Aruow Distilleries, Inc

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

IN THE !tfATTER OF ARROW DISTILLERIES, INC.

CO~IPLAINT, FINDINGS, AND ORDER IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF SEC. rl OF AN ACT OF CONGRESS APPROVED SEPT. 26, 1014 Docket 2491. Complaint, June 7, 1935-Decision, Oct. 20, 1997 Where a corporation engaged in the distilled spirits rectifying industry, in pur· chasing, rectifying, blending, and bottling various kinds of gin, rock and rye, and a wide variety of cordials or liqueurs, and in producing gin with a still used tllerefor, by redistlllation of purchased alcohol, not produced bY it, over juniper berries and other aromatics, and in use for experimental purposes, in connection with production of cordials, of two small Rtills of five-gallon capacity or less, and in sale of Its aforesaid various products chiefly to wholesalers and State Liquor Commissions, In other States and In District of Columbia, in substantial competition with those engaged in manufacture by true distillation of various kinds of alcoholic beverages from mash, wort, or wash, and in selling same in trade and commerce among the various States and In suld District, and with those engaged In purchasing, rectifying, blending, and bottling cordials, gins, and other al· cohollc beverages in rectifying plants and under rectifier's permits, and In sale thereof as aforesaid, and Including among said competitors those who, as manufacturers and dlstlllers from mush, wort, or wash of whiskies, gins, and other alcoholic beverages sold by them, truthfully used words "distlllery," "distilleries," "dlstllllng," or "distillers" as a part of their corporate or trade names and on their stationery, catalogs, and advertlslug and on the labels of the bottles in which they sell and ship such products and do not misrepresent that they have had one hundred years' experience In making quality liquors, and those who, engaged in purchasing, rectifying, blC'ndlng, and bottling cordials, gins, and other alcohollc beverages in rcc· tlfylng plants as above SC't forth, do not ure such words as aforesaid, nor misrepresent, as above stated, their years of experien<:e in the making of quality liquors- Represented, through use ot word "Distilleries" In its corporate name, printed on its stationery, catalogs and advertising, and on the labels attached to the bottles in which it sold and shlppl'd Its said products, and through printed representations, that it had bad "100 years experience making quality Uqucurs," to its customers, and furnlslled same wlth means of reprcseuting to their vendees, both retailers and ultimate consuming public, that it was n distiller of cordials, gins, and other alcoholic beverages and hnd been making quality Ilqueurs for one hundred years, notwithstanding fact it did not own, operate or control any dlstlllery or place where any alcoholic beverages are made by process of dlst1llatlon from mash, wort, or wash by original and continuous distillation therefrom, through continuous closed pipes and vessels until manufacture is complete, a~ long understood rroill word "dlstllleries" when used In connection with Industry in question and products thereof by trade and ultimate purchasing public, had not had one hundred years' experience, and was not, either under the Internal Revenue laws or as commonly understood, a distiller, for the spirituous bottled ARROW DISTILLERIES, INC. 1169 1168 Complaint liquors of which there is a preference on the part of a substantial portion of the purchasing public ;

With effect of misleading and deceiving dealers and purchasing public into belief that the cordials, gins, and other alcoholic beverages sold by it were by it made or distilled from mash, wort or wash by one continuous process, and of inducing dealers and purchasing public, acting in such beliefs, to buy Its said cordials, gins and other alcoholic beverages, rectified and bottled by it, and of thereby diverting trade to It from its competitors who do not, by their corporate or trade name or in any other way, misrepresent the extent of their past experience or that they are Iilanufacturers by distillation~ from mash, wort, or wash of whiskies, gins, or other such beverages; to the substantial injury of substantial competition in commerce: lleld, That such acts and practices were to the prejudice of the public and competitors and constituted unfair methods of competition. Defore 11/r. J olvn L. ll 01'1lJJr, trial examiner. !l!r. PGad B. Morehouse for the Commission. Mr. R. E. Joyce, of 'Vashington, D. C., and Dann & Atlas, of Detroit, Mich., 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 Arrow Distilleries, Inc., a corporation, hereinafter referred to as respondent, has been and is using unfair methods of competition in commerce, as "commerce" is definad in said 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:

