84 BULLETIN 1106, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
(union) to be had for this work entered into an arrangement under 
which it was agreed that certain of the factories only would operate 
for a specified period during which all the labor would be employed 
by those factories; then, during another specified period, the re- 
mainder of the factories would operate with all of the labor, and 
the other factories would not then operate. In view of all the facts 
involved, it was held that there was no violation of the law. It is 
true that the court referred to the fact that the price of glass was 
virtually determined by those engaged in the manufacture of 
machine-blown glass, but the fact remains that an economic arrange- 
ment, involving the complete closing of certain factories during a 
specified period and the operation of only certain other factories 
during that period, was upheld. 
The Supreme Court has also declared that those engaged in the 
same line of business may, through their trade associations, freely 
exchange information regarding goods on hand, the amount of un- 
filled orders, and the prices at which sales have been made. 71 
The court has, however, refused to apply the " rule of reason " in 
instances in which manufacturers of the same product have agreed 
upon a schedule of prices. 72 In cases of this character the court 
regards the fixing of prices as in itself a violation of the Sherman 
Act and will not inquire into the reasonableness of such prices. 
The act of Congress 73 approved July 2, 1926, directing the Sec- 
retary of Agriculture to establish a division of cooperative market- 
ing in the Department of Agriculture contains a provision reading 
as follows : , 
Persons engaged, as original producers of agricultural products, as farmers, 
planters, ranchmen, dairymen, nut or fruit growers, acting together in asso- 
ciations, corporate or otherwise, in collectively processing, preparing for market, 
handling, and marketing in interstate and /or foreign commerce such products 
of persons so engaged, may acquire, exchange, interpret, and disseminate past, 
present, and prospective crop, market, statistical, economic, and other similar 
information by direct exchange between such persons, and/or such associa- 
tions or federations thereof, and/or by and through a common agent created 
or selected by them. 
This provision confers broad authority on producers and their asso- 
ciations to acquire and exchange information pertaining to the pro- 
duction and marketing of crops. 
SECTION 6 OF THE CLAYTON ACT 
Following the passage of the Sherman Act, as larger and larger 
cooperative marketing and bargaining associations of producers were 
formed, the question of the application of the Sherman Act to such 
associations claimed the attention of agricultural leaders. In order 
to clarify the situation, when the Clayton Act 74 was enacted in 
1914, language was included in section 6 thereof with reference to the 
status of organizations of farmers. This section reads as follows: 
That the labor of a human being is not a commodity or article of commerce. 
Nothing contained in the antitrust laws shall be construed to forbid the 
existence and operation of labor, agricultural, or horticultural organizations, 
71 Maple Flooring Manufacturers' Ass'n v. United States. 268 U- S. 563 ; Cement Manu- 
facturers' Protective Ass'n v. United States, 268 U. S. 58S. 
72 United States v. Trenton Potteries Co., 273 U. S. 392. 
78 44 Stat., p. 803. 
» 38 Stat. 731, U. S. Comp. Stat., sec. 1243a. 
