Ward Baking Co. v. F.T.C.

• Decision Date: 26 February 1920
• Docket Number: 90.
• Citation: 264 F. 330
• Parties: WARD BAKING CO. v. FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit

264 F. 330

WARD BAKING CO. v. FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION.

No. 90.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

February 26, 1920

Eugene H. Hickok, of New York City, for petitioner.

Edward L. Smith (Claude R. Porter and W. T. Roberts, both of Washington, D.C., of counsel), for respondent.

Before WARD, ROGERS, and MANTON, Circuit Judges.

WARD Circuit Judge.

November 26, 1917, the Federal Trade Commission filed a complaint under section 5 of the act of September 26, 1914 (Comp. St Sec. 8836e), entitled 'An act to create a Federal Trade Commission, to define its powers and duties and for other purposes,' against the Ward Baking Company on the ground that the company had at periods of several consecutive days in the year 1917 given gratis to each purchaser of its bread in certain places a quantity of bread equal to the amount of the purchase with the intent of suppressing competition in the manufacture and sale of bread in interstate commerce and that a proceeding by the commission in respect thereof would be to the interest of the public.

The company filed an answer, denying this charge, appeared, and offered testimony at the hearing. The commission made a report and findings, of which the material finding for the purposes of this opinion is:

'Paragraph Three. That respondent, during the said month of May, in the year 1917, for a period of about four weeks, in the cities of New Bedford and Fall River, in the state of Massachusetts, and other towns and cities in said state and also in the towns of North Tiverton and Stone Bridge in the state of Rhode Island, did give to all who purchased bread from it an amount of bread equal to the amount so purchased, with the intent and purpose of suppressing and stifling competition in the sale of bread in the towns and cities named in the state of Massachusetts and the state of Rhode Island, and that all bread so sold and given away in the state of Rhode Island, during said period when said free bread campaign was being so conducted, was manufactured at the city of Cambridge, in the state of Massachusetts, and shipped by the said respondent from the city of Cambridge to the city of Fall River, both in the state of Massachusetts, and from said city of Fall River was distributed by wagons, trucks, and other conveyances across the state line and into the state of Rhode Island, in the vicinity of North Tiverton and Stone Bridge, and there given away to purchasers of bread from said respondent in the manner and form aforesaid, and that said bread so given away and distributed in the state of Rhode Island was transported and sold in interstate commerce across the state lines dividing the state of Massachusetts and the state of Rhode Island, for the purpose and with the effect of stifling and suppressing competition in interstate commerce as aforesaid.'

This method of competition the commission held to be unfair. September 2, 1919, the commission entered an amended order requiring respondent to desist from the practice:

'Now, therefore, it is ordered that the respondent, Ward Baking Company, its officers, directors, agents, servants, and employes, cease and desist from directly or indirectly initiating or carrying

...