P ARAGRAPII 1. Respondent is a corporation organized September 15, 1933, existing and doing business under the laws of the State of Michigan, with its office and principal place of business in the city of Detroit, in said State. It is now, and for more than one year last Past has been, engaged in the business of purchasing, rectifying, ?lending, and bottling whiskies, gins, and other alcoholic beverages ~n n. rectifying plant under a rectifier's permit, and in the sale thereof 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 distributors, some located within the State of Michigan and some located 1170 FEDERAL TRADE COMl\IISSION DECISIONS Complaint 2:5 F. T. C. 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 true distillation of whiskies, gins, and other alcoholic beverages from mash, wort, or wash, and in 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 is, and for moro 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 alcoholic beverages in rectifying plants under rectifiers' permits ancl in the sale thereof in commerce between and among the various States of the United States and in the District of Columbia.

r All. 2. Upon the premises of respondent's place of business aforesaid there is a st1ill for use in the production of gins by the 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 constituto respondent a distillery or a distiller, as defined by Section 32-!7 of the Hevised Statutes regulating Intemal Hevcnue, nor as commonly understood by the public and. the liquor industry. For a long period of time the word "distilleries" when used in connection with the liquor industry uml with the products thereof has had and still has a definite significance and meaning to the minds of wholesalers und retailers in !ouch imlustry ancl to the ultimate purchasing public, to wit, places where alcoholic liquors are produced by an original and continuous distillation from mash, wort, or wash, through continuous closed pip<>s and vc~sel:; until the manufacture thereof is complete, and a substantial portion of the purchasing public prefers to Luy spirituous liquors l)ottled and prepared by the actual uistillers thereof.

PAn. 3. In the course and conduct of its business us aforesaid by printed rrpresentations that it has had "100 y<>ars experience making quality liqueurs'' and by the use of the wonl "Distilleries'' in its corporate name, printed on its stationery, catalogs, u1h·ertising, and on the lal)('ls attacht•<l to the bottles in which it sells and ships its snitl pro<luds, and in various other ways, respondent represents to its customers and furni~hes them with the means of representing to tlJeir vemlees, Loth retailers and the ultimate cmbuming public, that ARROW DISTILLERIES, INC. 1171 1168 Complaint the said whiskies, gins, and other alcoholic beverages therein contained were by it manufactured through the process of distillation from mash, wort, or wash, when, as a matter of fact, respondent is not a distiller, does not distill the said whiskies, gins, and other alcoholic 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 re-distillation over juniper berries and other aromatics, does not distili the whiskies, gins, and other alcoholic beverages by it so bottled, labeled, sold, and transported in the sense in 'which the word "distilleries" is commonly accepted and understood by those engaged in the liquor trade and the public. Respondent does not own, operate, or control any place or places where alcoholic Leverages are manufactured by a process of original and continuous distillation from mash, wort, or wash. Respondent has not had 100 Years experience making quality liqueurs.

PAn. 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 manufactme and distill from mash, wort or wash, whiskies, gins, and other alcoholic bevernges sold by them and who truthfully use the words "distillery," "distilleries," "distillers," or "distilling" as a part of their corporate or tralle n::unes and on their stationery, catalogs, ad- Vertising, and on the labels of the bottles in which they sell and ship such products, and 'dw do not misrepresent that they have had 100 )'ears experience in making quality liqueurs. There are also among such competitors corporations, firms, partnerships, and individuals engaged in the business of purchasin~, rectifying, blending, and bottlin~ whiskies, gins and other alcoholic beverages in rectifying plants Under rectifiers' permits who do not use the words "distillery," "distilleries," "tlist illing," or "distillers" as a part of their corporate or trade names, nor on their stationery, catalogs, advertising, nor on the labels attachell to the bottles in which they sell and ship their said Products, and who do not misrepresent that they have had 100 years experience making quality liqueurs.

