R M. Prince Textiles, Inc.

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

IN THE MATTER OF R M. PRINCE TEXTILES, INC., ET AL.

CONSENT SETTLEMENT IN REGARD TO THE ALLEGI'D VIOLATION OF THE FEDERAL TRAnE COJ\MISSION'" ACT AND THE WOOL PRODUCTS LABELING ACT Docket 6081. Complaint, Feb. 10, 1953-Deeision, July, 1958 Where two corporations and their common offcer, and three offcers of a bankrupt corporation, which the first two had furnished with quantities of wool and "'001 stocks, together with orders, specifications, content t.ags and labels, and instructions for manufacturing into wool products as definerl in the Wool Products Labeling Act, eugaged in the sale and distribution in commerce of said wool products- (1) Misbranded cert.ain blankets in that they were not stamped, etco, as req uired by said Act; and (2) Misbranded cert.ain blankets through such false labeling as "All Wool- Excl of ornamentation " when in fact they contained in part reused or reprocessed wool, together with substantial quantities of miscellaneous other fibers:

Held, That such acts and practices const.it.uted mishranding in violation of tbe "Vool Products Labeling Act and the Rules aud Re?;ulations promulgated thereunder; were to the prejudice and injury of the public; and constituted unfair and deceptive acts and practices in C01nmercc. Before Afr. James A. Purcell and Mr. Webster Ballinger hearing eXammerso AfTo George Eo Steinmetz for the Commission. AfTo Abner R. 8i8son of Boston, Masso, for I-, Mo Prince Textiles Inc., Hugo M. Prince, and Devonshire Fabrics, Inc. AfTo Oeorge 01'1.zen of Boston, Masso, for Nathan Tarmy, Morris Tarmy, and Solomon Tarmy.

Afro WilfTed Ao Hay, of Portland, Maine, for Hobert n Schwarz recer ver.

CONSE':T SETI'LE3rent 1 Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Trade Commission Act and the IV 001 Products Labeling Act oJ 1939, the Federal Trade COIlmission, on February 10, lU53, issued and subsequently served its COILplaint on the respondents named in the caption hereof, charging them :J The Commi sion s "Xotice " announcing- and promulgating the consent settlement il:, puhli:-1Jell herewitll, follows:

'The COI1f;ent settlement tendered hy the l):1lties in this vroceeuing-, a copy of which scrvp.d herewith, was uceepted by the Commissioll OIl July 29, 1958, and ordered enter'f'd of record a.: the Commission s f!Dcbugs as to the facts, conclusion, and order in clisl)Ositiofi of thif; proceeding.

The lime fnr filing report of compliance pursuallt to the aforesaid order rum: from tllt, date of service hereof.

H. M. PRINCE 'fEXTILES, INC.) ET AL. 165 164 Findings with the use of unfair and deceptive acts and practices in violation of the provision of said Acts.

The respondents, with the exception of Deena Woolen Mils, Inc. desiring that this proceeding be disposed of by the consent settlement procedure provided in Rule V of the Commission s Rules of Practice any review thereof, andsolely for the purposes of this proceeding, the enforcement of the order consented to, and conditioned upon the Commission s acceptance of the consent settlement hereinafter set forth, and in lieu of answer to said complaint hereby: 1. Admit all the jurisdictional allegations set forth in the complaint. 2. Consent that the Commission may enter the matters hereinafter set forth as its findings as to the facts, conclusion, and order to cease and desist. It is understood that the respondents, in consenting to the Commission s entry of said findings as to the facts, conclusion, and admitting or deny-order to cease and desist, specifically refrain from ing that they have engaged in any of the acts or practices stated therein to be in violation of law.

