Ralph Dewberry

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

IN THE MATI'ER OF RALPH DEWBERRY, DOING BUSINESS AS DEWBERRY ENGRAVING COMPANY AND THE NATIONAL ENGRAV- ING COMPANY <:COMPLAINT, FINDINGS, AND ORDER IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF SEC. 5 OF AN ACT OF CONGRESS APPROVED SEPT. 26, 1914 Docket 3135. Compla.int, May Z2, 1931-Decision, Oct. 9, 1939 ·where an individual engaged In engraving stationery, letterheads, business and social cards, envelopes, and allied products, through pantograph method employed by some 90 percent of those engaged in business iu question, and also through much cheuper method or process employed by him Involving use of printing type in which proofs are pulled on transparent paper and in which said step is followed by various other st£>ps, and in sale and distribution of his products, produced as aforesaid, in substantial competition with others engaged in engmving stationery and allied products and in selling- same in commerce among the various States and in the District of Columbia, and including many who produce such products and distribute and sell same, and in no wise misrepresent quality or character thereof and do not disparage products of their re;;pective competitors- Represented that engraving produced from plates incised by hand, or by pantograph method, or method other than that used by said individual, was old style, out of date, antequated, and inferior, through statement, in some lGO,OOO letters which he circulated and distributed to prospective customers throughout the United States, to the effect that the reader thereof would be disappointed in the price he bad been "soaked" for engraving in the past, but for which reader's engraver, with his "oldstyle, out-of-date equipment," had "to get a high price" and make such charges, and further statement that his prices were "the lowest in the United States because we have the most modern plant in the country," etc., facts being pantograph method employed by large part of industry, as above set forth, is not accomplished with old style, out of date, or obsolate equipment;

With tendency and capacity, through such statements unlawfully disparaging competitors, and particularly those employing pantograph method, to mislead and deceive substantial portion of purchasing public into erroneous belief that such representations were true and that engraving equipment of competitors was inferior, antequated and out of date, and with result, as direct consequence of mistaken and erroneous belief induced by said acts and misrepresentations, that substantial number of consuming public purchased substantial volume of his said engraved stationery and allied products 'and trade was diverted unfairly to him from competitors likewise engaged in producing, distributing, and selling such products, and who truthfully advertise the same; to the injury of substantial competition in commerce :

II j DEWBERRY ENGRAVING CO., ETC. 1079 [, 1078 Complaint j; Held, That such acts and practices, under the circumstances set forth, were II I aU to the prejudice and injury of. the public and competitors, and con- I stituted unfair methods of competition. L I Before 11/r. Edward J. Hornibrook, trial examiner. I J/r. Morton Nesndth for the Commission. l ~.l!r. Mark L. Taliaferro of Stokely, Scrivner, Dominick & Smith, r1 of Birmingham, Ala., for respondent. j; Complaint j;

Pursuant to the provisions of an act of Congress, approved Sep- 1: tem!Jer 26, 1914, entitled "An Act to create a Federal Trade Com- lmission, to define its powers and duties, and for other purposes," !: the Federal Trade Commission, having reason to believe that Ualph Lr;Dewberry, trading and doing business as Dewberry Engraving Co. and The National Engraving Co., hereinafter referred to as respondent, has been and is using unfair methods of competition in commerce, as "commerce" is defined in said act of Congress, 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:

PARAGRAPH 1. Respondent, Ralph Dewberry, is an individual trading and doing business under the names of Dewberry Engraving Co. and The National Engraving Co. with his principal office and place of business located in the city of Birmingham, State of Alabama. The respondent is now and has been for some years, engaged in the business of engraving stationery, letterheads, business and social cards, envelopes, and allied products, and in the distribution and sale thereof in commerce as hereinafter set out. PAR. 2. Said respondent, in the course and conduct of his business as aforesaid, causes his said products, when sold, to be transported from his principal place of business in the State of Alabama, to purchasers thereof located at various points in other States of the United States and in the District of Columbia. Respondent now maintains, and has maintained at all times, a constant current of trade and commerce in said engraved stationery and allied products so distributed and sold by him, among and between the various States of the United States and in the District of Columbia. PAR. 3. In the course and conduct of his said business respondent is now, and has been, in substantial competition with other individuals, firms, and corporations likewise engaged in the business of producing, distributing and selling engraved stationery and allied products in commerce between and among the various States of the United States, and in the District of Columbia. Complaint 29F. T. G. PAR. 4. All engraving is accomplished by means of intaglio plates. or pieces of metal upon which letters, words, or designs have been: incised or cut. There are a number of processes of producing intaglio engraved plates. One of such methods is the cutting or incision by hand. Others are the pantograph method and photoengraving process. The respondent uses or employs the photoengraving process. of producing intaglio plates and the pantograph method is employed. by the majority of those in the engraving trade in the United States. PAR. 5. In the course and operation of said business, and for the· purpose of inducing the purchase of his said products, the respondent under the name Dewberry Engraving Co. has solicited and conducted a large mail-order business and has caused to be sent out through the United States mails many letters of solicitation to prospective purchasers with samples of his engraving enclosed. The respondent1 under his trade name The National Engraving Co., has approximately 500 agents throughout the United States about 200 of whom are active in the solicitation and sale of respondent's products. During the past 3 years the respondent has distributed by mail approxi· mately 160,000 circular letters to prospective purchasers, both within and without the State of Alabama, the following being a true copy thereof:

You'll be disappointed if you read this letter- • • • Disappointed in the price you have been "soaked" for engraving in thp past. Not that your engraver could really help charging you so much; with old-style, out-of-date equipment, he HAD to get a high price. Our prices are the LOWEST in the United States became;e we have the most modern plant in the country and specialize on engraved stationery. GENUINE ENGRAVED LETTERHEADS $7.00 per 1,000 New die engraved FREE We use Engraver's Parchment which Is one of the finest bonds made. Compare this sheet of paper with that yon are now using and you will notice the difference immediately.

Without cost or obligation let us submit a proof o! your letterhead In one o! the modern styles on the enclosed style sheet. You can use finer stationery and save money. TRY US DEWBERRY ENGRAVING COMPANY The stat~ment and representation made by the respondent "You'll be disappointed if you read this letter- * * * Disappointed in the price you have been 'soaked' for engraving in the past. Not that your engraver could really help charging you so much; with old-style, out· of-date equipment, he HAD to get a high price" serves to, directly and by inference, unlawfully disparage the competitors of the DEWBERRY ENGRAVING CO., ETC. 1081 1078 Complaint respondent, and more specifically those competitors who use the pan- I ~ tograph method of cutting plates. Respondent's competitors who use !'l :md employ said pantograph method constitute approximately 90 per- \1: -cent of all the engraving trade in the United States and the panto- ,.' graph method of engraving is not out-of-date equipment. The respondents statement and representation "'Ve use Engraver's Parch- Jnent which is one of the finest bonds made'' is grossly false, misleading, and. untrue. In truth and in fact the paper used by the £aid respondent in filling orders for engraved stationery and allied pro<lucts is not properly nor correctly represented, designated, or referred t~ as parchment nor is it one of the finest bonds made, but to the -contrary, is an inferior and low-grade type of bond paper. Further, the use of the phrase "Engraver's Parchment" is misleading in that its natural implication is that there is a recognized grade or type of paper of that superior quality connoted by the word parchment, ~specially adapted to engraved printing, and known to the trade as t>ngraYer's parchment, when such is not the fact. J> AR. 6. There are among the respondent's competitors many 'vho produce engra,·ed stationery and allied products and distribute and sell the same in commerce as hereinbefore described who in no way misrepresent the quality or character of their respective products and who do not falsely disparage the products of their respective competitors.