PAn. 5. The representations by respondent, as set forth in paragraph 3 h!.'reof, are calculated to and have a capacity and tendency to and do misiPad and deceive dealers and the purchasing public into the })('lief that the whiskies, gins, and other alcoholic beverages sold by the rPspontl<.>nt or manufactured or distilled by it from mash, wort, or Wash by one continuous process and are calculated to aiel have the Capacity and tPmlency to and do induce dealers anu the purchasing Public, acting in such beliefs, to purchase the whiskies, gins and other alcoholic beverages rectifieu anu bottled by the respondent, thereby 1172 FEDERAL TRADE COl\Il\IISSION DECISIONS Findings 23F. T. C.

diverting trade to respondent from its competitors who do not by their corporate or trade name or in any other manner misrepresent the extent of their past experience or that they are manufacturers by distillation from mash, wort, or wash of whiskies, gins, or other alcoholic beverages, and thereby respondent does substantial injury to substantial competition in interstate commerce. PAn. 6. The acts and things above alleged to have been done and the false representations aTieged 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. REPORT, FINDINGS AS TO THE FACTs, AND ORDER Pursuant to the provisions of an Act of Congress approved SeptPmber 26, 1914, entitled "An Act to create a Federal Trade Commission, to define its powers and duties, and for other purposest the Federal Trade Commission on June 7, 1935, issued, and on June l 0, 1935, served its complaint in this proceeding upon the respondent, Arrow Distilleries, Inc., charging it with the use of unfair methods of competition in commerce in violation of the provisions of said net. After the issuance of said complaint and the filing of respond- £'nt's answer thereto, testimony and other evidence in support of the allegations of said complaint were introduced by PGad B. Morehouse, attorney for the Commission, before John L. Hornor, an ex:aminer of the Commission theretofore duly designated by it, and in opposition to the allegations of the complaint by R. E. Joyce and Saul A. Dann, attorneys for respondent; 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 }waring before the Commission on the said complaint, the answer thereto, testimony, other evidence, and brief in support of the complaint, no briefs in opposition thereto having been filed and no oral arguments having been made; and the Commission having duly ('Onsidcred the same, and being now fully advist•d in the premisest 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 Tile FACTS PARAGR.\PII 1. Respondent is a corporation organized Septc111ber 15, 1933, under the laws of the State of 1\Iichigan, with its principal ARROW DISTILLERIES, INC. 1173 1168 Findings office and place of. business at 3539 Concord Avenue, in the city of ~etroit in said State. It was incorporatetl with an authorizetl cap- Ital stock of $175,000, and ever since a date shortly after its incorporation has been antl now is engagetl in the distilled spirits rectify- ~ng intlustry under the necessary permits from the Unitell States, 111 the business of purchasing, rectifying, blending, and bottling Various kintls of gin, rock and rye, and a wide variety of cordials of liqueurs such as Kuemmel, Triple Sec, Creme de Menthe, Creme de Cacao, Cocktails, Tom Collins, Greek Liqueurs, Polish Liqueurs, 'rom antl Jerry, antl other alcoholic beverages, in a rectifying plant, and in the sale thereof in constant course of trade and commerce between and among the various States of the United States and in the D.istrict of Columbia. While it has some retail accounts, it sells ~hiefly to wholesalers and State Liquor Commissions in States hav- 111g liquor monopolies. As of October 1, 1936, it had sold approxi- Inately $1,575,000 worth of spirituous beverages. 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 some thirty-one States of the United St.ates, to the purchasers thereof, consisting of wholesalers antl reb"nlers located in other States of the United States and the District of Columbia.

. In the course nnd conduct of its business as aforesaid, respondent Is now, and for more than one year last past has been, in substantial co~npetition with other corporations and 'with individuals, partner- ~lups, and firms engaged in the manufacture by true distillation of ~'arious kinds of alcoholic beverugcs from mash, wort, or wash, 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., respontl- <>nt is, and. for more than one year last past has been, in substantial competition with other corporations and with individuals, firms, ~nd l~artnerships e1~gaged. the ~usiness of purchasing> rectifying, jr: . lendmg, and bottllllg conbals, gms, and other alcohohc Leverages ~ 11 rectifying plants under rectifiers' permits, and. in the sale thereof ~l commerce behwcn and among the various States of the United tntes and in the District of Columbia.

