Stone & Thomas, Inc.

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

In true Marrer or STONE & THOMAS, INC.

CONSENT ORDER, ETC., IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION AND THE FUR PRODUCTS LABELING ACTS Docket C-23. Complaint, Nov. 14, 1961—Decision, Nov. 14, 1961 Consent order requiring furriers in Wheeling, W. Va., to cease violating the Fur Products Labeling Act by failing to disclose on labels and invoices and in newspaper advertising the true animal name of the fur used in fur products, to disclose on labels and invoices the country of origin of imported furs, to show on labels and in advertising when products were dyed, and to show the name of the manufacturer, etc., on labels; by advertising in which the term “blended” was used improperly and which falsely represented the percentage reduction from usual prices of fur products; and by failing to comply in other respects with requirements of the Act.

Complaint Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission «ict and the Fur Products Labeling Act, and by virtue of the authority vested in it by said Acts, the Federal Trade Commission, having reason to believe that Stone & Thomas, Inc., a corporation, hereinafter referred to as respondent, has violated the provisions of said Acts and the Rules and Regulations promulgated under the Fur Products Labeling Act, and it appearing to the 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:

Paracrarn 1. Stone & Thomas, Inc. is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the laws of the State of West Virginia with its office and principal place of business located at 1030 Main Street, Wheeling, West Virginia. Par. 2. Subsequent to the effective date of the Fur Products Labeling Act on August 9, 1952, respondent has been and is now STONE & THOMAS, INC. 1133 11382 Complaint engaged in the introduction into commerce and in the sale, advertising, and offering for sale, in commerce, and in the transportation and distribution, in commerce, of fur products; and has sold, advertised, offered for sale, transported and distributed fur produets which have been made in whole or in part of fur which had been shipped and received in commerce, as the terms “commerce”, “far? and “fur product” are defined in the Fur Products Labeling Par. 3. Certain of said fur products were misbranded in that they were not Jabeled as required under the provisions of Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and in the manner and form presecribed by the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder. Among such misbranded fur products, but not limited thereto, were fur products without labels and with labels which failed: 1. to show the true animal name of the fur used in the fur product.

%, to disclose that the fur contained in the fur product was dyed when such was the fact.

3. to show the name or other identification issued and registered by the Commission, of one or more of the persons who manufacture such fur product for introduction into commerce, introduce it into commerce, sell it} in commerce, advertise or offer it for sale in commerce, or transport or distribute it in commerce. +. to show the name of the country of origin of imported furs used in the fur product.

Pan. +. Certain of said fur products were misbranded in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act in that they were not Jabeled in accordance with the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in the following respects:

(a) Information required under Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder was set forth in abbreviated form, in violation of Rule 4 of said Rules and Regulations. ;

(b) Information required under Section 4+(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder was mingled with non-required information, in violation of Rule 29(a) of said Rules and Regulations. (c) Information required under Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Reeulations promulgated thereunder was not. completely set ont on one side of labels, in violation of Rule 29(a) of said Rules and Regulations. (d) Information required under Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder Complaint 59 F.T.C.

was set forth in handwriting on labels, in violation of Rule 29(b) of said Rules and Regulations.

(e) Information required under Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder was not set forth in the required sequence, in violation of Rule 30 of said Rules and Regulations.

(f) Information required under Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder was not set forth separately on labels with respect to each section of fur products composed of two or more sections containing different animal furs, in violation of Rule 86 of said Rules and Regulations.

(g) Required item numbers were not set forth on labels, in violation of Rule 40 of said Rules and Regulations. Par. 5. Certain of said fur products were falsely and deceptively invoiced by respondent in that they were not invoiced as required by Section 5(b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act, and in the manner and form prescribed by the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder.

Among such falsely and deceptively invoiced fur products but not limited thereto were invoices pertaining to fur products which failed:

1. To show the true animal name of the fur used in the fur product. 2. To show the country of origin of imported fur used in the fur product.

Par. 6. Certain of said fur products were falsely and deceptively invoiced in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act in that they were not invoiced in accordance with the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in the following respects: (a) Information required under Section 5(b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder was set forth in abbreviated form in violation of Rule 4 of said Rules and Regulations.

(b) Required item numbers were not set forth on invoices in violation of Rule 40 of said Rules and Regulations. Par. 7. Certain of said fur products were falsely and deceptively advertised in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act in that respondent caused the dissemination in commerce, as “commerce” is defined in said Act, of certain newspaper advertisements, concerning said products, which were not in accordance with the provisions of Section 5(a) of the said Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder; and which advertise- STONE & THOMAS, INC. 1135 1132 Complaint ments were intended to aid, promote and assist, directly or indirectly, in the sale and offering for sale of said fur products. Par. 8. Among and included in the advertisements as aforesaid, but not limited thereto, were advertisements of respondent which appeared in issues of the Wheeling Intelligencer and the Wheeling News Register, newspapers published in the city of Wheeling, State of West Virginia, and having a wide circulation in said State and various other States of the United States. By means of said advertisements and others of similar import and meaning, not specifically referred to herein, respondent falsely and deceptively advertised fur products in that said advertisements:

(a) Failed to disclose the name or names of the animal or animals that produced the fur contained in the fur product as set forth in the Fur Products Name Guide, in violation of Section 5(a) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act. (b) Failed to disclose that fur products contained or were composed of bleached, dyed or otherwise artificially colored fur, when such was the fact, in violation of Section 5(a) (3) of the Fur Products Labeling Act.

