Sidebilder
PDF
ePub

CUSTOMS LAW.-The customs law of Brazil provides that the President of the Republic is authorized

To modify the rate of import duties, even to the extent of permitting free entry during a certain period, for articles of foreign origin whch can compete with similar national products, when these are produced or marketed by trusts.1

COFFEE VALORIZATION.-Owing to the overdevelopment of coffee plantations in certain States of the Republic, and to an extraordinary crop in the season 1901-2, the stocks of coffee were greatly increased, and the financial position of the coffee planters was thereby rendered precarious. Various methods were considered for preventing the increase of stocks, as, for example, the burning of a portion of the coffee crop, while some restriction of new plantations was accomplished through special taxation. The Government also tried to alleviate the situation by reducing the export tax on coffee, namely, from 13 per cent to 11 per cent ad valorem.2

In 1905 the movement for the so-called valorization of coffee was initiated, and on December 29, 1905, a law was enacted by the State of Sao Paulo laying a tax of 3 francs on each bag of coffee containing 60 kilos (132.3 pounds) exported in order to obtain a basis for financing this scheme.

In the following year (Feb. 26, 1906) three States-Sao Paulo, Minas Geraes, and Rio de Janeiro-made an agreement known as the "Convenio de Taubaté," of which the most significant features were substantially as follows: That coffee should be maintained in the domestic markets at minimum prices of 55 to 65 francs per bag (7.9 cents to 9.34 cents per pound) for a standard grade (No. 7 American), such price to be subsequently raised to 70 francs if the market permitted; that the export of coffee inferior to No. 7 should be discouraged and such coffee kept for home consumption instead; that a surtax of 3 francs per bag be levied on all coffee exported from the contracting States, the proceeds to be used for valorization purposes; that the existing tax laws to hinder the planting of new areas be continued for two years and eventually longer; that the State of Sao Paulo be authorized to borrow £15,000,000 on the security afforded by the surtax, and the joint responsibility of the three States; that the advantages resulting from the agreement should be apportioned among the three States according to the amount of surtax collected, and that the agreement should take effect after ratification by the President of the Republic."

1 Actos do Poder Legislativo, Lei N. 2919-de 31 Dez., 1914, sec. 2, 1X. A similar provision has been in effect since 1907.

Dettmann, Das Moderne Brasilien, Berlin, 1912.

Translations of this and other important agreements relating to this subject are given in Exhibit H of this report. (See p. 797.)

Petition in equity, United States of America r. Herman Sielcken et al, Washington, Government Printing Office, 1912.

The loan provided for in the agreement was intended to be used for the purpose of buying and carrying large stocks of coffee. By a second convention of July 4, 1906, between these three States, the minimum prices were reduced and provision made for undertaking the work without the approval of the President. A Federal decree of August 6, 1906, however, approved these conventions after making some modifications. Subsequently they were further modified in some particulars, especially as to the minimum domestic prices.

To further promote the valorization plan the quantity which could be exported was limited. On August 25, 1908, Sao Paulo passed a law which practically limited the export of coffee from the State to 9,000,000 bags for the crop year beginning July 1, 1908, to 9,500,000 bags for the next crop year, and to 10,000,000 bags for succeeding years, by levying an additional ad valorem tax of 20 per cent on coffee exported in excess of the quantities specified. This law also increased the surtax on exported coffee to 5 francs per bag and authorized a loan of £15,000,000 for carrying out the measures necessary "for the defense of coffee" and for the consolidation of temporary financial obligations connected therewith. The Federal Government sanctioned this law by an act of December 9, 1908, guaranteed the loan of £15,000,000 arranged for, required that certain stocks of coffee owned by Sao Paulo be made an additional guarantee, and made certain other provisions intended to give the Government greater security. To finance this valorization scheme several loans previously made were consolidated in a loan of £15,000,000 obtained according to a contract made with J. Henry Schroeder & Co., of London; Société Générale, of Paris; and the Banque de Paris et des Pays-Bas on December 11, 1908.

On the same day the bankers and representatives of Sao Paulo made an agreement for the organization of a committee of seven to exist 10 years, which was given extensive power with respect to the sale of the Brazilian coffee in the United States, Europe, etc., and the payment of the moneys due the bankers. In particular, Sao Paulo agreed to sell at auction through the committee 500,000 bags of its stocks in 1909-10, 600,000 bags in 1910-11, 700,000 bags in 1912-13, and the same quantity in each succeeding year; further, additional quantities not to exceed these obligatory quantities, for each year, respectively, might be sold to meet the demands of the trade, provided that the prices were not less than specified, namely, 47 francs for "good average" and 50 francs for "Havre type superior" per 50 kilos. It was also provided that additional quantities, if needed by the trade, might be sold at a price to be agreed to by the Government.

With the money borrowed from the bankers the State of Sao Paulo purchased great quantities of coffee and placed it in storage; the

[merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]

Provision is made in artice 1981 for several ways by will h the nullity of a jural act may be judicially determined, with declares in part that it may be sought by the puble minister in the intenst of morality or of the law.

In artide 1143 the law provides a posible remedy against unfair competition, the text of this article being substantially similar to article 1382 of the French Civil Code.