l' PAn. 2. Prior to August 15, 1936, when the regulations of the ; ederal Alcoholic Administration of the Treasury Department Leca_rne eil'ecti,·e under tlte Act of August 29, 1935, 40 Stat. 977, certalll cordials (synonomolls with liqueurs) could be and were labeled. ~ld r~ferred. to in the trad.e ~s "distilled." products. Thereaf.te~·, that epar tment would. not permit such products to be labeled. "distilled.." FEDERAL TRADE COl\Il\IISSION DECISIONS 1174 Findings 25 F. T. C. The Commission takes notice of Hegulation No. 5, Article 2, of the aforesaid regulations entitled "Standards of Identity for Distilled Spirits," Class Six, "Cordials and Liqueurs," which reads as follows: (a) Cordials or Liqnems are products obtained by mixing or redistilling 11eutrul spirits, brandy, g-in, or other distii!Pd spirits with or over fruits, flowers, plants, or pure julePs therefrom, or other natural flayoring materials, or with extruds derived from infusions, percolations, or maceration of such materials, and to whi(·h sug-ar or dextrose or l>oth I1ave Ul'£'11 added In an amount not less than 2%% by weight of the finh;hed pro<luct. Synthetic or imitation flavoring materials shall not be inclu<led. (b) "Sloe gin" is a cordial or liqueur with the main characteristic flavoring derived from sloe b('rri('S.

(c) Cor<llals and liqueurs shall not be deslgnat('d as "distilled" or "conwound." The evidence of record shows that in the trade cordials are pro· duced either by the method of percolation, distillation, maceration, or compounding. Percolation, as to cordials, is the distilling of var· ious fruits and herbs to obtain the flavor from them, the berries or herbs being placed in a still and alcohol put into the still. This alcohol is then vaporized through the berries to extract all of the flavor from them, and then condensed on the other side of the still· All of the distillatr that comes oil' is a cordial. .All eonlials are made by compounding, but the flavor therein is derived by 1wreola· tion, distillation, or macerations. 1\facerntion is a cold water method of pxtracting the flavor.

Appro:ximatrly 75% of respondents' products are such "non-dis· tilled" products, approximately 3% is gin, and the balance consists of brandies, rums, Slivowitz, and various otlH'r distillPll products which respolJ(knt bottles but <lors not distill itself, and thPse nre mark<'!l in compliance with the aforesaid regulations with the words "llottletl by."

Rl•spondent has no distiller's permit from the Federal Govern· ment, nnd ncquirPs such alcohol products as it requires in its business directly or inuirectly from distillers. Its answer atlm.its that it does not own, operate, or control any place or places where whiskies, gins, or other alcoholic heverngPs are manufactun•d from mash, wort, or wash.