(c) Used the term “blended” as part of the information required under Section 5(a) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder to describe the pointing, bleaching, dyeing or tip-dyeing of furs, in violation of Rule 19(f) of said Rules and Regulations. (d) Represented through such statements as “fur trimmed coat sale limited time only at 15% off” that the regular and usual prices of fur products were reduced in direct proportion to the percentage of savings stated when such was not the fact in violation of Section 5(a) (5) of the Fur Products Labeling Act. Par. 9. Respondent in advertising fur products for sale as aforesaid made claims and representations respecting prices and values of fur products. Said representations were of the type covered by subsections (a), (b), (c) and (d) of Rule 44 of the Rules and Regulations promulgated under the Fur products Labeling Act. Respondent in making such claims and representations failed to maintain full and adequate records disclosing the facts upon which such claims and representations were based in violation of Rule 44(e) of said Rules and Regulations.

Par. 10. The aforesaid acts and practices of respondent, as herein alleged, are in violation of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder and con- Order 59 F.T.C.

stitute unfair and deceptive acts and practices in commerce under the Federal Trade Commission Act.

DECISION AND ORDER The Commission having heretofore determined to issue its complaint charging the respondent named in the caption hereof with violation of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Fur Products Labeling Act, and the respondent having been served with notice of said determination and with a copy of the complaint the Commission intended to issue, together with a proposed form of order; and The respondent and counsel for the Commission having thereafter executed an agreement containing a consent order, an admission by the respondent of all the jurisdictional facts set forth in the complaint, a statement that the signing of said agreement is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by respondent that the Jaw has been violated as set forth in the complaint, and waivers and provisions as required by the Commission’s rules; and The Commission, having considered the agreement, hereby accepts same, issues its complaint in the form contemplated by said agreement, makes the following jurisdictional findings, and enters the following order:

1. Respondent Stone & Thomas, Inc. is a corporation organized, existing and doing business under and by virtue of the Jaws of the State of West Virginia with its office and principal place of business located at. 1030 Main Street, Wheeling, West Virginia. 2. The Federal Trade Commission has jurisdiction of the subject. matter of this proceeding and of the respondent, and the proceeding is in the public interest.

ORDER It is ordered, That. Stone & Thomas, Inc., a corporation and its officers and respondent’s representatives, agents and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, m connection with the introduction into commerce, or the sale, advertising, or offering for sale in commerce, or the transportation or distribution in commerce, of fur products, or in connection with the sale, advertising, offering for sale, transportation, or distribution of fur products which are made in whole or in part of fur which has been shipped and received in commerce, as “commerce”, “fur” and “fur product” are defined in the Fur Products Labeling Act, do forthwith cease and cesist from:

STONE & THOMAS, INC. 1137 1132 Order 1. Misbrading fur products Ly:

A. Failing to affix labels to fur products showing in words and figures plainly legible all the information required to be disclosed by each of the subsections of Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act.

B. Setting forth on labels affixed to fur products: (1) Information required under Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in abbreviated form.

(2) Information required under Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder mingled with non-required information.

(8) Information required under Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in handwriting.

C. Failing to set forth all the information required under Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Lbeling Act, and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder on one side of such labels. D. Failing to set forth the information required under Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in the required sequence. KE. Failing to set forth separately on labels affixed to fur products composed of two or more sections containing different animal furs the information required under Section 4(2) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder with respect to the fur comprising each section. F. Failing to set forth the item number or mark assigned to a fur product.

2. Falsely or deceptively invoicing fur products by : A. Failing to furnish invoices to purchasers of fur products showing in w ords and figures plainly legible all the information required to be disclosed by each of the subsections of Section 5(b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act.

B. Setting forth information required under Section 5(b) (1) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in abbreviated form.

C. Failing to set forth the item number or mark assigned to a fur product.

3. Falsely or deceptively advertising fur products through the use of any advertisement, representation, public announcement or notice which is intended to aid, promote or assist, directly or indirectly, in the sale, or offering for sale of fur products and which: 693—490—64 73 Complaint 59 F.T.C.

A. Fails to disclose:

(1) The name or names of the animal or animals producing the fur or furs contained in the fur product, as set forth in the Fur Products Name Guide, and as prescribed under the Rules and Regulations.

(2) That the fur product contains or is composed of bleached, dyed or otherwise artificially colored fur when such is the fact. B. Setting forth the term “blended” as part of the information required under Section 5(a) of the Fur Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder to describe the pointing, bleaching, dyeing or tip-dyeing of furs. C. Represents directly or by implication through percentage savings claims that the regular or usual price charged by respondent for fur products in the recent regular course of business were reduced in direct proportion to the amount of savings stated when contrary to the fact.

D. Misrepresents in any manner the savings available to purchasers of respondent's fur products.

4, Making claims and representations of the types covered by subsections (a), (b), (c) and (d) of Rule 44 of the Rules and Regulations promulgated under the Fur Products Labeling Act unless there are maintained by respondent full and adequate records disclosing the facts upon which such claims and representations are based. It is further ordered, That the respondent herein shall, within sixty (60) days after service upon him of this order, file with the Commission a report in writing setting forth in detail the manner and form in which it has complied with this order.