PAn. 7. 111e aforesaid false and misleading statements and representations made by the respondent in designating and describing his products and in disparagement of his competitors, have, and have had, the tendency and capacity to mislead and deceive a substantial portion of the purchasing public into the erroneous belief that all of said representations are true, and into the further erroneous belief that the engraving equipment of respondent's competitors are inferior, antiquated, and out of date. Further, as a direct consequence of the mistaken and erroneous beliefs, induced by the acts and misrepresentations of the respondent as aforesaid, a substantial number of the consuming public has purchased a substantial volume of respondent's engraved stationery and allied pro<lucts with the result that trade has been unfairly diverted to the respondent from competitors likewise engaged in the business of producing, distributing, und selling engraved stationery and allied products who truthfully advertise their products. As a result thereof, injury has been, and is now being done by respondent to substantial competition in commerce among and between the various States of the United States and the District of Columbia.

Findings 29F.T. C.

PAR. 8. The above and foregoing acts, practices, and representations of the respondent have been, and are, all to the prejudice of the public and respondent's competitors as afore~mid, and have been, and are, unfair methods of competition within the meaning and intent of section 5 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." REPORT, FINDINGS AS TO THE FACTS, AND Onder Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act, the Federal Trade Commission, on l\Iay 22, 1937, issued and thereafter served its complaint in this proceeding upon respondent Ralph Dewberry, charging him 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 Morton Nesmith, attorney for the Commission, and in opposition to the allegations of the complaint by l\Iark L. Taliaferr9, attorney for the respondent, before Eel ward J. Hornibrook, an examiner of the Commi,:sion theretofore designated by it, and said testimony and other evidence were duly recorded and filed in the office of the Commission. Thereafter, the proceeding regularly came on before the Commission on said complaint, and on the answer thereto, testimony and other evidence, brief in support of the complaint (respondent not having filed a brief, and oral argument not having been requested); and the Commission having duly considered the matter, and being now fully advised in the premises, finds that this proceeding is in the interest of the public, and makes this Hs findings as to the facts, and its conclusion drawn therefrom. FINDINGS AS TO THE FACTS PARAGRAPH 1. Respondent, Ralph Dewberry, is an individual doing Lusiness under the trade name of Dewberry Engraving Co. and National Engraving Co., with his office and principal place of business located at Birmingham, Ala., and he has been for sometime last past, and is now, engaged in the business of engraving stationery, letterheads, business and social cards, envelopes, and allied products, and in the sale and distribution thereof. Respondent has caused and now causes said engraved products, when sold, to be transported from his principal place of business in the city of Birmingham, State of Alabama, to the purchasers thereof locatetl in various States of the United States other than the State of Ala- DEWBERRY ENGRAVING CO., ETC. 108& ,. 1078 Findings !' li I',.Lama. There is now, and has been for several years last past a course of trade and commerce in said engraved products by re- ~ lspondent between and among the several Slates of the United States. and in the District of Columbia. Respondent is now, and has been,. fluring the past several years, in substantial competition with other firms, individuals, and corporations also engaged in the businessof engraving stationery, and allied products, and in the sale thereof,. sjmilar to those of respondent, 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 his business, and in the solicitation of sales of his products, respondent Ralph Dewberry,. trading as the Dewberry Engraving Co., circulated and distributed. Ly mail approximately 160,000 letters to prospective customers. throughout the United States, a copy of which is as follows: DEWBEURY ENGRAVING COMPANY Designers and producers of Engraved Stationery 2024 ~-OUkTH AVENUE BIRMINGHAU, ALABAMA You will be disappointed if you read this letter- • • • Disappointed In the price you have been "soaked" for engraving: in the past. Not that your engraver could really help charging you so much~ with old-style, out-of-date equipment, he had to get a high,price. Our prices are the LOWEST in the United States because we have the most modern plant in the country and specialize on engraved stationery. • • • • • • • (The letter includes other matter not necessary to quote here.) PAR. 3. All engraving is accomplished by means of intaglio platesor pieces of metal on which letters, words, or designs have been incised or cut; there are a number of processes of producing intaglio. engraved plates, and one such method is the cutting or incision by hand. Others are the pantograph method and the photoengraving: process. The pantograph method is employed by a large majority· of those engaged in the engraving trade in the United States, and'. respondent produces intaglio plates both by the pantograph method [llld by a method produced by the use of printing type in which proofs are pulled on a transparent· paper which is then dusted with. lamp black or other opaque material. This is then placed in a. ncuum printing frame against a sensitized metal plate and exposed to a strong light, which hardens the sensitized surface of the platewhere the light strikes. The plate is then washed under a stream I' of water, dried and burned, causing the sensitized topping to become- t; I acid resisting. The plate is then etched to the required depth. ' Afterward, the sensitized cutting is removed and the plate chromium •'I faced. The plate is then run on a power press with the use of ,I , . .. ' I I' Conclusion 29 F.T.C. special plate holders. The plate is composed of either copper, brass, or steel. The pantograph method of producing intaglio plates is much more expensive than respondent's method just described. The production of intaglio plates by cutting or hand incision or tooling is much more expensive than either the pantograph or respondent's method.

