Inland Empire Bakers' Assn., Inc

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

IN THE MATTER OF INLAND EMPIRE BAKERS' ASSOCIATION, INC., ET AL. I COMPLAINT, FINDINGS, AND ORDER IN REGARD TO Tile ALLEGED ·violatioll OF SEC, 5 OF AN ACT OF CONGRESS APPROVED SEPT. 26, 1914 Dorket .q.550. Complaint, July SO, 1941-Decision, July 10, 19.q;a ' . Where a nonprofit corporation, mrmbershlp of which was composed of individuals and concerns engaged in the manufacture and in the sale and distribution o! bread and other bakery products in the "Inland Empire,'' comprising eastern Washington and the Idaho "Panhandle,'' in the ca~e of certain members transporting their products across the State line between the 1 two, and. except insofar as their competition had been restrained as below set forth. in competition with one another and with other bakeries in the area men· tioned; and rertain representative members; · Following the court's invalidation of the "Washington .\gricultural Adjust.rnent or Triple A Act"-wllich, euacted shortly after the organization of tbe association, provided for the ftdovtion and enforcement of marketing agree· ments by various Industries in the State handling agricultural products, and pursuant to which the \Vusbington bakers, acting through the associatlo!l, had adopted and promulgated a marketing agreement regulating the bnking industry in enstet·n ·washington, including the fixing of uniform prices on all bakery products-and subsequent to unsuccessful efforts to embody in a con· tract, in substance, the provision~ of said marketing 11agreement; with a desire of continuing the benefits which had accrued to them thereunder- (a) Undertoolt to obtain such results through means of informnl agreements and understandings reached through the meetings and other activities of the assoc:lation, and thereby sucCCI!ded in maintaining substantially same schedule of pt·lces. as had been obtained under said Trlp\e A Marketing Agreement; and, while members mostly !>old only intrastate, did not except or exclude from their agreements interstate sales:

(b) From time to time checked up on isolated instances in which bakers did not maintain prices fixed by them, and made efforts to coerce such recalcitrant .. bakers Into maintaining fixed prices; and (c) WE>re Instrumental in obtaining State enactment o'f a price recording statute under which all bakers selling their products within the State were required to file their prices with Its Director of Agriculture, and, could change such filed prices only on ten days' notice; and, through their association, supplied bakers with bunk forms for use in such price filing and advised and assisted them therein, and thereby were enabled to keep informed with respect to prices and contemplated price changes;

With the result that uniform prices. were thus fixed in all interstate as well as intrastate sales made by any of their number; and with ten(lency and capacity substnntlally to restrain and suppress competition in the sale and distribution of bread and other bnkery products in commerce, to increase the prices paid by the immediate purchasers and consequently the prices paid by the con· suming public, and to deprive such purchasers and consuming public of the advantagrs which would prevail under conditions of free and open competition;.

INLAND EMPIRE BAKERS' ASS'N, INC.~ ET A~. 141 . 140 Complaint lield, That such acts and practices, under the circumstances set forth, were all to the prejudice of the public and competitors, and constituted unfair methods of competition in commerce.

Defore Mr. lV. lV. Sheppard, trial examiner. Mr. Allen. C. Phelps for the Commission.

