"ertl~lng-To puhllsh or disseminate In any manner any false ad"ertlsement of any rectified product. Any advertisement shall be deemed to be !nlse If It Is untrue in any particular, or if directly or by fllnblgulty, omission or Inference It tends to create. a misleading Impression. 560 FEDERAL TRADE COI\IIIIISSION DECISIONS Flnulngs 24F.T.C.

PAR, 7. The use by respondent of the word "Distillers'' in its corporate name, printed upon its stationery and on the labels attached to the bottles in which it sells and ships such products and in various other ways, constitutes false advertising within the meaning of the aforesaid provisions of said Article V and tends to and does create the misleading impression that respondent is engaged in the business of distilling spirits from mash, wort, or wash, that the spirituous beverages by it so sold and transported have been prepared and bottled by the original distillers thereof, and that the whiskies, gins, and other spirituous beverages sold by respondent have been manufactured and distilled by it from mash, wort, or wash as aforesaid, all contrary to the provisions of Section 1, Article V, of the Code afores.aid.

PAR. 8. The above alleged methods, acts, and practices of the respondent are and have been in violation of the standard of fair competition for the Distilled Spirits Rectifying Industry of the United States. Such violation of such standard in the aforesaid transactions in interstate commerce and other transactions which affect in· terstate commerce in the manner set forth in paragraph 5 of count 1 hereof, are in violation of Section 3 of Title I of the National Industrial Hecowry Act and they are unfair methods of competition in commerce within the meaning of the Federal Trade Commission Act as amended.

REPORT, FINDINGS AS TO THE FACTS, AND ORDER Pursuant to the provisions of an Act of Congress approved September 2G, 1914, entitled, "An Act to create a Federal Trade Com· mission, to define its powers and duties, and for other purposes," the Federal Trade Commission, on May 24, 1935, issued and served its complaint in this proceeding upon respondent, Reo Distillers, Inc., charging it with the use of unfair methods of competition in commerce, in violation of the provisions of said act. After the issuance of said complaint and the filing of respondent's answer thereto, testimony and other evidence in support of the allegations of said complaint were introduced by PGad n. Morehouse, attorney for the Commission, before John L. Hornor, an examiner of the Commission theretofore duly designated by it, and no testimony was offered by respondent in opposition to the allegations of the complaint; and said testimony and other evidence were duly recorded and ·filed in the office of the Commission. Thereafter the proceeding regularly came on for final hearing b£>fore the Commission on the said com· REO DISTILLERS, INC. 561 Findings plaint the answer thereto, testimony and other evidence, briefs in support of the complaint (brief in opposition thereto and oral argutnents of counsel having been waived); and the Commission having duly considered the same, and being now fully advised in the premises, finds that this proceeding is in the interest of the public, and :makes this its findings as to the facts and its conclusion drawn therefrom:

FINDINGS AS TO THE FACTS PARAGRAPH 1. Respondent is a corporation, organized and existing Under the laws of the State of New Jersey, with its office and principal place of business at 277 Jellif Avenue in the city of Newark in said State, where it engaged in the business of a rectifier and wholesaler of spirituous liquors from early in the year 1934 until about .August 14, 1935. Originally incorporated, prior to the repeal of Prohibition, under the name "Reo Chemical Company," it changed to its present corporate name by amendment of its charter, in December 1933.

Its business consisted of purchasing, rectifying, blending, and bottling whiskies, gins, and other spirituous liquors and in the sale thereof in constant course of trade and corrunerce between and among the various States of the United States and in the District of Columbia, doing a business amounting to approximately $800,000 in sales annually. It had the kind of plant and equipment ordinarily incident to that type of business, located in a three-story brick building. The first floor consisted of offices, shipping room, and receiving room; the second floor was the bottling dE>partment; and on the third floor 'Was located the mixing room, compounding room, receiving room, laboratory, and a gin still, which still will be hereinafter more fully described.

In the course and conduct of its said business, it caused its said Products, when sold, to be transported from its place of business as aforesaid into and through various States of the United States to ~he purchasers thereof, consisting of wholesalers and retailers located ln other States of the United States and the District of Columbia. In the course and conduct of its business as aforesaid, respondent ~as in substantial competition with other corporations and with Individuals, partnerships, and firms engaged in the manufacture by ~istillation of whiskies, gins, and other spirituous beverages and ln the sale thereof in trade and commerce between and among the Various States of the United States and in the District of Columbia; and in the course and conduct of its business as aforesaid, respondent Findings 24F.T.C.

was in substantial competition with other corporations, and with individuals, firms, and partnerships engaged in the business of purchasing, rectifying, blending, and bottling whiskies, gins, and other spirituous beverages and in the sale thereof in commerce between. and among the various States of the United States nnd in the District of Columbia.

