John Hartford

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

IN THE MATTER OF JOHN HARTFORD AND HARVEY E. "\VAGLEY, TRADING AS FEDERAL CIVIL SERVICE TRAINING BUREAU COMPLAINT, FINDI:>!GS, AND ORDER IN REGARD TO Tile ALLEGED VIOLA'riON OF SEC. 5 OF AN ACT OF CONGRESS APPROVED SEPT, 26, 1014 Docket '2795. Complaint, llfay 2, 1936-Decision, July 7, 19.17 Where two Individuals engaged in sale and distribution of correspondence courses for Civil Service positions under the United States Government- ( a) 1\Iade use of trade name including words "Federal Civil Service Train· ing Bureau" in conduct of their said business, and thereby represented and implied that such business, thus designated, was a part of, or was connected with, or an agency of, the Government of the United States, or of the United States Civil Service Commission, notwithstanding tact neither of said individuals, nor business or school in question, nor anyone connected therewith, had any connection whatsoever with either said Government or Commission, or in any way represented either of them i (b) ltepresented and set forth, in advertisements of their said courses of study and instruction, that said school would prepare the prospective student for coming Civil Service exumlnations, and that, due to deaths, natural growth of service, etc., many examinations were being announced, and that in one year the Government pay-roll had increased some sixty· odd thousand, as therein set forth, and that many examinations were be· ing announced and would "be held convenient to you," and thereby rep· resented and implied that examinations In the various Civil Service classifications for which they gave training were being held at frequent in· tervals and that appointments to Government positions were constantly being made from eligibles thus obtained, facts being that few, if any, examinations were being held during much of time concerned, and few, if any, appointments made in some of classifications for which they proposed to and did give training, and that increase in appointments referred to was not, in the main, In the Classified Civil Service, but in appointments made regardless of Civil Service requirements; and (c) Made use of a contract form containing so-called "ltefund Agreement," careful reading of which belied its import and implication that a Gov· ernment appointment was assured within a year or money paid would be refunded, and which was rendered inoperative, in the main, due to the fact that examinations, taking of which were a prerequisite, were not being held during a part of the time, at least, when it was in use, and consequently could not be taken by the students in the subject>~ which they had studied so as to entitle them to refund during such time and under agreement in question;

With tendency and capacity to confuse, mislead and deceive members of the public into believing that said school was a branch or bureau of, or connected with, the Government of the United States, and that civil service examinations were being held at frequent intervals in classifications for which they offered training, Government positions in such classifications were available and appointments therein were being and FEDERAL CIVIL SERVICE TRAINING BUREAU 445 444 Complaint would be made, and that vacancies existed in the Government service and were to be filled, and that students who enrolled for courses in question and did not secure Government positions would receive their money back upon conditions reasonably possible of fulfillment, and to induce members of public to nnswer their said ad,·crtisements, sign their contracts, Pay money to them, and purchase said courses of study and instruction as above described, by r<>ason of erroneous beliefs thus engendered, and to divert trade to them from competitors engaged in sale of correspondence courses in similar and in other lines of study, including therein competitors who do not make the same or similar misleading misrepresentations, bnt truthfully and accurately state the private character of their undertakiugs, without implying Government connection, and the facts in regard to ·civil service examinations and availability of Government positions in civil service, and who do not make use of refund agreements which mislead in their terms or failure to disclose pertinent facts upon which agreements depend, from whom said acts and practices tended to and did in fact unfairly divert business to themselves; to the substantial injury and prejudice of competition in commerce:

lield, That such acts and practices were to the prejudice of the public and competitors and constituted unfair methods of competition. Before Mr. John W. Addison, trial examiner. M'f'. Harry D. Michael for the Commission.

Mr. Noble lV. Lee, of Chicago, Ill., for Harvey E. Wagley. Complaint Pursuant to the provisions of an Act of Congress approved September 26, 1914, entitled "An Act to create a Federal Trade Commission, to d€'fine its powers and duties, and for other purposes," the Federal Trade Commission having reason to believe that John Hartford and Harvey E. 'Vagley, doing business under the name and. style of Federal Civil Service Training Bureau, have been and are using unfair methods of competition in commerce as "comtnerce" is defined in said act, and it appearing to 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 AR.\GRAPH 1. That said respondents, John Hartford and Harvey E: ~Vagley, doing business under the name and style of Federal Civil Service Training Bureau, are now and have been engaged for lllore than six months last past in the sale and distribution of courses of study and instruction designed and intended for preparing students thereof for examination for various civil service positions Under the United States Government, which said courses of study ~nd instruction are pursued by correspondence. Said respondents, ln COnducting their said business, have their offices and principal 446 FEDERAL TRADE COl\Il\IISSION DECISIONS Complaint 25 F. T. O. place of businrss in the city of Chicago, in the State of Illinois. Respondents, in the course and conduct of their said business, cause their said courses of study and instruction, consisting of pamphlets, study and question sheets, and other printed or mimeographed matter, to be transporte(l from their said place of business in Illinois to, into, and through States of the United States other than Illinois to various and numerous persons to whom said course of study and instruction are or have been sold.