Mr. Roy A. Redfield, of Spokane, ·wash .. , for respondents. Complaint Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act and by virtue of the authority vested in it by said act, the Federal 1'trade Commission having reason to believe that the corporationst associations, firms, and individuals named in the caption hereof, hereinafter referred to as respondents, have been and are now using ~nfair m~thods of competition in commerce, as "commerce" is defined ln said act, and it appearing to said Commission that a proceeding ?sit in respect thereof would be in the public interest, hereby issues lts complaint, stating its charges in that respect as follows: P ARAGRAPII 1. The respondent, Inland Empire Bakers' Association, Inc., is a corporation, organized and existing under the laws o£ the State of Washington, with its principal office and place of business located at 311 Radio Central Building, Spokane, Wash. The. mem- ?ership o£ said respondent, Inland Empire Bakers' Association, Inc., ls composed o£ individuals, partnerships, and corporations who are engaged in the business of processing, manufacturing, offering for Sale, selling, and distributing bread and bakery products in certainI areas in the States o£ Washington and Idaho. Said respondent is ' hereinafter referred to for convenience as "respondent association." PAn. 2. The following-named individuals are or have been officers r:f said respondent association and are named as respondents h<'rein both in their individual capacities, and as office.rs of said association: L. L. Francis, % Silver Loaf Baking Co., 1102 1Ve~t Ide Street, Spokane, 1Vash., president; Mel Jacobsen, o/o Jacobsen's Bakery, 617 North Ash Street, Spokane, 1Vash., vice president; V. B. Pringle, 311 Radio Central Building, Spokane, 1Vash., secretary and executive ~~a~~ - PAn. 3. The membership. of said respondent association varies from time to time, and it is therefore impractical to specifically name all of said members as respondents herein. The following-named corllorations and individuals are representative of the whole membership ?f said respondent association and are named as respondents herein lndividually and severall); and as members o£ said association and as M9749•n-43-vol. 35·-12 142 , FEDE.RAL TRADE COMMISSION DEoCISJ:OINS Complaint 35 F. T. C. representatives of all members of said respondent association as a .class, including those not herein specifically named, who are also ·made respondents herein: Silver Loaf Baking Co., a corporation, 1102 ·west Ide Street, Spokane, Wash.; E. A. Boge, doing business lmder the name and style of Boge Brothers Bakery, 401 South Sher· man Street, Spokane, 'Vash.; and Olaf Jacobsen, doing business . 1.mder the name and style of Jacobsen's Bakery, 617 North Ash Street, Spokane, 'Vash. Said respondents are hereinafter referred to for c~mvenience as "respondent members.:' P.1.R. 4. Respondent, Silver Loaf Baking Co., is a corporation, · organized and existing under the laws of the State of 'Vashington, :and maintains its principal office and place of business at 1102 West 'Ide Street, Spokane, 'Vash.

Respondent, E. A. Doge, is the owner and operator of Doge Broth· .ers Bakery, with his principal office and place of business at 401 South Sherman Street, Spokane, ·wash.

Respondent, Olaf Jacobsen, is the owner and oper::ttor of Jacobsen's Dakery, with hill principal office and place of business located at 611 North Ash Street, Spokane, "~ash. .

PAn. 5. Said responuent members of respondent association are .engaged in the manufacture and distribution of bread and bakery products in the eastern part of the State of 'Va~hington. and the -western part of the State of Idaho. Many of said respondent mern· ·hers, in connection with the distribution for sale and sale of such bakery products, and in the regular course of their respective busi· nesses, ship or cause some of said commodities to be transported ,across the State line between the States of 'Vashington and Idaho, that is, from the point of origin of such products in one of such States to the customers Luying the same in the other. There is and has been at all times herein mentioned 1t current of trade and corn· mei·ce in bread and bakery products between said States of ·washing· ton and Idaho. Said respondent members are in competition with ,(me another and with' other bakers in the distribution for sale and sale of such bakery products, in the areas above mentioned, except -insofar as such competition has been hindered, lessened, and re· :Strained as hereinafter alleged. , . PAR. 6. Respondent officers and members· of respondent association, ·since about 1935, have agreed and confederated together, and have united in and pursued a common a~d concerted course of action, act· ing through and by mea.ns of respondent association, to restrict, re· strain, and suppress competition in the sale and distribution of bread and bakery products by the manufacturers thereof to their customers located in the easter'n'part of the State of Washington and the western INLAND-EMPIRE: BAKERS' ASS'N, INC., E1' AL. 143 ~40 Complaint :Part of the State of Idaho, by agreeing to fix and observe, among themselves, uniform and noncompetitive prices for such commodities, and by .agreeing to act collectively to enforce and ,impose upon all b.akers selling said products in such area the use of such noncompctihve prices so fixed by respondents. Since said date, respondents have ~adopted, followed, and adhered to said policy of fixing and maintainlug artificial, uniform, nnd noncompetitive prices for bread ancJ bakery llroducts in said area by the use of the various devices and means hereinafter set forth .

. l)An: 7. Purs4ant to said agreement, combination, and policy, and ln furtherance thereof, respondents have done, among other things, the following: . 1. Formulated, carried out, and made effective the policy and meth- <>ds described in the preceding paragraph. . 2. In 1935 and 1936 respondents attempted to s~cure tho signatures of all bakers in eastern Washington and western Idaho to a written agreement fixing the prices at which br~ad and bakery products were to be sold in such area.