PAR. 2. In the course and conduct of its business as aforesaid, respondent had upon its said premises a still which it used in the production of gin by a process of rectification, whereby alcohol purchased but not produced by respondent was redistilled over juniper berries and other aromatics. Such rectification of alcoholic spirits does not make or constitute respondent a distiller as defined by Section 3247 of the Revised Statutes regulating Internal Revenue, nor as commonly understood by the public or the liquor industry. For a long period of time the word "distiller," when used in connection with the liquor industry and the products thereof, has had and still has a definite significance and meaning to the minds of the wholesalers and retailers in such industry and to the ultimate purchasing public, to wit: the manufacturers of such liquors by the process of original and continuous distillation from mash, wort, or wash, through continuous closed pipes and vessels until the manufacture thereof is completed.

PAR. 3. The attorney for the Commission called a large number of witnesses, ten being members of the trade and twenty-two being members of the purchasing public, and with few exceptions the Commission's witnesses testified that the word "distillers," or similar words such as "distilling,'' "distilleries," etc., indicate the initial distilling process of producing spirituous and alcoholic liquors from fermented grain mash, etc., the manufacturer thereof or the place of distillation of spirituous and alcoholic liquors. The greater number of these witnesses testified that the use of such words would induce them or did induce them to purchase the products of the concern using such words in their corporate name or on the label of the bottle containing the product, in the belief that a distiller's product would be more uniform and up to certain specifications, and a manufacturer's name should mean something. They testified that they preferred buying in as direct a manner as is practical and considered distillers as having more responsibility than a rectifier or bottler of spirituous liquors. It was testified that the use of the word "Distillers" in the corporate name of the respondent would indicate to them that the respondent was the actual distiller of the product and they would give preference in purchasing a product which bore a label containing such REO DISTILLERS, INC. 563 554 Findings corporate name in competition with a product bearing a label which ~id not contain the word "distiller" or any word indicating a distill- Ing process in its corporate name or otherwise. The Commission finds that there is a substantial portion of the Purchasing public which prefers to buy spirituous liquors prepared and bottled by distillers.

PAR, 4. In the course and conduct of its business as aforesaid, by the use of the word "Distillers'' in its corporate name, printed on its ~tationery and advertising, and on the labels attached to the bottles In which it sold and shipped its said products, and in various other Ways, respondent represented to its customers and furnished them With the means of representing to their vendees, both retailers and the ultimate consuming public, that respondent was a distiller and that the whiskies, gins, and other spirituous beverages therein contained Were by it manufactured through the process of distillation from lllash, wort, or wash, as aforesaid, when, as a matter of fact, respondent was not a distiller, does not now and never did distill the said Whiskies, gins, and other spirituous beverages by it so bottled, labeled, sold and transported, and merely by the use of a still operated by it as aforesaid in the rectification of alcoholic spirits by redistillation over juniper berries and other aromatics did not distill the whiskies, gins, and other spirituous beverages by it so bottled, labeled, sold, and transported in the sense in which the word "distilled'' is commonly accepted and understood by those engaged in the liquor trade and by the public. Respondent does not now and never did own, operate or control any place or places where such beverages were manufactured by the process of distillation from mash, wort, or wash. • PAR. 5. There were among the competitors of respondent engaged ~n the sale of spirituous beverages, as mentioned in paragraph 1 ereof, corporations, firms, partnerships and individuals who manu- ~~ctured and distilled from mash, wort, or wash, as aforesaid, whis- Ies, gins, and other spirituous beverages sold by them and who truthfully used the words "distillery " "distilleries " "distillers " or "distilling" as a part of their corporate' or trade names' and on 'their stationery and advertising, and on the labels of the bottles in which they sold and shipped such products. There were also among such competitors, corporations, firms, partnerships, and individuals engaged in the business of purchasing, rectifying, blending, bottling, and selling whiskies, gins, and other spirituous beverages, who did not use the words "distillery," "distilleries," "distilling," or "distill- ·ers,'' as a part of their corporate or trade names, nor on their sta- 564 FEDERAL TRADE COl\IMISSION DECISIONS Findings 24F. T. C.

tionery or advertising, nor on the labels attached to the bottles in which they sold and shipped their said products. PAR. 6. Representation by respondent, as set forth in paragraph 3 hereof, was calculated to and had the capacity and tendency to and did mislead and deceive dealers and the purchasing public into the beliefs that respondent was a distiller and that the whiskies, gins, and other spirituous beverages sold by the respondent were manufac· tured and distilled by it from mash, wort, or wash, as aforesaid, and was calculated to and had the capacity and tendency to and did induce dealers and the purchasing public in such beliefs, to purchase the whiskies, gins, and other spirituous beverages bottled and sold by the respondent, thereby diverting trade to respondent from its com· petitors who did not by their corporate or trade names or in any other manner misrepresent that they were manufacturers by distilla· tion from mash, wort, or wash, of such products, and thereby respond· ent did substantial injury to substantial competition in interstate commerce.