The relationship existing between said respondents in connect ioll with said business is that the said John Hartford is the owner thereof while the said Harvey E. ·wagley is u creditor and in active operation and charge of the same :for the purpose of securing and liquidating such indebtedness.

PAR. 2. That, during the time above mentioned, other individuals, firms, and corporations in various States of the United States are and have been engaged in the sale and distribution of courses o:f study and instruction designed and intended for the purpose of preparing students thereof :for examination :for various civil service positions under the United States Government, and also engaged in the sale and distribution of other courses o:f study an(l instruction in other lines, all o:f which are pursued by correspondence. Such other in· dividuals, firms, and corporations have caused and do now cause their said courses of study and instruction, when sold by them, to be transported from various States o:f the United States to, into and through States other than the State of origin of the shipment thereof. Sai<l respondents have been, during the aforesaid. time, in competition in interstate commerce in the sale of their said courses of study and instruction with such other individuals, firms, and cor· porations.

PAR. 3. That the name, Federal Civil Service Training Bureau, used by l'flSpondents in conducting their said business, implies and has the tendency and capacity to create the belief among persons solicited to pursue respondents' courses of study that said Federal Civil Service Training Bureau is a part of, or is connected with, or is an agency of, the Government of the United States or o:f the United States Civil Service Commission. That the word "Federal" is a term frequently used in referring to the United States Govern· ment or its agencies or to institutions under its direction or super· vision. That the term "Civil Service" is used to designate a class of employees of the United States Government or to apply to the work in which they are engaged. That the word "Bureau" is a term frequently and generally used in officially or otherwise de· FEDERAL CIVIL SERVICE TRAINING BUREAU 447 4H Complaint scribing various governmental agencies. That, in fact, neither re- ~pondeuts nor their school nor anyone connected therewith have any connection whatsoever with the United States Government or with the United States Civil Service Commission or in any way represent either of them . . PAR. 4. That respondents, in advertising their said course of study and. instruction, make use of advertising matter in which tho following statements appear:

FEDERAL CIVIL SERVICE TRAINI~G Bulle.\ U Will Prt'})nre Yon for Coming Civil Service Examinations. Due to deaths and retirements, the natural growth of the service, vro· Ulotionl'l, etc., many examinations are being tumouuct'd. In one year, 1!)33 to H.l:-14, the payroll of Federal Executive Employees increased from 5G3,4S8 to G23,fl99.

EXAl\llNATIOXS BEING IIELD-lllany Pxaminatlons are uow hcing anllouuced; they will be held convpuieut to yon. Said statements, so made by respondents, carry the implications to the general public that examinations in 1he various civil service classifications for which respondents give training are being helJ at frequent intenals and that appointments to government positions are constantly being marle from eligibles thus obtained; when, in fact, during much of the time respondents have been giving their ~aid training, few, if any, examinations were being held and few, 1 ~ any, appointments were being made in many of the classificat~o~ls for which respontlcnts proposed to give and did give training. Said statements are further misleading from the fact that the ap- Pointments referred to therein were not, in the main, in the civil !'etvice, but appointments made regardless of civil service requirements.

PAR. 5. That respondents, in the sale of their said course of s( udy and instruction, ma1Ye use of a contract form containing a so-called "n ~\refund Agreement," reading as follows: It is understood that I am to complete the <>entire training, SPIHling in all Wot·k for correction; try the first examination covered by this training; then, if I fail to pass the examination, or pass aud am not offered an ap- Pointment within one year from date that my name 1<: placed on the go\'<'l'll· lllent eligible list, I am, upon written application, to receive a refund (•f the t'lltire amount paid for this training, or I will be trained for every examina· tion for the above stated po;;ition, without furl her payment., until my name 18 Placed on the Government eligible list. 'the import ·and implication of the above quoted agreement is that a government appointment is assured within one year or the money Paid will be refunded; when, in fact, such agreement, by careful l::i812ln)-3!J-31 Complaint 25 F. T.C. reading thereof, mean:3 nothing of the kind. Said agreement is further meaningless, and was so during the period of its use by re· spondents, on account of the fact that it was rendered inoperative, in the main, because examinations for which respondents gave training . were not being held and it was consequently impossible for their students to be placed on an eligible list and thereby become entitled to a refund under such agreement.

