NAB reports (Jan-Dec 1941)

be given an opportunity to show cause why cease and desist orders should not be issued against them. Copinol Company — Robert E. Overell, trading under the firm name of Copinol Company, 7th and Main Sts., Los Angeles, en¬ gaged in the distribution of a medicinal preparation designated "Copinol” and sometimes ‘‘Copinol Nasal Medicine,” is charged in a complaint with false advertising. The complaint charges that in advertisements distributed through the United States mails and other means in commerce, the respond¬ ent has represented among other things: "Secret Formula for Nose Catarrh Revealed at Last!” "Special ingredient retains medication longer in nose — speeds relief in catarrh-choked nasal congestion, shrinks swollen membranes,” and " * * * New laws require that Copinol reveal its treasured formula and now the whole world knows that LANOLIN, blended with six other scientific ingredients, is the amazingly effective medication that insures such lasting relief from stuffy head colds, catarrh-choked nose and throat, nasal catarrh, and sinus congestions. * * *” These representations, the complaint continues, are false and mis¬ leading; the preparation has no therapeutic value in the treatment of head colds, nasal catarrh, or sinus congestion in excess of fur¬ nishing temporary relief to congested nasal mucous membranes, and is nothing more than a m.ild antiseptic emollient and constrictor of the arterioles. The complaint charges further that respondent’s preparation contains ephedrine, and the preparation may be harmful to those suffering from heart trouble, high blood pressure, diabetes or thyroid trouble, and that use of the preparation over a long period of time is likely to nroduce such prolonged nasal constriction as to cause tissue damage from anoxemia with secondary inflammatory reaction. The advertisements disseminated b>' the respondent, the com¬ plaint continues, contain no cautionary statements to the effect that this preparation should not be used by persons having heart trouble, high blood pressure, diabetes or thyroid trouble, and con¬ stitute false advertising in that they fail to reveal that use of the preparation under the conditions prescribed in the advertisements or under such conditions as are customary or usual, may result in injury to health. (4431) Ktliel IJellamy, Iiic., 30 Elm St., Nutley, N. J., engaged in the sale and distribution of a cosmetic and drug preparation designated "Ethel Bellamy Eyelash Luxuriant,” is charged, in a complaint with misrepresentation of the product. In advertisements circulated in commerce, the complaint charges, the respondent has represented that the product is of substantial therapeutic value in the treatment of granulated eyelids; that its use promotes the growth of eyelashes, and that it supplies pigment lo eyelashes and darkens eyelashes permanently. These representations, the complaint continues, arc exaggerated, misleading and untrue. (4424) Food Ser\i(e Eciiiipineiit Industry, Inc. — Charging various members of the food service equipment industry with combinations and agreements to unlawfully restrict competition in the sale of their jirorlucts and create monopolies, a complaint has been issued against Food Service Equipment Inrlustry, Inc., Chicago. Its officers, directors, anrl member companies who arc representative of the some 75 or 80 of the country’s leading dealers in fond .service equipment; corporations manufacturing such equipment, who are representative of concerns holding ‘‘Honor Roll Certificates” from the industry association; Illinois Brass Mfg. Co., Chicago; Colum¬ bia Stamping and Enameling Companx’, Long Island City, N. Y.; .■\merican Vitrified China Manufacturers’ .Association, New Castle, Pa., two of its officers, and its member manufacturing companies. The complaint alleges that each of the various respondents, in cooperation with one or more other respondents, either directly, or through Food Service Equipment Industry, Inc., or its officers or directors, or .American Vitrified China Alanufacturers’ .Association, or its officers, or by other means, entered into agreements, combi¬ nations, policies and practices which had the effect, among other things, of monopolizing in the respondent food service equipment dealers the resale and distribution of food service equipment to hotels, clubs, restaurants and other users, and in monopolizing in the respondent manufacturers the manufacture of such equipment. The complaint alleges that by means of agreements and under 20 — January 3, 1941 standings; (1) the distributors comprising the industry association membership, through the association required all