r,m, 3. Upon the prPmises of rPsponllent's place of business afore· said tl1ere is a 2!i0-gallon capacity gin still, wl1el'Pin respoJHlent manu· factures gin from alcohol purchased but not produced by it, through the re1listillation of said alcohol over juniper benies awl other aro· matics. This gin constitutes approximately 3% of its total output alltl npproximntely 2% of its total sales yo}ume. In alhlition to ~he nforesaid gin still it has two small stills of a 2- and 5-gallon cnpaci~Y l'Pspectively, which are us£'d as a part of its laboratory equipment 10 ARROW Distilleries, INC. 1175 ihis Findings experimenting with the production of cordials. The aforesaid manufactm·e of gin by redistillation of purchased alcohol is 'n:•ll recognized in the trade as a process of rectification, and it is not necessary Under the pertinent laws and regulations for one engaging in such a process to possess a permit to distill. Neither such rectification 0.f alcoholic spirits nor the use of the two smalll'r stills auoYe menhoned for experimental pmposes, make or constitute this respondent a distiller nor its place of business a distillery, within the intent and llleaning of Section 3247 of the revised statutes rl'gulating Internal R:venue. (U. S. C. Tit. 26, S(•C. 1158.) The Commission finds that tlus respondent is a rl'ctifier, its place of lmsiness a rectifying plant, and that it is engaged in the business of rl'ctifying, within the intent and meaning of Section 32-14 of the revisl'd statutes of the United ~states. (U. S. C. Tit. 26, Sec. 13fl7f.) Nl'ither dol's such r<'ctificat~on and experimentation make or constitute this respondent a dis- ~lller as commonly understood by the public and by those engaged In any branch of the liquor industry. For a long period of time the word "distilleries" when used in coiuwction with the liquor int~nstry ami with the products thereof has had and still has a definite ~Jgnificance aJHl meaning to the minds of wholesalers :uHl retailers In Sllch industry and to the ultimate purchasing public, to wit, places "'.he.re alcoholic liquors arc protluced Ly an original :md continuous d~!Stlllation from mash, wort, or wash, through continuous dosed Plpes and wssels until the manufacture thereof is complete, and a ~:lbstantial portion of the pmchasing public prefers to Luy spirituous Jquors bottled and pr<'pare<l Ly the actual distillers thereof. ~) AR. 4. In the comse and conduct of its business as aforesaid, by PI'Intetlrt'presentations that it has ha<l "100 years experience making quality liqueurs" and Ly the use of the word "Distilleries" in its cor- Phrate name, printed on its stationery, catalogues, advertising, and on t e labels attaclwd to the bottles in which it sells and ships its said Products, and in various other ways, rt'spondent represents to its customers and furnishes them \with a nwans of representing to their Vendees, Loth retailers and the ultimate consuming public, that it is n clistiller of conlials ,.,.ins, and other alcoholic beverages and has been tn I· '"" a nng quality liqueurs for 100 years, when as a matter of fact re- J~~J~dent is not a distiller and does .not own, operate or control any tl Shllery or place where any alcoholic beverages are manufactured by le Process of distillation, from mash, \rort, or wash. Respondent1 las not hall 100 )'C'ars expcricnee making quality liqueurs. The !';pecimens of labels introtlucNl in evidence in this case showtl ht. . '. In several instanct•s respondent has caus!'d to be conspicuously Pl'lated thereon such phrases as '':\fade by Arrow Distilleries, Inc." Findings 25F.T.C.

"Distilled and Bottled by Arrow Distilleries, Inc.," "Prepared by Arrow Distilleries, Inc." and "Made and Bottled by Arrow Distilleries, Inc."

PAR. 5. In support of the allegations contained in paragraph 2 of the complaint, relating to public preference to buy alcoholic beverages bottled and prepared by the actual distillers thereof, witnesses were called who were members of the purchasing public and who were examined with respect to any such preference on their part for the pur· chase of liqueurs or cordials as well as other alcoholic beverages when bottled by a distiller. 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 products, in the belief that a distiller's product would be more uniform and up to certain specifications and that a manufacturer's name should mean something. They testified that they preferred buying in as direct a. manner as 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 "Distilleries" in the corporate name of the respondent would indicate to them that the respondent was the actual distiller of the product and that they would give preference in purchasing n. product which bore a label containing such corporate name in competition with a product bearing a label which did not contain the word "Distilleries" or any word indicating a "Distilling" process in its corporate name or otherwise. This preference on the part of the public was confirmed by the testimony of several retailers, one of whom had found that due to the preference arising from the use of such term as "Distilleries" on the package, he could advance the price 15 percent over that of a similar package which did not contain such a representation.

PAn. 6. 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, whiskies, gins, and other al~o­ holic beverages sold by them and who truthfully use the words "dt~­ tillery," "distilleries," "distillers," or "distilling" as n. part of th~Ir corporate or trade names and on their stationery, catalogues, advertts· ing, and on the labf'ls of the bottles in which they sell and ship such products, nnd who do not misrepresent that they have had 100 years. expel:ience making quality liqueurs. There are also among such co~­ petitors corporations, firms, partnerships, and individuals engaged Ill the business of purchasing, rectifying, blending, and bottling cordial~, gins nnd other alcoholic beverages in rectifying plants under recti- ARROW DISTILLERIES, INC. 1177 1168 Order fiber's permits who do not use the words "distillery," "distilleries," "distilling," or "distillers" as a part of their corporate or trade names, nor on their stationery, catalogs, advertising, nor on the labels attached to the bottles in which they sell and ship their said products, and who do not misrepresent that they have had 100 years experience making quality liqueurs.