PAR. 6. That the representations of respondents, as aforesaid, have had and do have the tendency and capacity to confuse, mislead and deceive members of the public into the belief that respondents' school is representative of or connected with the Government of the United States; that civil service examinations are being held at frequent intervals in the classifications for which respondents offer training; that Government positions in such classifications are available and that appointments therein nre being made and will be made; that vacancies exist in the government service that are to be filled; and that students who enroll for respondents' courses will receive their money back upon conditions reasm~ably possible of fulfillment; when, in truth and in fact, such arc not the facts. Said representations of respondents have had and do have the tendency and capacity to in· ducc members of the public to answer respondents' advertisements, to sign their said contracts, to pay money to respondents, and to purchase said courses of study and instruction, as herein described, because of the erroneous beliefs engendered, as above set forth, and to divert trade to respondents from competitors engaged in the sale of correspondence courses in interestate commerce in similar lines to those offered by respondents, as well as those so engaged in such sale in other lines of study. There are among the competitors of respondents those who do not make the same or similar misleading representations as made by respondents, as herein set out, but who truthfully and accurately state the private charpcter of their under· takings without implying Government connection and who truth· fully state the facts in regard to civil service examinations and availability of government positions in the civil service and who agree to make refunds on clear conditions that are possible of fulfill· ment. As a result of respondents' practices, as herein set forth, in· jury has been and is now being done by respondents to competition in commerce between and among the various States of the United States.

PAR. 7. The above acts and things done by respondents are all to the injury and prejudice of the public and the competitors of re· spondents in interstate commerce within the meaning and intent of Section 5 of an Act of Congress entitled "An Act to create a Federal FEDERAL CIVIL SERVICE TRAINING BUREAU 449 Findings Trade Commission, to define its powers and duties, and for other Purposes," approved September 26, 1914.

REPORT, FINDINGS AS TO Tile FACTS, AND ORDER Pursuant to the provisions of an Act of Congress approved Sept~rnber 2G, HH4' entitled "An Act to create n. Federal Trade Commis- ~on, to define its powers and duties, and for other purpo3es," the 1 ~deral Trade Commission, on May 2, 1936, issued its complaint in ~Ins proceeding, charging the respondents, John Hartford and ]'Iarvey E. 1Vagley, doing business under the name and style of 1 ederal Civil Service Training Bureau, with the use of unfair ll1ethods of competition in commerce in violation of the provisions of said act. Said respondent John Hartford was not found and was ~ot served with the complaint herein. Said respondent Harvey E . . Vagley was duly served with complaint and filed answer. After the Issuance of said compaint and the filing of answer thereto by respond- ~;lt Harvey E. 1Vagley, testimony and other evidence in support of 1;~ allegations of said complaint were introduced by Harry D. lchael, attorney for the Commission, before John 1V. Addison, an e~aminer of the Commisl::iion, theretofore duly designated by it, respondent Harvey E. Wagley having failed to introduce testimony anu other evidence in opposition to the allegations of the complaint; ~nu said testimony and other evidence were duly recorded and filed ln the office of the Commission. Thereafter the proceeding regularly ca]Jl'le on for final hearincr before the Commission on the said com-P . ~ amt, the answer of the respondent Harvey E. 'Vagley, testimony ~ncl other evidence, and brief in support of the complaint, counsel or respondent Harvey E. Wagley having waived the filing of briefs Ul~cl having elected to submit the case on the record; and the Com- ~lssion having duly considered the same and being now fully ad- \~'led in the premises, finds that this proceeding is in the interest 0 the public and makes this its findings as to the facts and its cone1nsi d on ra wn therefrom :