3. Held meetings of said respondent association and its officers and members at which the policy of fixing prices on bread and bakery ·products, aboY.e described·, was discussed, adopted, and agreed to. 4. Issued and circulated bulletins, circulars, and letters in furtherttnce of said a~reement and policy and in aid of efforts by respondents to establish, effectuate, and maintain the same. . 5. As::;i:;;ted all bakers in the area mentioned in drawing up sclwd- .tlles of uniform prices for bread and bakery products to be filed with the Department of Agriculture of the State of 'Vashington, in accordance with a statute of said. State, and coercively attempted to prevent changes in such schedules. · 6. Cooperated with other associations of bakers in fixing prices on bread and bakery products in areas on the borders' of or adjacent to the territory ~served by respondent members. . 7. Checked up on individual bakers refusing to adhere to said prices ~o fixed by respondents and coerced them, or attempted to coerce them, lnto adhering to such prices and policy.

· 8.' Supervised generally the practices and prices of all bakers in the area mentioned and attempted to require them to conform to re- Spondents' prices and program.

PAR. 8. Tho officer respondents hereinbefore named are now, and have been, officers of said responde.nt association, and as such officers, have had, und now have, full and complete charge of the activities of said respol-ident association, and have conducted the affairs of said 144 FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION DECISIONS ' Findings 35F. T.C;

association in pursuance to and in furtherance of the objects and aims of said association as above set 'forth .• PAR. 9. The re~ults of the acts and practices of the said respondent members and of said respondent association, as herein set forth, have been, and now are, to substantially lessen, restrict, restrain, and sup· press competition in the interstate sale of bread and bakery products in the States of 'Vashington and Idaho and to empower the said respond~nts to control the market' and enhance the prices of said products above the prices which would prevail un.der normal, natural, free, and open competition. Said acts and practices also have tended to promote a monopoly in ~aid respondents in the manufacture and sale of said commodities in the trade areas hereinabove mentioned. PAn. 10. The acts and practices of the respondents, as herein alleged, are all to tha prejudice ·of the public, have a dangerous tend· ency to and have actually hindered and prevented price competition between and among said respondents in the sale of said products in commerce within the intent and meaning of the Federal Trade Com· mission Act, and have placed in said respondents the power to control . prices; have increased the prices of said products paid by the pur· chasers thereof and consequently the prices paid by the public; have J tended to create in the said respondents a monopoly in the sale of ~ said products in such commerce, and have unreasonably restrained such commerce in said products, and constitute unfair methods of competition in commerce within the intent and meaning of the Federal Trade Commission Act. · REPORT, FINDINGS As TO THE FACTS, AND Onder Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act, the Federal Trade Commission, on July 30, 1941, issued and subse· qnently served upon the respondents named in the caption hereof, its complaint, in this proceeding, charging the respondents with the ~se 01~ unfair methods of competition in commerce in violation of the pro· visions of that act. After the filing of the respondents' answer, testi· mony and other evidence in support of the allegations of the complaint were introduced by the attorney for the Commission, and in opposition thereto by the attorney for the respondents, before a trial examiner of the Commission theretofore duly designated by it, which testimony and other evidence were duly recorded and filed in the office of the Commission. Thereafter, the proceeding regularly came on for final hearing before the Commission on the complaint, the answer of the respondents, testimony and other evidence (includipg certain· testi· mony omitted from the trial examiner's report, which omissions were made.the subject of exceptions by the respondents), report o.f the trial · INLAND EMPIRE BAKERS' ASS'N, INC., ET AL. 145 14o Findings "elarniner upon the evidence and the exceptions to such report, and briefs in support of and in opposition to the complaint (oral argument 11.ot having been requested), and the Coll,lmission, having duly con- Sidered the matter and being now fully advised in the premises, 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 THE FACTS ' PARAGRAPH 1. Respondent, Inland Empire Bakers' Association, lnc. (hereinafter referred to as "respondent association" and as "the association"), is a nonprofit corpor11tion organized and existing under the laws of the State of Washington, with its principal office and Place of business at 311 Radio Central Building, Spokane, Wash. 1'he membership of the association is ·composed of individuals, partnerships, and corporations engaged in the manufacture and in the sale and distribution of bread and other bakery products in ~certain areas in the States of ·w~ashington and Idaho. , . Respondent, L. L. Francis, 1102 '\Vest Ide Street, Spokane, Wash., 18 or was until recently president of the association; respondent Mel Jacobsen, 617 North Ash ~treet, Spokane, '\Vash., is vice president of the association; and respondent V. B. Pringle, 311 Radio Central :Building, Spokane, '\Vash., is secretary and executive manager of the a~sociation. These individuals formulate the policies and conduct, ~!feet, and control the acts ami practices of the association, and are Joined as respondents in this proceeding both in their individual ~apacities and in their capacities as officers of the association . . The membership of the association varies from time to time, and ht is th~refore impracticable to ·name all of the members specifically <Jtein. The corporation and individuals named below are representative of the entire membership of the association and are named as respondents herein individually and as members of the association, ' t\J;d also as representative of all the members of the association as a ~lass: Silver Loaf Baking Co., a corporation organized and existing llnder the laws of the State of '\Vashington, with its principal'office hnd place of business at 1102 '\Vest Ide Street, Spokane, Wash.; E. A . .oge, doing business under the name of Doge Brothers Bakery, with h1s principal office and place of business at 401 South Sherman Street, Spokane, '\Vash.; anq Olaf Jacobsen, doing business under the name Gf Jacobsen's Bakery, with his principal office and place of business a.t 617 North Ash Street, Spokane, Wash. The members of the assoylation, including those named above, are frequently referred to here- 1_l1after as "respondent members" or as "members." Findings . 35 F. T. C- PAR. 2. The members of the association are engaged in the manu· fn.cture and in the sale and distribution of bread and other bakery products in the area known as the "Inland Empire," which comprise& the eastern part of the State of Washington and the northern part of the State of Idaho, frequently referred to as the "panhandle" of Idaho. In the course and conduct of their respective businesses~ and. in connection with the sale and distribution of their products, certain members ship some' of their products or cause them to be transported. across the State line between the States of Washington and Idaho-tha~ is, from the point of origin of such products in one of these State& to the purchasers of the products located in the other State. These members maintain, and for many years last past have maintained, a course of trade in their respective products in commerce betweell the States of Washington and Idaho. · PAn. 3. Except insofar as compejition has been hindered, lessened, and restrained as a result of the acts and practices hereinafter described, all of the respondent members are in competition with one another and with other bakers in the sale and distribution of bakery products in the areas mentioned above, and those members selling and distributing their products in interstate commerce are in competition with one another in such commerce and also with other' bakers engaged in selling and distributing bakery products in such commerce.

