10926 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE July 5 reservations, and for other purposes; to the MEMORIALS By Mr. BALDWIN: Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs. H. R. 8549. A bill for the relief of Teresa M. By Mr. MORRIS: Under clause 4 of rule XXII, me­ Reyes; to the Committee on the Judiciary. H. R. 8545. A bill to amend title 10, United morials were presented and referred as By Mr. BOSCH: States Code, with respect to agreements for follows: H. R. 8550. A bill for the relief of Ernst length of service of graduates of the United By the SJ;>EAKER: Memorial of the Legis­ Windmeier; to the Committee on the Judi­ States Military, Naval, and Air Force Acade­ lature of the State of Alabama, memorial­ ciary. mies, and for other purposes; to the Com­ izing the President and the Congress of the H. R. 8551. A bill for the relief of Alfonso mittee on Armed Services. United States to enact legislation allowing De Martino; to the Committee on the Ju­ By Mr. PATTERSON: the Federal judges of the district courts of diciary. H. R. 8546. A bill to regulate the foreign the United States to direct verdicts in jury By Mr. DAWSON of Utah: commerce of the United States by establish­ cases only in accordance with the scintilla H. R. 8552. A bill for the relief of Michael ing quantitative restrictions on the importa­ evidence rule of the common law; to the Prevedourakis; to the Committee on the Ju­ tion of plumbing brass goods; to the Com­ Committee on the Judiciary. diciary. mittee on Ways and Means. Also, memorial of the Legislature of the By Mr. FISHER: By Mr. VINSON: State of Alabama, memorializing the Presi­ H. R. 8553. A bill for the relief of Stewart H. R. 8547. A bill to authorize the disposal dent and the Congress of the United States Chiu Hao Wu and Virginia Wu; to the Com­ of certain uncompleted vessels; to the Com­ relative to proposing amendments to the mittee on the Judiciary. mittee on Armed Services. Constitution of the United States; to the By Mrs .. KELLY of New York: By Mr. SIKES: Committee on the Judiciary. H. R. 8554. A bill for tlie relief of Charles H.J. Res. 394. Joint resolution proposing and Aida Rosen; to the Committee on the an amendment to the Constitution of the Judiciary. United States relating to the powers reserved By Mr. SIKES: to the States by the 10th amendment to the PRIVATE BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS H. R. 8555. A bill for the relief of Sussanne Constitution; to the Committee on the Judi­ Under clause 1 of rule XXII, private Leiminger McDonald and Kathe Rita Lei­ ciary. bills and resolutions were introduced and minger McDonald; to the Committee on the H.J. Res. 395. Joint resolution proposing Judiciary. an amendment to the Constitution of the severally referred as follows: By Mr. TEAGUE of California: United States vesting the Senate of the By Mr. ANFUSO: H. R. 8556. A bill for the relief of Mrs. Maria United States with certain appellate court H. R. 8548. A bill for the relief of Candida Richter Cornell and her minor daughters, functions; to the Committee on the Judi­ Giovanna Pirecca Nardi and Vito Pirecca Irene Theopile Richter and Beatriz Isabel ciary. Nardi; to the Committee on the Judiciary. Richter; to the Committee on the Judiciary. EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS Questions and Answers on H. R. 11, an ard Oil Company of Indiana v. Federal Trade that statement for the benefit of those who Commission (340 U. S. 231) and other re­ wish to review more material dealing with Amendment to Robinson-Patman Act cent decisions in similar cases have made it that point. clear that notwithstanding Federal legisla­ -6. Question. Will the law as amended by EXTENSION OF REMARKS tion against price discrimination a large H. R. 11 prevent sellers from reducing prices OF . seller may now discriminate in price even to meet competition? where the effect may be to substantially Answer. No. There ls nothing in the lessen competition and tend to create a mo­ Clayton Act, the Robinson-Patman Act, or HON. WRIGHT PATMAN nopoly. Therefore, the Commission stated in H. R. 11 forbidding price reductions. Un­ OF TEXAS that it is of the opinion that the objectives der those provisions of law any seller would IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES of H. R. 11 • • • are of sufficient importance remain free to lower his price to any level to the effective operation of the Clayton Act he chooses to meet competition or for any Friday, July 5, 1957 that such legislation should be enacted with­ other purpose. Those provisions of the law out awaiting further case by case develop­ do not deal with the question of price re­ Mr. PATMAN. Mr. Speaker, during .ment. ductions. They deal only with the practice recent days the Members have referred In the light of those circumstances it ap­ of price discrimination. to me questions received by them regard­ pears that it is time for each of us to re­ 7. Question. Describe a situation in which ing H. R. 11. Efiort has been made to examine our position on the question of the law could be applied if it were amended supply answers to the Members who re­ whether we are for a free and competitive by H. R. 11. f erred to questions. However, some enterprise system or .for a system of mo­ Answer. Under date of March 8, 1957, the questions have been repeated a number nopoly. When that is done, I am confident Armstrong Creamery Co., of Wichita, Kans., that a majority will be found who are still wrote a letter to Members of Congress and of times. Therefore, for the benefit of opposed to a substantial lessening of com­ to Members of the Senate in which price Members and others I shall insert in the petition and a tendency to monopoly and are discrimination practices of the National RECORD at this point answers I have made therefore in favor of H. R. 11, the equality of Dairy Products Corp. were outlined. That to a number of those questions. The opportunity bill. lt is a bill against mo­ up-to-date instance of price discrimination questions and answers are as follows: nopolies. was described by the Armstrong Creamery Co. as follows: 1. Question. Why do we have Federal laws 3. Question. Would the law as amended by H. R. 11 apply to local sales by retail "Recently the National Dairies Division against price discrimination? (Sealtest) at Kansas City lowered the price Answer. Congress conducted extensive in­ stores? Answer. No. The law applies only to in­ of ice cream 25 cents per gallon throughout vestigations respecting the practice of price this area. Discounts and all other factors discrimination during the periods of 1875-90, terstate sales and shipments. 4. Question. Would the law as amended considered, this new price is lower than 97 1912-14, and 1935-36, and so did the Bureau percent of the sales volume in the area be­ of Corporations during the period 1903-14 by H. R. 11 apply to local sales by whole­ salers? fore Sealtest lowered the price. This low and its successor, the Federal Trade Com­ price makes it impossible for any dairy to mission, during the period 1928-34. Each Answer. It would apply only to interstate sell ice cream at a profit, and if continued sales and shipments. Therefore, since whole­ of those investigations uncovered an abun­ very long will force a number of independent salers and jobbers ordinarily sell only in a dance of evidence demonstrating that the plants out of business. At the same time practice of price discrimination was used single State it would not apply to such sales. Sealtest has been ·raising prices in other widely by large sellers with the effect and On March 18, 1957, I made a statement out­ lining in detail how the equality of oppor­ areas where competitive situations are as result of destroying competition and creating bad, or worse, than they are here. monopolies. Therefore, Congress acted to tunity bill, H. R. 11, would and would not apply to independent oil jobbers. That "The plain fact is that through ineptness curb the practice of price discrimination be­ and mismanagement, Sealtest has lost a lot cause it had been found to be a monopolis­ statement appears in the RECORD commenc­ ing at page 3875 of March 18, 1957. of volume in the past few years and has taken tic practice. this method of regaining their position. 2. Question. Why is H. R. 11 needed? 5. Question. How will H. R. 11 affect Right n.ow they can use the excuse that they Answer. The Federal Trade Commission in freight absorption? are meeting the price of the 3 percent of the its official formal report on H. R. 11 to the Answer. The bill will not prevent freight volume which was sold at a cutthroat figure Committee on the Judiciary, House of Rep­ absorption. In the RECORD of March 18, (and which will always be sold that way). resentatives, March 12, 1957, in effect stated 1957, page 3892, I inserted a statement out­ "Of course, Sealtest's profits ln other areas that the decision by the Supreme Court of lining why it is considered that H. R. 11 will will more than carry the losses they will the United States in the case of the Stand- 11ot prevent freight absorption. l refer to take in this one." 1957 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE 10927 The letter of the Armstrong Creamery Co .