Combinations for Export Under the Webb Act
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 9760025 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Joseph E Davies (0009-0009-6361-9277, Federal Trade Commision, corresponding author) |
| Year | 1919 |
| Volume | 82 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 150-158 |
| Publication date | 1919-02-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0002-7162 • E-ISSN: 1552-3349 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publications (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/000271621908200116 |
| OpenAlex | W2102035360 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
Largely as a result of this recommendation, the Webb Bill passed the House of Representatives on September 2, 1916. The original House bill contained two clauses that negatived the purposes of the bill. It was provided that export trade should not deemed to include the production, manufacture, trading in or marketing within the United States or any territory thereof, of such goods, wares or merchandise or any act in the course of such production or manufacture. Again it was provided that such action should be confined to such as does not the export trade of the United It would be manifestly impossible to obtain goods for export in the United States unless the organization were to trade or market in the United States. Further, it would appear that such a combination to be effective must restrain export trade. The bill did not pass the 64th Congress. The bill was, however, passed by the 65th Congress and approved April 10, 1918, with the objectionable features eliminated. In general terms, the act as finally adopted declared that nothing contained in the Sherman Law should be construed as making illegal a combination entered into for the sole purpose of engaging in export trade or acts in furtherance thereof providing there were no resulting restraints of domestic trade, or of the export trade of a domestic competitor, nor any act of any kind whatsoever which artificially or intentionally enhanced or depressed prices, substantially lessened competition or otherwise restrained trade in 150
Business · American Constitutional Law and Politics · Computer Science · World Trade Organization Law
| Highly cited | No |
|---|