P.m. 4. The association was organized in January 1934, at which time respondent" V. B. Pringle was made its secretary and executi''8 manager, and in November 1934, a formal constitution was adopted- The ostensible purposes of the association were set forth in the' constitution in the form of a "Declaration of Princi pies," as follows; · Principle 1.-We belleYe that men who cooperate In the organization of tllll' baking industry, so as to afford the greatest oppoi'tunity for de1•eiovment of' this baking Industry, to better serve the public and those other Industries' os<;ociated with them, then his service Is of value to all. · Principle 2.-The principles of this association shall be to protect, promote, , foster, and advance the Interest of the baking Industry and Its members. PriiJ.Clple 3.~To bring about the stabilization of the baking Industry, so t]Jat, indivluually and collectively, members may voice their needs In developing a· better Industry.

Principle ~.-To cooperate collectively in giving the public a1i understandill!:" of the Importance of the tenth largest lndust1·y in the United States. Principle 5.-To assist members of the baking Industry in arriving at a proper cost of operation and perfecting the ba\dng Industry In all It~ branches... Principle 6.-It Is the Intent of the association to foster and perpetuate a cooperative spirit and to treat his competitors In the baking Industry, as be would like to be treated.

Principle '7.-To effectuate the poUcy of farm relief and to eliminate sucll tmde practices as tend to lessen the use of farm products. INLAND EMPIRE BAKERS' ASS'N, INC., ET AL. 147' 14o Findings I>r!nclple 8.-To produce and relieve unemployment and lmproYe the standard.- ' d Principle 9.-To Effectuate better corniJt!tltive conditions of the bal~ing tnllstry, which will tend to increase the consumption of farm products and" reflect accordingly to the benefit of the consumer, producer, mauufuct.urer, and. eln!Jloyees, as well as a fair and reasonable profit t~ tbe employer . .l'l·inciple 10.-Tbe association Is not organized for pecuniary profit an<l shalt llot declare dividends or other fin,anclal distribution to Its members. . ~t was originally contemplated that the Association would include- In lts membership the bakers of eastern 'Vashington, northern Idahor and the we-stern section of Montana, and in the. early days of itsoperations the association did number among its members, in addition ~0 practically every baker in eastern ·washington, a number of bakers . ocatecl in northern Idaho.- Shortly after the association was organ-- Ize~, however, the State of 'Vashin~ton enacted an Agricultural' Adjustment Act, known generally as the Washington Triple A, which lll'ovidecl for the adoption and enforcement of marketing agreements- ~ the various industries in the State handling agricultural products.- • ot long afterward, the State of Idaho enacted similar legislation. A.s a result of the enactment of these statutes, the bakers composingthe membership of the association divided into two groups. The- \V ashington bakers, acting through the association, proceeded to· lldopt and promulgate a marketing agreement which provided for ~he regulation of the baking indi,1stry in eastern 'Vashington, includ- Ing the fixing of uniform prices on all bread and other bakery Products sold in that part of the State. The effective date of thisllgreement \Vas March 15, 1934. The secretary and executive manager· of the association, respondent Pringle, was the State administrator ~£ the ·washington Triple A for the eastern 'Vashington area, and rom time to tim~ new price lists were issued by Pringle. _ Likewise, tl_1e bakers in northern Idaho proceeded to organize under· the Idaho Triple A and to adopt and promulgate a marketing agree- ~llent fixing the prices on all bakery products sold in that part of bdah~. ..Dy this tim.e t.he Idaho bakers had discontinued their me~lllrshlp m the assoc1atlon (except one baker, who sold a substantial Portion of his products in eastern Washington), and their activities- ~ere not conducted through the association, CIS were the activities of ~le Washington bakers. While the Idaho Agricultural Adjustment et has never been declared invalid by the courts, the Attorney ~general of Idaho has rendered an opinion to the effect that the act: 18 Unconstitutional.

. A. P-AR. 5..In ~uly .1D35, the Washington Agricultural Adjustment ~t was held mvahd by the Supreme Court of that State. As the llrlces which the eastern vVashington bakers had been receiving for ' . ! Findings 35F. T.C.

