1937•Journal of MarketingRequires access

Recent Price-Regulating Legislation

Pearce C. Kelley

Open publisher page 5 citations

Abstract

During the 1936-1937 session of the various state legislatures all of these types were considered, and many were enacted. Arkansas passed two laws containing the first four provisions. A state trade commission or little Federal Trade received some attention, but apparently did not meet with legislative approval.' Michigan also had such a bill under consideration which, in addition to creating a fair trade commission, also provided for the licensing of wholesalers, jobbers, and retailers.2 Utah enacted a Trade Commission act in March, 1937. However, state fair trade commissions for other than industries affected with a public interest, seem to be a development of the future rather than of the immediate present. This is not true for the other types of priceregulating legislation. Historically, the states have shown signs of following or even preceding federal legislation with similar state acts. During the

About this research paper

What this paper is about

During the 1936-1937 session of the various state legislatures all of these types were considered, and many were enacted. Arkansas passed two laws containing the first four provisions. A state trade commission or little Federal Trade received some attention, but apparently did not meet with legislative approval.' Michigan also had such a bill under consideration which, in addition to creating a fair trade commission, also provided for the licensing of wholesalers, jobbers, and retailers.2 Utah enacted a Trade Commission act in March, 1937. However, state fair trade commissions for other than industries affected with a public interest, seem to be a development of the future rather than of the immediate present. This is not true for the other types of priceregulating legislation. Historically, the states have shown signs of following or even preceding federal legislation with similar state acts. During the

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 5 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

During the 1936-1937 session of the various state legislatures all of these types were considered, and many were enacted. Arkansas passed two laws containing the first four provisions. A state trade commission or little Federal Trade received some attention, but apparently did not meet with legislative approval.' Michigan also had such a bill under consideration which, in addition to creating a fair trade commission, also provided for the licensing of wholesalers, jobbers, and retailers.2 Utah enacted a Trade Commission act in March, 1937. However, state fair trade commissions for other than industries affected with a public interest, seem to be a development of the future rather than of the immediate present. This is not true for the other types of priceregulating legislation. Historically, the states have shown signs of following or even preceding federal legislation with similar state acts. During the

Key concepts: Legislation, Commission, Legislature, State (computer science), Business, Session (web analytics), Law, Public administration

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Recent Price-Regulating Legislation — Research Paper | ScholarLens