According to The Board of Trade Journal issued by the English Government, a bill was introduced in the Legislature of Argentina on August 30, 1913, which provided, among other things, that every contract or combination of any kind regarding commerce or transport is forbidden when it's object is to produce artificial alterations to the prejudice of the consumer in the prices of articles of consumption or of prime necessity, that the directors of a legally constituted company who take part in the transaction are to be held personally responsible, that on a second offense by the directors or representatives of such company it may be dissolved, and that a limited liability company or its agency which is guilty of repeated offenses may be fined from 10,000 to 500,000 pesos.

1 Código Penal.

* Código Civil, 1906 ed

*The Board of Trade Journal, Sept. 25, 1915, p. 742.

It is understood that this bill was introduced on account of an alleged combination among meat packers, but that it failed, largely on account of the opposition of the stock raisers.1

Section 28. Colombia.

A provision of the Commercial Code of Colombia has been noted which is so pertinent to this subject that it deserves mention. Article 6 of this code reads as follows:2

ART. 6.—The establishment of companies (Sociedades anónimas) contrary to good morals, to public order and to legal regulations is prohibited; as well as those which do not deal with a real object and one of lawful business, or which tend to a monopoly of the necessities of life or of any branch of industry.

Section 29. Mexico.

In Yucatan, Mexico, a public commission has been established to regulate the price of henequen or sisal fiber. This commission is · entitled "Comision Reguladora del Mercado de Henequen," and was created in accordance with a State law enacted in August, 1911. This law authorizes the governor to appoint a commission, of which he is also a member ex officio, who shall engage in the purchase of sisal fiber with a view to a better regulation of the price. A Government loan of 5,000,000 pesos was also authorized to be placed at the disposal of the commission for this purpose, and in order to meet this loan a tax was provided to be levied on unmanufactured henequen at rates ranging from one-half centavo to 1 centavo per kilogram, according to the price of the fiber in Yucatan. The commission is directed to maintain through its mercantile operations an equilibrium between supply and demand and to aid in directing excess production to new outlets. The law also provides that any profits arising from the mercantile transactions of the commission shall be applied to promote and further the manufacture of fiber within the State of Yucatan. This commission began operations in 1912. The fiber growers have organized an association to cooperate with this commission and have agreed to use it as a central selling agency.

Section 30. Japan.

There is apparently no law specifically relating to trusts or combinations in Japan. Article 48 of the Commercial Code, which is similar in some respects to section 138 of the German Civil Code, reads as follows:

ART. 48. If a business association acts contrary to the public order or good morals, the court may dissolve it on the application of the Attorney-General or by exercising its executive power.

1 Report of the Royal Commission on the Meat Export Trade of Australia, 1915, pp. 20, 21.

* Ley de 1888 (21 de Febrero) que reforma el Código de Comercio.

3 The Commercial Code of Japan, by Yang Yin Hang. Boston, 1911.

A similar provision with regard to foreign business associations having branch offices in Japan is found in article 260, which follows:

ART. 260. If a representative of a foreign business association establishing a branch office in Japan commits any act contrary to the public order or good morals during the management of the business of the association, the court may upon the application of the attorney-general or by its own executive power order the branch office to be closed.

Article 262 of this code provides penalties for disobedience to orders of the court made in pursuance of article 260. The pertinent parts of this article read as follows:

ART. 262. Promoters, members managing the business of a business association, directors, representatives of foreign business associations, auditors, or liquidators are punished by a fine of from ten yen to one thousand yen in the following cases:

9. When they act contrary to an order of the court issued according to the provision of Art. 260.

It is not known whether any judicial application of these laws has been made with respect to combinations which restrict competition. Where a trade name and business or a business alone is transferred articles 22 and 23 of this code provide for restricting future competition by the transferor with the transferee, if no express agreement has been made regarding it. As these articles, however, are of more particular interest with regard to the question of unfair competition the texts are given in Chapter X. (See p. 695.)

Section 31. China.

No satisfactory data have been found regarding the laws of China in respect to combinations in restraint of trade, but a comparatively recent work based on original sources makes the following statement concerning this subject. In this quotation the Chinese characters for the titles of the laws referred to, etc., are indicated by asterisks and the references to authorities are omitted:

Arrangements to artificially influence the market are contrary to law. For a person to unduly depress or raise prices to suit his own convenience entails a penalty of eighty blows; and undue profit arising there from will be treated as theft.

TRADE COMBINATIONS. Our railway directors and shipping agents would be in gaol in a very short time, if they ventured on their ordinary practices in China, under the clause ******—i. e., the law against 'ruffians establishing conferences and preventing shippers chartering outside vessels'; and the originator of the combination to raise sales would be sent to military servitude on the borders after a month's cangue,2 while those who combined with them would get one hundred blows and three years' transportation. So in the case of Chang Hao ** and others, where some licensed shipping agents and others who combined to raise the rates on a demand for transport arising were so sentenced.

Alabaster: Notes and Commentaries on Chinese Criminal Law, London, 1999, p. 545.
A form of punishment similar to pillory.

« ForrigeFortsett »