their products under the marketing agreement were substantially higher than the prices which. bad prevailed prior thereto, the bakers were desirous of continuing in some other form and by some other means t,.he benefits wh~ch had accrued to them under the Triple .A. They first undertook to do this through a proposed contract desi~: nated by them as "Eastern 'Vashington Fair Trade Agreement, which embodied in substance the provisions of the marketing agree· ment promulgated under the Triple A. This contract was signed by some forty bakers in the eastern 'Vashingt.on area, but it never became effective because it required as a condition precedent to its taking effect the signatures of bakers representing 85% ofthe norrnal production of bakery products within that area, and one of the largest bakers in the area declined to join in the agreement. . PAR. 6. Having failed in the~r efforts to obtain the adoption of this formal contract, the members of the association undertook to obtain the same results by means of informal agreements and understand· ings reached through the meetings and other activities of the assoda· tion. The minutes of meetings held between September 5, 1935, and June 2, 1937, are in evide.nce, and they are replete with statements by various officers and members showing the existence of such agree· ments and understandings, and showing that concerted and coopera· tive action was taken by the respondents pursuant thereto. In this manner and by these means, the 'respondents sought to maintain and were successful in maintaining substantially the same schedule of prices as had obtained under the Triple A marketing agreement. The evidence further shows that the association from time to tiJ:ne checked up on isolated instances in which bakers in that area did not maintain the prices fixed by respondents, and efl'~rts were made to coerce such recalcitra:nt bakers into maintaining the fixed schedule of prices.

PAR. 7. The respondents were also instrumental in obtaining, in January 1937, the enactment by the State of 'Vashington of a price· recording statute under which all bakers selling their products within the State were required to file their prices with the State director of agriculture. Such prices, once filed, could not be changed except upon 10 days' notice. Through the association the respondents maintained a close check on all prices filed by bakers in the easte,rn ·washington area. Respondent Pringle, in his capacity as secretary and executive manager of the association, contacted the bakers in the area, supplied them with blank iorms to be used in filing their prices, and advised and assisted them in their price filings, obtaining a corn· mission as notary public in order that he might. be able to notarize INLAND EMPIRE BAKERS' ASS'N, INC., ET AL. 149 140 Conclusion the executed :forms. In this manner the respondents were enabled to ' keep 'themselves informed with respect to the prices of ·the bakers in that area, and with respect also to any contemplated changes in prices. PAR. 8. The respondents do not deny that. they sought, through mutual agreements and concerted action, to maintain a schedule of Uniform prices governing the sale of their products, but they insist th_at such agreements and activities related only to the sale of products Within the State of ·washington, and that interstate sales were in no ~ay involved. The record discloses, however, that' at no time were lnterstate sales excepted or excluded :from the agreements, and those members of the association who sold their products in interstate com- ~erce adopted and maintained the agreed schedule of prices in their Interstate transactions as well as in intrastate sales." 'Vhile the agreements may have contemplated intrastate sales primarily, this being ?ue to the fact that most of the respondents sold only within the State In which they were located, the result of the agreements was that uniform prices were also fixed in all interstate sales made by any of the ~respondents. A significant circumstance indicating that it was the Intention of the respondents to regulate trade in both 'Vashington and Idaho and between the two States is that, in.1940 and 1941, strenuous efforts were made to reenlist the northern Idaho bakers in the association. That these efforts met with substantial success is attested by the fact that in Hl41 eleven bakers in northern Idaho renewed their lllembership in the association.