manufacturers of food service equipment to sell their products through the industry association members and not directly to ultimate users, and pursued a general policy of reducing competition throughout the United States which tended to maintain a monopoly in the respondent dealers and manufacturers, such policies and practices having been accomplished through national and local association meetings, special committees, publications and by other means; (2) the industry association issued to respondent manufacturers ‘‘Honor Roll Certificates” signifying that they had agreed, and abided by their agreement, not to sell through any but "recognized” dealers and to discontinue selling directly to hotels, restaurants, chain stores and similar users, the tendency and effect being to set up the respondent manufacturers Honor Roll Certificate recipients, as a ‘‘White List” of manufacturers to receive exclusively the industry members’ business; and (3) the industry association members entered into and carried out agreements with manufacturers of stainless steel and enamel cooking equipment, the china manufac¬ turers’ association member and three of the largest commercial gas range manufacturers, all respondents in the proceeding, to monopolize in the respondent industry association members the resale, and in the respondent manufacturers all purchases of these manufacturers’ products by industry members. The complaint alle.ges that Illinois Brass Mfg. Co. and Columbia Stamping and Enameling Co., although not recipients of Honor Roll Certificates, cooperated as manufacturers wdth the other respondents in effectuating the industry corporation members’ policies and practices. The respondents officers of Food Service Equipment Industry, Inc. are: 1. S. Anoff, Chicago, chairman; M. P. Duke, St. Louis, vice-chairman; Miss L. E. Iwert, Chicago, secretary, and S. R. Spearans, New York, treasurer; directors: .A. H. Beadle, St. Paul. Minn.; S. J. Carson, Denver, Colo.; H, C. Davis, Baltimore; W. F. Dougherty, Philadelphia; B. Dohrmann, San Francisco; P. L. Ezekiel, Richmond, Va.; A. W. Forbriger, Cincinnati; W. Fried¬ man, New' York; C, .A. Winchester, Boston; and C. Winkler, Seattle. The respondent member companies, named as being representative of some 75 or SO corporations, firms or individuals engaged in the purchase and resale of food service equipment, are: .A. L. Cahn & Sons, New A’ork; Duke Manufacturing Co., St. Louis; Ezekiel S: Weilman Co., Inc., Richmond. \'a.; .Alex Janows & Company, Chicago; Albert Pick Co., Inc,, Chicago; The Stearnes Company, Chicago; and Straus-Duparquet, Inc., New York, The respondent manufacturers, named as being representative of some 40 or 45 manufacturers, all recipients of Honor Roll Certificates, are: .American Stove Co., St. Louis; Josiah .Anstice & Co.. Inc., Rochester, N. AA; G. S. Blakeslee & Co., Cicero, Ill.; G. S. Blodgett Co., Inc., Burlington, Vt.; Carrollton Metal Products Co.. Carrollton, Ohio; Colt’s Patent Fire .Arms Manufacturing Co., Hartford, Conn.; Detroit-Michigan Stove Co., Detroit; Hobart Manufacturing Co., Troy, Ohio; Lalance-Grosiean Manufacturing Co., Woodhaven, Long Island, N, \^.; McGraw Electric Co., Chicago; Polar Ware Co., Sheboygan, Wis.; Standard Gas Equip¬ ment Corporation, New' A'ork; United States Stamping Co., Moundsville, W. Va.; and Vollrath Co., Sheboygan, Wis. .Active officers of the respondent .American Vitrified China Manu¬ facturer .Association named respondents are: .Albert M. Walker, Bedford, Ohio, president, and James K. Love, New Castle, Pa., secretary-treasurer. Respondent members of the china association are: Bailey-Walker China Co., Bedford, Ohio; Buffalo Pottery Co., Inc., Buffalo, N, ; Carr China Company, Grafton, W. \’a.; Iroquois China Co., Syracuse. N. V^.; Jackson Vitrified China Co., P^alls Creek, Penna.; D. E. McNichol Co. of W. Va., Clarksburg, W. \’a.; Mayer China Company, Beaver Falls, Penna.; Onondaga Pottery Co., Syracuse, N. A^.; Scammell China Company, Trenton, N. J.; Shenango Pottery Co., New Castle, Penna.; Sterling China Compan\’, Wellevillc, Ohio; and Wellsville China Co., WYllsville, Ohio. The respondents Buffalo Pottery Co., Inc., and D. E. Mc¬ Nichol Co. of W. A'a., according to the complaint, received Honor Roll Certificates. (4433) National Distillers Prortuets Corporation, 120 Broadway, New A'ork, which conducts a distillery and factory in Cincinnati in which it prepares and from which it ships into various States a poultry feed supplement variously designated as “Produlac Brand Semi-Solid Distillers Grains Mash”, "Semi-Solid Produlac” and "Produlac’’. is charged, in a complaint with misrepresentation of its product.