3. Agree that this consent settlement may be set aside in whole or in part under the conditions and in the manner provided in Paragraph s Rules of Practice. (f) of Rule V of the Commission The admitted jurisdictional facts, the statement of the acts and practices which the Commission had reason to believe were Ull1awful the conclusion based thereon, and the order to cease and desist, all of which the respondents consent may be entered herein in final disposition of this proc'eeding, are as follows:

FINDINGS AS TO THE racts PARAGRAPH 1. Corporate respondents H. M. Prince Textiles, Inc. and Devonshire Fabrics, Inc., each constitute a corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of N ew York. The respondent Hugo M. Prince is the president and treasurer of each said corporate respondent. This individual formulates, directs and controls the acts, policies and practices in each such instance. The offces and the principal place of business of both said corporation respondents and of said Hugo M. Prince are located at 450 Seventh Avenue in the City of New York, New York.

, is a cor- PAR. 2. Corporate respondent Deena Woolen Mills, Inc. poration duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Maine. Said corporate respondent since the fiing the complaint herein has been adjudicated a bankrupt pursuant to involuntary bankruptcy proceedings initiated in the U. S. District Court for the District of Maine in Portland, Maine, such adjudication having been had on March 3, 1953; followed by the appointment of John D. Findings 50 F. T. C.

Leddy, Esquire, Portland, Maine, as Receiver of said Deena Woolen Mills, Inc., a corporation, bankrupt, for the purpose of administering said bankrupt estate pending the election of a Trustee by the creditors thereof.

The said Receiver has in writing stated that no operations are being conducted by said bankrupt respondent corporation at this time and such ad-that no further operations are contemplated. By reason of judication in bankruptcy, together with the fact that no further operations have been in effect or are now contemplated in the future, the Commission finds that the said complaint insofar as it relates to the corporate respondent Deena "\V oolen Mils, Inc., should be dismissed. PAR. 3. Nathan Tarmy, Morris Tarmy, and Solomon Tarmy were during all times referred to in the complaint, offcers of the said respondent, Deena Woolen Mils, Inc. These individuals formulated directed and controlled the acts, policies and practices of said cor- "\'T porate respondent Deena oolen Mils, Inc. PAR. 4. Respondents H. M. Prince Textiles, Inc., and Devonshire Fabrics, Inc., during all of the times hereinafter mentioned, furnished and continued to furnish respondent Deena Woolen Mils, Inc., with quantities of wool and wool stocks, together with orders, specifications content tags and labels, with instructions for manufacturing such materials into wool products.

Thereafter, in conjunction with said Devonshire Fabrics, Inc., the said H. M. Prince Textiles, Inc., undertook to sell and distribute, and did sell and distribute, in commerce certain of said wool products manufactured by respondent Deena "\V oolen Mills, as aforesaid. The said wool products, namely, blankets, when finished, were thereupon introduced into commerce by Deena "\V oolen Mills, Inc., as well as by respondent Devonshire Fabrics, Inc., pursuant to content labeling and shipping instructions furnished by the said H. M. Prince Textiles Inc., or its selling division, Devonshire Fabrics, Inc. PAR. 5. Subsequent to the effective date of the said Wool Products Labeling Act and more especially since 1950, said respondents and each of them have manufactured or caused to be manufactured, for introduction into commerce, introduced or caused to be introduced into commerce, sold, offered for sale, transported, distributed and delivered for shipment in commerce, as "commerce" is defined in the "\V 001 Products Labeling Act of 1939, wool products, as "wool products" are defined therein.

PAR. 6. Certain of said wool products were misbranded in that they were not stamped, tagged or labeled as required under the provisions of Section 4 (a) (2) of the said Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939, and in the manner and form prescribed by the Rules and Regulations promulgated under said Act.

I-I. M. PRINCE TEX'lLES , INC. , E'l AL. 167 164 Order PAR. 7. Certain of said wool products were misbranded within the intent and meaning of said Wool Products Labeling Act and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder in that they were falsely and deceptively labeled with respect to the constituent fibers included therein.

Among the misbranded wool products aforementioned were blankets labeled by said corporate respondents as "All Wool-Exce. of ornamentation; whereas in truth and in fact said blankets were not all wool as defined by the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939 and the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder, but contained in part reused or reprocessed wool, together with substantial quantities of miscellaneous fibers other than wool.