PAR. 4. The pantograph method of engraving which is used by approximately 90 percent of those engaged in the business is not accomplished with "old-style," "out-of-date," or obsolete equipment; and the statements in respondent's Jetter serve directly and by inference unlawfully to disparage the competitors of respondent, and more specifically those competitors who employ the pantograph method of cutting plates.

PAR. 5. There are among respondent's competitors many who produce engraved stationery and allied products, and distribute and sell same in commerce who in no \vay misrepresent the quality <1r character of their respective products and who do not falsely disparage the products of their respecti"ve competitors. PAn. G. The aforesaid acts and practices, and false statements made by respondent in disparagement of his competitors, have had, nnd have the tendency and capacity to mislead and deceiye a substantial portion of the purchasing public into the enoneous belief that said representations are true, and into the further erroneous belief that the e~graving equipment of respondent's competitors is inferior, antiquated, and out of date. Further, as a direct consequence of a mistaken and erroneous belief induced by the acts and misrepresentations of respondent, as aforesaid, a substantial number .o£ the consuming public has purchased a substantial voluiM of respondent's engraved stationery, and allied products, with the result that trade has been unfairly diverted to the respondent from competitors likewise engaged in the business o£ producing, distributing, and selling engraved stationery, and allied products, and who truthfully advertise their products. As a result thereof injury has l,een, and is now being done by respondent to substantial competition in commerce among and between the various States o£ the United States and the District of Columbia. CONCLUSION The aforesaid acts and practices o£ respondent Ralph Dewberry us herein found, are all to the prejudice and injury o£ the public, and of respondent's competitors, and constitute unfair methods oi competition in commerce within the intent and meaning o£ the Federal Trade Commission Act.

DEWBERRY ENGRAVING CO., ETC. 1085 1078 Order ORDER TO CEASE AND DESIST l; This proceeding having been heard by the Federal Trade Com- (:mission upon the complaint of the Commission, the answer of the respondent, testimony, and other evidence taken before Edward J. IHornibrook, an examiner of the Commission theretofore duly dl'sig- r nated by it in support of the allegations of said complaint and in If opposition thereto, brief in support of the complaint by :Morton •: Nesmith, counsel for the Commission (respondent not having filed brief and oral argument not having been requested), and the Commission having made its findings as to the facts and its conclusion that said respondent has violated the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act.

It i~ ordered, That respondent, Ralph Dewberry, individually and trading as Dewberry Engraving Co. or under any other name or names, his agents, representatives, and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, in connection with the offering for sale, sale, and distribution of his engraved stationery, letterheads, business and social cards, envelopes, and allied products in commerce, as commerce is dl:'fined in the Federal Trade Commission Act, do forthwith cease and desist from representing that engraving produced from plates incised by hand or by the pantograph method or by any method other than that usl:'d by respondent is old style, out of date, antiquated, or inferior.

It is further ordered, That the respondent shall, within GO 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 he has complied with this order.

:21~706'"-40-vol. 2D-71 CO~Il\IISSION DECISIONS1086 FEDERAL TRADE Syllabus 29F. T. C.