PAn. 7. The representations by respondents, as set forth in paragraph 4 hereof, are calculated to and have a capacity and tendency to and do mislead and deceive dealers and the purchasing public into the belief that the cordials, gins, and other alcoholic beverages sold by the respondent are manufactured or distilled by it from mash, Wort, or wash by one continuous process, and are calculated to and have the capacity and tendency to and do induce dealers and the purchasing public, acting in such beliefs, to purchase the cordials, gins and other alcoholic beverages rectified and bottled 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 the extent of their past experience or that they nre manufacturers by distillation from mash, wort, or wash of whiskies, gins, ?r.other alcoholic beverages, and thereby respondent does substantial lnJury to substantial competition in interstate commerce. PAn. 8. Existing regulations promulgated under the Federal Alcohol Administration Act approved August 29, 1935 ( 49 Stat. L. 977), which regulations became effective August 15, 1936, provide that rectifiers who redistiH tax-paid purchased alcohol over juniper berries and other nromatics mny call such resulting product "distilled gin," ttnd require that the labels shall state thereon who distilled it. For this reason the Commission has excepted from the application of its Order herein gins so produced by this respondent. CONCLUSION . 'rhe aforesaid acts and practices of the respondent Arrow Distilleries, Inc., are to the prejudice of the public and of respondent's competitors, and constitute unfair methods of competition in comlllerce, within the intent and meaning of Section 5 of an Act of Con· gress, approved September 26, 1914, entitled "An Act to create a Federal Trade Commission, to define its powers and duties, and for other purposes."

OI:DEU TO CEASJo~ AND DESIST . 'rhis proceeding having been heard by the Federal Trade Commis- Sion upon the complaint of the Commission, the answer of respondent, testimony and other evidence taken before John L. Hornor, an 1178 FEDERAL TRADE COl\Il\IISSION DECISIONS Order 25F. T. C.

examiner of the Commission theretofore duly designated by it, in support of the allegations of said complaint and in opposition theretor brief filed herein by PGad D. Morehouse, counsel for the Commission (no brief having been filed in opposition thereto by R. E. Joyce ancl Saul Dann, attorneys for respondent, and no oral argnml.'nts having been reque~ted), and the Commission having made its findings as to the facts and its conclusion that saitl r£'spondent has violated the provisions of an Act of Cmtgress approveLl Sept£'mber 20, 1914, entitled "An Act to create a Fetleral Trade Commission, to define its powers and duties, and for other purposes." It i8 ordered, That the respondent, Arrow Distillerie~, Iuc., its officct·s, representatives, agents, and employpps, in connection with the sale aml distribution of cordials, gins, and all other alcoholic Leverages in interstate commerce and in the District of Columbia (except gins produced by it through a process of rectification whereby alcohols purchased, but llot prolluccd, by rpspondent are redistilled over juniper berries aml other aromatics), do forthwith cease and desist ft·om:

1. Uepresenting, through the use of tho word "DistillPrks" in it9 corporate name, on its stationery, allvertising, or on the label:; attac:hed to the bottle~ in which:h it sell~ nntl ship~ saitl products, orin uny other way by word or words of like import, (a) that it is :t distiller of cordials, gins or other spirituous be\'erages; or (b) that the sai<l cordials, gins or other spirituous LPvernges wpre hy it manufactmed through the process of distillation; or (c) that it owns, operates or controls a plact• 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 closNl pipes and vessels until the manufacture thereof is completed, unkss and until respondent shall actually own, operate, or control such a place Ol' places; and from 2. Hepresenting that it has hall 100 yl'ars experir11ce making quality Jic1ueurs, or in any other way Ly worth; or phrases of like import, representing that it has been making liqueurs for a longer period of time than is actually the fact.

It i.~ ful'tlwl' ordered, That the said respondent within GO days from and after the date of the Sf'rvice upon it of this order, shall file wit~l the Commission a rf'port or reports in writing setting forth in detail the mamwr and form in which it is complying, ancl has complicdr with the order to cease anll dt>sist ht>reinabove set forth. AMERICAN MUSHROOM INDUSTRIES, LTD. 1179 Syllabus