PACKERS AND STOCKYARDS ADMINISTRATION. 573 



charges had been filed by practically all of the persons required to 

 do so. 



GENERAL RULES AND REGULATIONS. 



The provisions of Title II of the act with respect to packers were 

 practically self-operative immediately upon the passage of the act, 

 but it was deemed necessary to establish certain general rules and 

 regulations under Title III as to stockyard owners, market agencies, 

 and dealers, to cover certain matters with respect to which the re- 

 quirements of the Secretary of Agriculture might not otherwise be 

 fully understood. Consequently, tentative rules and regulations 

 with resjiect to stockyard owners, market agencies, and dealers were 

 prepared and furnished to all classes of persons interested for sug- 

 gestions and criticism, and public hearings were held as follows : 



Portland, Oreg., Nov. 8, 1921. Kansas City, Mo., Nov. 15, 1921. 



Denver, Col., Nov. 12, 1921. Chicago, 111., Nov. 18, 1921. 



Fort Worth, Tex., Nov. 14, 1921. 



After full consideration had been given to the information received 

 through the medium of these hearings and correspondence, the formal 

 general rules and regulations of the Secretary of Agriculture were 

 issued on November 30, 1921, as Circular No. 156 of the Office of 

 the Secretary. 



At the close of the fiscal year, regulations governing the procedure 

 in formal proceedings under the packers and stockyards act were in 

 course of preparation, based upon our practical experience in 

 handling such matters. 



LITIGATION. 



About the time of the issuance of the formal general rules and 

 regulations of the Secretary of Agriculture, a suit was instituted in 

 the Federal district court at Chicago by certain commission men and 

 traders who do business in the Chicago stocky^ards to enjoin the 

 Government from carrying out the provisions of the packers and 

 stockyards act, with special reference to commission men and traders, 

 it being asserted that the act was unconstitutional as to such persons 

 and that the definition of interstate commerce in the act exceeded 

 the authority of Congress. The attorney for the Packers and Stock- 

 yards Administration represented the Government before the dis- 

 trict court at Chicago and assisted the Solicitor General of the 

 United States in the preparation of tlie briefs presented to the Su- 

 preme Court of the United States. While tliis litigation was pend- 

 ing, the commission men and dealers, although promising cooperation 

 with the Packers and Stockyards Administration in the event the suit 

 was decided in favor of the Government, not only in Chicago but to 

 a considerable extent in other markets influenced by Chicago, were 

 unwilling to comply with the requirements of the law, and the Pack- 

 ers and Stockyards Administration was delayed and embarrassed in 

 its work. The case was heard before Federal Judges Evans, Landis, 

 and Fitz Henry, who joined in a clear and clean-cut decision uphold- 

 ing it, and declined to grant even a temporary injunction or stay; 

 but the case was appealed immediately to the Supreme Court of the 

 United States, and, pending its determination, the enforcement of 

 the law as to the Chicago appellants was suspended. The Supreme 