On August 14, 1935, respondent's complete equipment was seized and confiscated by the United States on an income tax levy, and sold at auction in October 1935. On :May 5, 1936, two of the respondents corporate officers were sentenced by a Federal Court to terms in the United States Northeastern Penitentiary at Lewisburg, Pa., and re· spondent has not engaged in this business since the aforesaid seizure. Respondent's corporate charter, however, is still existent, and the Commission can have no assurance that in the absence of a prohibi· tive. order this respondent may not at some future time renew the violations of law herein charged.

PAR. 7. The complaint herein was issued May 24, 1935 (just prior to the decision of the United States Supreme Court in the case of A. L.A. Schechter Poultry Corporation, et al., v. U.S., 295 U.S. 495), and was in two counts. Count 2 charged violation of Section 3 of Title I of the National Industrial Recovery Act, which was invali· dated by the aforesaid decision. For that reason the Commission is dismissing this complaint as to count 2 thereof. PAR. 8. Decause of regulations issued under the Federal Alcohol Administration Act approved August 29, 1935 ( 49 Stat. 977), which regulations became effective as of August 15, 1936, providing that rectifiers who redistill purchased alcohol over juniper berries and other aromatics may label such resulting product "distilled gin," and requiring that the labels state who distilled it, the Commission has excepted gins produced by respondent by redistillation of alcohol over juniper berries and other aromatics from the prohibitions of its order. REO DISTILLERS, INC. 565 554 Order CONCLUSION The aforesaid acts and practices of the said respondent, under the conditions and circumstances hereinbefore described, were to the Prejudice of the public and respondent's competitors, and were unfair n:ethods of competition in interstate commerce, constituting a violabon of an Act of Congress approved September 26, 1914, entitled "An Act to create a Federal Trade Commission, to define its powers and duties, and for other purposes."

ORDER TO CEASE AND DESIST This proceeding having been heard by the Federal Trade Com- :rnission upon the complaint of the Commission, the answer of respondent, testimony and other evidence taken before John L. Hornor, ~n examiner of the Commission theretofore duly designated by it, In support of the allegations of said complaint-no testimony having been, offered in opposition thereto-brief filed herein by PGad B. ~Iorehouse, counsel for the Commission (counsel for respondent hav- I~g failed to file brief or request oral argument) ; and the Commis- Sion having made its findings as to the facts and its conclusion that Said respondent has violated the provisions of an Act of Congress approved September 26, 1914, entitled "An Act to create a Federal Trade Commission, to define its powers and duties, and for other Purposes."

It is ordered, That the respondent, Reo Distillers, Inc., its officers, representatives, agents, and employees, in connection with the sale, offering for sale, and distribution in interstate commerce or in the District of Columbia, of whiskiesr gins, and all other spirituous bevt>rages, except gins produced by it through a process of rectification '~·hereby alcohol purchased but not produced by respondent is redistilled over juniper berries and other aromatics, do cease and desist from:

Representing, through the use of the word "Distillers" in its cor- Porate name, on its stationery, advertising or on the labels attached to the bottles in which it sells and ships said products, or in any other way by word or words of like import, (a) That it is a distiller of_ whiskies, gins, or any other spirituous beverages; (b) that the said whiskies, gins, or other spirituous beverages were by it manufactured through the process of distillation; or (c) that it owns, ?Perates, or controls a place or places where any such products are by It :manufactured by a process of original and continuous distillation from mash, wort, or wash, through continuous closed pipes and ves- 566 FEDERAL TRADE CO"'-Il\IISSION DECISIONS Order 24F. T. C.

sels until the manufacture thereof is completed, unless and until respondent shall actually own, operate, or control such a place or places.

. l t ia further ordered, That the said complaint be, and the same hereby is, dismissed as to count 2 thereof. It ia further ordered, That the said respondent, within 60 days from and after the date of the service upon it of this order, shall file with the Commission a report or reports in writing, setting forth in detail the manner and form in which it is complying and has complied with the order to cease and desist hereinabove set forth. OSTRUCON DISTILLED PRODUCTS CO., INC. 567 Syllabus