PAR. 9. The agreements, understandings, combinations, and conspiracies entered into by the respondents, and the acts done· pursuant thereto and in furtherance thereof, as herein described, have had and now have the tendency and capacity substantially to lessen, restrict, :restrain, and suppress competition among the respondents in the offer- ~ng for sale, sale, and distribution of bread and other bakery products In commerce between the States of Washington and Idaho, to increase the prices paid by the hnmediate purchasers of such products, and cons~quently the prices paid by the consuming public, and to deprive such purchasers and the consuming public of the advantages which Would prevail under conditions of normal, natural, free, and open competition among the respondents.

CONCLUSION The acts and practices of the respondents. as herein found are all to the prejudice of the public and of respondents' 1Competitors, and con- Stitute unfair methods of competition in commerce with~ the intent ltnd meaning of the Federal Trade Commission Act. 150 FEDERAL • TRADE COMMISSION DECISIOINS Order 35F. T.C.

ORDER TO CEASE AND DESIST This proceeding having been heard by the Federal Trade Com· mission upon the cumi1laint of the Commission, the answer of respondents, testimony· and other evidence in support of the allega· tions of the complaint and in opposition thereto, taken before a trial examiner of the Commission theretofore duly designated by it, the report of the trial examiner upon the evidence and the exceptions to such report, ·and briefs in support of and in opposition to the .complaint (oral argument not having been requested), and the Com· mission having made its findings as to the facts and its conclusion that the respondents have violated the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act. . It is fYrdered, That the respondents, Inland Empire Bakers' Asso· ciation, Inc., a corporation; L. L. Francis, individually and as president of said association; Mel Jacobsen, individually and as vice president of said association; V. B. Pringle, individually and as secretary and. executive manager of said association; Silver Loaf Baking Co., a corporation, a member of said association; E ..A.. Doge, trading as Doge Brothers Bakery, ind.ividually and ns _a'mem· her of said association; Olaf Jacobsen, trading as Jacobsen's Bakery, individually and us a member of said association; all other members of saiu association, as :representatives for whom the said members named above were made respondents herein; and the officers, repre· sentatives, agents, and employees of said association and of the respective members thereof, directly or through any corporate or other: uevice, in connection with the offering for sale, sale, and distribution _of bread and other bakery products in commerce, as "commerce" is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act,· do forth with cease and desist from :

1. Entering into, continuing, or carry~ng out, or aiding or assis~ing in the continuing or carrying out, of any agreement, understanding, combination or conspiracy between or among any two or more of said respondents, or b~tween or among any one or mor·e of said respondents and any other person, partnership, or corporation, for the purpose or with the effect of establishing or maintaining uniform prices for bakery products. · 2, Doing by cooperative or concerted action, or agreement or under· standing between or among any two or more of said respondents, or between or among any one or more of said respondents and any other person, partnership, or corporation, any of the following acts or things:

INLAND EMPIREl BAKERS'· ASS'N, INC., ET AL. 151 14o Order (a) Fixing, establishing, or maintaining up.iform prices for bakery :Products.

(b) Entering into discussions for the purpose or with the effect ·or agreeing upon, a.rriving at, adopting, fixing, or maintaining uniform prices for bl),kery products. · ' (c) Coercing or attempting to coerce any person, partnership, or corporation ~ngaged in selling bakery products into establishing or lllaintaining uniform prices fixed by respondents. · It is further ordered, That the respondents shall, within 60 days after service upon them of this order, file with the Commission a report in writing, ·setting forth in detail the manner and form in 'Which they have complied with this order.

III

I 't j! 152 FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION DE.CISIOINIS · Complaint 35F. T.C.