CONCLUSION The acts and practices of the respondents as herein found, constitute misbranding of wool products and as such are in violation of the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939 and of the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder; and all of the aforesaid acts and practices as herein alleged are to the prejudice and injury of the public and constitute unfair and deceptive acts and practices in commerce, within the intent and meaning of the Federal Trade Commission Act. ORDER TO CEASE AND DESIST : t is ordered That the corporate respondents, H. M. Prince Textiles Inc., and Devonshire Fabrics, Inc. , and their offcers, and Hugo M. Prince, Nathan Tarmy, MOTlis Tarmy, and Solomon Tarmy, individually, and respondents' representatives, agents, and employees, directly or through any corporate or other device, in connection with the introor the saleduction or manufacture for introduction into commerce, transportation, or distribution in commerce, as "commerce" is defined in the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939, of blankets or other "wool products" as such products are defined in and subject to the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939 which products contain, purport to contain, or in any way are repre- " assented as containing "wool reprocessed wool " or "reused wool those terms are defined in said Act, do forthwith cease and desist from misbranding said products by:

1. Falsely or deceptively stamping, tagging, labeling, or otherwise identifying such products as to the character or amount of the constituent fibers included therein;

2. Failing to securely affx to or place on each product a stamp, tag, label or other means of identification showing in a clear and conspICuollS manner:

Order 50 F. T. C.

(a) The percentage of the total fiber weight of such wool product exclusive of ornamentation not exceeding 5 per centum of said total fiber weight of (1) wool, (2) reprocessed wool, (3) reused wool, (4) each fiber other than wool where said percentage by weight of such fiber is 5 per centum or more, and (5) the aggregate of all other fibers. (b) The maximum percentages of the total weight of such wool product of any nonfibrous loading, filling or adulterating matter; (c) The name or the registered identification number of the manufacturer of such wool product or of one or more persons engaged in introducing such wool product into commerce, or in the offering for sale, sale, transportation, distribution, or delivery for shipment thereof in commerce, as "commerce" is defined in the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939.

Provided That the foregoing provisions concerning misbranding shall not be construed to prohibit acts permitted by paragraphs (a) and (b) of Section 3 of the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939; And provided further That nothing contained in this order shall be construed as limiting any applicable provisions of said Act, or the Rules and Regulations promulgated thereunder.

It is further ordered That the complaint herein, insofar as it relates to the corporate respondent Deena VV oolen MiJs, Inc., be, and the same , hereby dismissed.

It is further ordered That the respondents herein, except the corporate respondent Deena Woolen Mills, Inc., shall within sixty (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 the Order to cease and desist. H. M. PRINCE TEXTILES INC., A CORPORATION (Sgd) By (S) H.M. PRINCE.

(Name) (Title) Pres. DEVONSHilE F A B R I C S INC. , A CORPORATION (Sgd) By (S) H. M. PRINCE.

(Name) (Title) Pres. Hugo M. Prince, individually and an offcer of H. M.

Prince Textiles, Inc., and Devonshire Fabrics, Inc.

(Sgd) (S) HUGOM. PRINCE Nathan Tarmy, individually and as an offcer of Deena Woolen Mils, Inc.

H. M. PRINCE TEXTILES , INC., ET AL. 169 Order 50 F. T. C.

(Sgd) (SJ NATHAN TARMY Morris Tarmy, individually and as an offcer of Deena Woolen Mils, Inc.

(Sgd) (SJ MORRIS TARMY Solomon Tarmy, individually and as an offcer of Deena Woolen Mils, Inc.

(Sgd) (SJ SOLOMON TARMY.

Date: June 22 1953.

The foregoing consent settlement is hereby accepted by the Federal Trade Commission and ordered entered of record on this 29th day of July 1953.

&; &; 170 FEDERAL TUADE COM::ISSION DECISIONS Order 50 F. T. O.