FINDINGS AS TO THE FACTS E P ARA.GrtAPII 1. The said respondents, John Hartford and Harvey p' ~Vagley, were engaged in business under the name and style of lt~~ eru.l Civil Service Training Bureau for the period of time and sa] er the circumstances hereinafter stated and were engaged in the St e and distribution in commerce between and among the various si:tes of the United States of courses of study and instruction de- ""ned and int('nded for preparing students thereof for examinations FEDERAL TRADE CO.\UIISSION DECISIONS 450 Findings 25 F. T. C. for various civil service positions under the United States Gorernment, which.said courses of stu<ly antl instructions were pursued by correspon<lPnce. Said respondents, in the conduct of said business, had their offices and principal place of business at No. 508 South Dearborn Street, in the city of Chicago, State of Illinois. Rl'spon~l­ ents, in the course and conduct of their said business, caused then· said courses of study and instruction, consisting of parnphleb, study, and question sheets and other printed or mi~eogrn phed materh~l, when sold Ly them, to be transported in comm<>t·ce from their s:lltl place of business in the State of Illinois to, into and through States of the United States other than Illinois to various and mtmerons persons in such other States to whom said courses of study and instruction were sold.

PAn. 2. During the time respondents co11ducted said business, ~s herein set out, other individuals, firms, and corporations in ya~·t­ ous States of the United States were l'ngaged in the sale and thstribution in commerce lwtwel'n and. among the various States of the UniieJ States n.ml in the District of Columbia of comses of st ndy nnd instruclion drsigned nnd intPnderl for the pnrposp of preparing students thereof for examinations for various civil :;t'rviee positiou~ under the United Statps Government, and also engaged, ns afore- :oaid, in the sale and distribution of other courses of study aml instruction in other lines, all of which are and were pursued by conespond· ence. Such other individuals, firms, and corporations have caused and. do now cause their sa.id courses of study and instruction, when sold by them, to be transported from the various Stail's of the Unitctl States where they are located to, ill to, and through States other th:tll the States of origin of the shipment thereof to the purchasers of the same in such other Statf's. Said respondents were, rluring the till.10 of the conduct of their sai<l business, in substantial competition, Ill the sale of their said courst's of study awl instruction in cmnmerce between and among the various States of the United States, with such other individuals, firms, and corporations. . PAR. 3. Said business conducted under the name of Feder:tl Ci\'Il Service Training Bureau was odginally established by the sa ill respondent John Hartford. Said respondent Hartford made arrangements with the said respondent "\Vagley whprehy the said "\ragley dill a considerable volume of the printing and minwograplti11g work w.;rd in the conduct of the business of said corrrspondrnce school conducted under the trade name aforesaid. Said respondent Ilartfortl subleased of!ices from said respondent "\Vagley for the conduct of said business. The business was started early in the .)'Par 1t);35. On November 23, 1035, respondent Hartford entered into an agrel'n1t'I1t FEDERAL CIVIL SEUVICR TRAINING BUREAU 451 444 Findings With tespondent Wagley, by the terms of which said business and the Property appertaining thereto were set over to respondent "\Vagley in trust for the purpose of securing an indebtedness amounting to $5,077.77. Dy the terms of this agreement respondent \Vagley was authorized to collect and receive money owing to said respondent liartford in the coiJ.f-lnct of said correspondence school under the said llame Federal Civil Service Training Dureau. He was further authorized under said agreement to apply the proceeds so received and collected to the payment of said indebtedness. Pursuant to said agreement, respondent "\Vagley took charge of 11 le office of said Federal Civil Service Training Dureau and had gelleral charge of the financial affairs thereof, at least in the absence of respondent Hartford. During much of the time when said ~agreement "·as in effect, respondent Hartford was in the field selllllo'~ co nurses of mstructwn.· · A'1 so, (Iurmg. t I1e time. w lien sa1'd agree- ~~ent Was in eflect, office work was conducted by l\Ir. Charles f ayinond, Illl employee of respondent "\Vagley, who devoted part 1{ne Work to the affairs of said correspondence school· as an em- }) oyee of the school. During the pcriou of time when said business Wa~ so conducted, the name Federal Civil Service Training Bureau Was ll Sll t m. t I 1e rom l uct t l ICI'eof,. and the prmte(. 1 matter anu'1 cont J·a t f L r or111s as herein set out and which had previously been usod . Y the respondent Hartford were continued in use. Courses oi Jnstru ction were sold to students durmg· sa1'd peno(· 1, and sue l1 Cours · \. ll es Were serviced aiel money collected thereon. J. sma sum '''as·J 'a PI> I·Iel1 to respondent 1VaO'ley's mdebte(· l ness cl unng· t I1e penou· '1 '' leJ 1 Satd. agreement was in effect.o , On or about J anuarv 21, 193G, respondent Hartford turned the ,•Jtti L . J re Hsuwss over to respondent 1Vagley, and the latter thereupon 1tsslln1e l l control. No new busmess· was so 1·rciteu· -1 b y respon d ent \\r L a.gley from such time until in March 1936, when the name of the t•llt~llle>!is Was changed to Commercial Training Institute. Solici- •l ton 0 f b . . '" usmess was then resumed and the name of the busmess 11.~ 81 1 after changed to Public Training Service. These were merely 'Va( e llames, the business being owned and operated by respondent ~~ley individually. .

