580 ANNUAL REPORTS OF DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 



packers and stockyards act expressly requires the market agencies to 

 adopt and enforce reasonable rules and regulations of their own, 

 which, upon being published and filed with the (Tovernment, must be 

 observed, and that they could handle many matters effectively from 

 a local standpoint. As a result they formulated a number of rules 

 in conference with the local supervisor. These rules have been pub- 

 lished and filed and are being observed to the general satisfaction of 

 the agencies concerned. 



FORMAL PROCEEDINGS. 



Whenever after a complaint is filed the stage is reached where it 

 does not seem possible to accomplish a satisfactory adjustment in- 

 formally, the proceeding is given a place on the formal docket of the 

 Packers and Stockyards Administration. Prior to June 30 there 

 had been instituted eight such proceedings, and each will be de- 

 scribed in this report under its caption and docket number. 



Docket No. 1. — Kansas City Live Stocli Exchange, complainant, v. Armour & 

 Co. and Fowler Packing Co., respondents. The Kansas Live Stock As- 

 sociation, The Missouri Live Stock Producers' Association, Tlie National 

 Live Stock Producers Association, Missouri Farmers' Association, and 

 Farmers Union of Kansas, interveners. 



This was a complaint filed by the Kansas City Live Stock Ex- 

 change, which is composed of commission men* in the Kansas City 

 market, against Armour & Co. and the Fowler Packing Co., with 

 respect to the operation by the Fowler Packino^ Co. of its yards, 

 known as the Mistletoe Stock Yards, at Kansas City, Kans., a short 

 distance from the Kansas City public stockyards. The Fowler Pack- 

 ing Co. is owned by Armour & Co. It was complained that the 

 Mistletoe Stock Yards were really a public stockyard market within 

 the meaning of Title III of the packers and stockj^ards act and 

 should be so determined by the Secretary of Agriculture. It was 

 also complained that the methods of doing business in these yards 

 were contrary to Title III relating to stoclcyards and to Title II re- 

 lating to packers under the packers and stockyards act because of al- 

 leged unfair, unjustly discriminatory, and deceptive practices, and 

 further because the buying operations of the two respondent con- 

 cerns were alleged to affect adversely the interests of producers and 

 shippers who patronize the Kansas City public stockyards by de- 

 pressing the prices in that market. A formal hearing was held at 

 Kansas City, Mo., beginning March 27, 1922, and lasting 12 days, 

 before an examiner of the Packers and Stockyards Administration. 

 The various associations named as interveners participated in the 

 hearing for the purpose of assisting in having the facts developed 

 completely. Following the hearing, proposed findings of fact and 

 briefs were submitted by the parties and tentative findings of fact 

 were prepared and' submitted to the parties by the examiner. The 

 proceeding was pending consideration of these findings of fact on 

 J%ne 30. 



Docket No. 2. — The Secretary of Agriculture v. Stewart-Carson-McC6rmack Co. 

 and others, National Stock Yards, 111. 



Very soon after the posting on November 1 of the stockyards at 

 East St. Louis, 111., it developed that there were certain commission 

 agencies in that market, including two cooperative selling agencies, 