liat·~; l'Plationship of said respondent Wagley with said respondent said . oru, as above specified, and the acts and things done by the llla l 1 espondeut \Vagley in pursuance thereof, and as a result thereof, 'l e t! ·t] 01 le Said respondent \Vagle responsible for the acts and things s~t le and the practices uS<>d in the conduct of said business as herein out anu made him a principal therein.

Findings 25F. T. C.

PAR. 4. The name, Federal Civil Service Training Bureau, used by respondents in the conduct of said business, implied and hacl the tendency and capacity to create the belief among persons solicited to pursue the courses of study sold under such name that said Feder!ll Civil Service Training llnreau was a part of, or was connected with, or was an agency of, the Government of the United States or of the United States Civil Service Commission. The word "Federal" is a term frequently used in referring to the United States Government or its agencies or to institutions under its direction or supervision. The term "Civil Service" is used to designate a class <1f employees of the United States Government or to apply to the work in which they are engaged. The word "llureau" is a terJll frrquently and generally used in officially or otherwise describing various Governmental agencies. Neither respondents, nor either of them, nor said school, nor anyone connected therewith, had any connection whatsoever with the United States Gov-ernment or with the United States Civil Service Commission, or in any way repre· sented either of them.

PAn. 5. Respondents, in advertising said courses of study and in· struction, made use of advertising matter in which the following statements appeared:

FEDERAL CIVIL SERVICE TRAINING BUREAU Will Prepare You for Coming Civil Service Examinations. Due to deaths and retirements, the natural growth of the service, P~~; motions, etc., many examinations are being announced. In one year, 193S to 1934, the payroll of Federal Executive Employees increased from 1JI}3,4S to G23,51)().

I~XAMINATlONS BEING HELD - 1\Iany examinations are now being nnnounced; they will be held convenient to you. Said statements directly and uy implication serw·d as represci~t~i tions to the general public that examinations in the various c1Vl service classifications for which respondents gave training were being held at frequent intervals and that appointments to Govern~ ment positions were constantly being made from eligibles ~hll 5 obtained. In fact, during much of the time respondents were givin1 their said training few, if any, ~xaminations were being hel< and few, if any, appointments were being made in some of th~ classified civil service, but were appointments made regardless 0 training. Said statements were also misleading in that the incretlse in appointments referred to therein were not, in the main, in th~ classified ci vii service, but were appointments made regardless 0 civil service requirements.

FEDERAL CIVIL SERVICE TRAINING BUREAU 453 Findings . PAR. 6. Respondents, in the sale of said courses of study and lnstructior~, made use of a contract form containing a so-called "Relund Agreement" reading as follows:

It is understood that I am to complete the entire training, sending in all ~Ork for correction; try the first examination covered by this training; ~n If I fall to puss the l:'examination, or pass and am not offered an ap- POintment within one year from date that my name is placed on the Governfllent eligible list, I am, upon written application, to receive a refund of the ;.entire amount paid for this training, or I will be trained for every examinn- 1'0n for the above stated position, witlwut further payment, until my name 13 I>lacect on the Government eligible list. 'I'he import and implication of the above quoted agreement was that a ~overnment appointment was assured within one year or the money Paid would be refunded; when, in fact, such agreement, by careful reading thereof, meant otherwise. Said agreement was also valueless ~n account of the fact that it was rendered inoperative, in the main, ecause examinations for which respondents gave training were ~ot being held, at least during a part of the time it was in use, and ~ "'.as consequently impossible for their students to take the examlna~lon in the subjects which they had studied and thereby become entitled to a refund under such agreement during such time. t P Alt 7. The representations of respondents, as aforesaid, had the tendency and capacity to confuse, mislead, and deceive members of the public into the beliefs that respondents' school was a branch ~l' bureau of or connected with the Government of the United . states; that Civil Service examinations were being held at frequent ~ntervals in the classifications for which respondents offered trainlno-b'"''· th a t G overnment positions· · m· sue h classi'fi ca t'wns were avai"1 • ~ Ie and that appointments therein were being made and would tle Inade; that vacancies existed in the Government service that were 1~ he filled; and that students who enrolled for such courses and~ Id llot secure Government positions would receive their money l' ack upon conditions reasonably possible of fulfillment. Said repnesentations of respondents had the tendency and capacity to induce /etnbers of the public to answer respondents' advertisements, to ;.~gn their said contracts, to pay money to respondents, and to pur- ~ ase said courses of study and instruction as herein described, bet a~~ of the erroneous beliefs engendered, as above set forth, and ()~ lVert trade to respondents from competitors engaged in the sale sp correspondence courses in similar lines to those offered by rest:;d~nt~, as web as those so engaged in such sale in other lines of ~ f Y In Interstate commerce. There were and are among the come Itors of respondents those who do not make the same or similar 454 FEDERAL TRADE COl\I!IUSSION DECISIONS Order 2GF. T. C.

misleading representations as made by respondents, as herein set out, but who truthfully and accurately state the private character of their undertakings without implying Government connection and who truthfully state the facts in regard to civil service examinations and availability o£ Government positions in the civil service, and who do not make use of refund agreements that are misleading in their terms or that are misleading because of failure to disclose pertinent facts upon which such agreements depend. Respondents' said acts and practices tended to and did in fact unfairly divert business to respondents from their said competitors, to the substantial injury and prejudice of competition in commerce among and between the nrious States of the United States. CONCLUSION The aforesaid acts and practices of respondent Harvey E. 'Vagley, doing business under the name and style of Federal Civil Service Training Bureau, are to the prejudice of the public and o£ respondent's competitors, and constitute unfair methods of competition in commerce within the intent and meaning of Section 5 of an Act of Congress approved September 26, 1914, entitled "An Act to create 11 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 Commission upon the complaint of tlle Commission, the answer of respondent Harvey E. ·wagley (respondent John Hartford not having been served with the complaint hE>rein), testimony and other evidence taken before John '\V. Addison, an examiner of the Commission theretofore duly designated by it, in support of the allegations of the cornplaint, and brief in support of complaint, respondent Harvey E. Wagley having failed to introuuce evidence in his behalf, and having elected to submit the case upon the record without brief or oral argument, and the Commission having made its findings as to the facts and its conclusion that said respondent Harvey E. 'Vagley has violated the provisions of an Act of Congress approved September 26, 191-h entitled "An Act to create a Federal Trade Commission, to define its powers and duties, and for other purposes." It is ordered, That said case be closed as to the responllent John Hartford, on account of failure of service of the complaint upon him, without prejudice to the right of the Commission, should the facts so warrant, to reopen the same and resume prosecution of the complaint in accordance with its regular procedure. FEDERAL CIVIL SERVICE TRAINING BUREAU 455 Order It i8 further ordered, That the respondent Harvey E. 'Vagley, doing business under the name and style of Federal Civil Service Training Bureau, or under any other name or in any other manner, his representatives, agents, and employees, in connection with the offering for sale, sale, and distribution of courses of study and instruction, or of books, study material, pamphlets, or printed or mimeographed matter, designed or intended for preparing students thereof for examinations for civil service positions under the United States Government, in interstate commerce, or in the District of Columbia, do forthwith cease and desist from:

1. Hepresenting, through the use of the word., "Federal" or ''Bureau" or the term "Civil Service" or any other words or terms ~f similar import, meaning and effect, that respondent's business Is a part of, is connected with, or is a branch, bureau or agency of, the Government of the United States or the United States Civil Service Commission · ' 2. Uepresenting that the number and character of appointments to positions in the United States Classified Civil Service or the character of examinations held therefor are other than the facts, existing at the time such representations are ma<le, may warrant; 3. Representing that the total number of appointments to Government positions not in the Classified Civil Service are indicative of the opportunities for appointment to the Cla.ssified Civil Service; 4. Representing that the total number of appointments to the Classified Civil Service are indicative of the opportunities for ap- Pointment therein of those who may complete the training offered<l by the respondents' courses, unless such number be limited to those appointments made in the classifications for which said courses are adapted;

5. Representing, through the use of iuoperati ve, misleading or deceptive refund agreement that a Government position is assured ~0 those purchasing respondents' courses of instruction and that If said position is not obtained the money paid for said courses "'ill be refunded.

It i8 further ordered, That said respondent Harvey E. Wagley shall, within 60 days after service upon him of this order, file with the Commission a report in writing setting forth in detail the Inanner and form in which he has complied with this order. Syllabus 25F. T. C.