Sherman law. The Commission is given the right to require annual or special reports in writing from corporations, either under oath or not as it may determine. These reports are limited to the same subjects as to which its general power of investigation is given. The Commission may not require information as to the financial condition of the corporation reporting. Penalties are imposed for failure to file the required reports.

The Commission is given power to investigate upon its own initiative or upon the application of the Attorney General the manner in which any final decree entered against a corporation in a suit brought by the government under the Anti-trust laws has been or is being carried out and to report its findings and recommendations; also to investigate and report the facts relating to any alleged violations of the Antitrust laws upon the request of the President or either house of Congress.

The Commission is authorized upon the application of the Attorney General to investigate and make recommendations for the readjustment of the business of any corporation alleged to be violating the Antitrust laws. This investigation may be conducted before or after legal proceedings against the corporation. Any corporation alleged to be violating the Anti-trust laws may thus be given the opportunity of readjusting its business before the burdens or penalties resulting from legal proceedings are imposed, and thereby maintain its organization and thereafter conduct its business in accordance with the law.

The law provides for the publication of annual and special reports of the Commission and of its decisions and also gives the Commission power to make public within its discretion information obtained by it, except trade secrets and names of customers.

Penalties are provided for employees of the Commission making public information without authority.

In the provision as to annual reports and elsewhere in the law it is suggested that the Commission will classify corporations and it is given the power to require reports or other information from particular classes only. Under this provision no doubt large numbers of corporations will be relieved from filing reports, thus saving expense and annoyance; and the Commission will not be uselessly engaged in handling large quantities of reports in which it may well know in advance it will have no possible interest. The Commission may, however, require reports at any time from any corporation subject to its jurisdiction.

The Commission is given power to investigate trade conditions with foreign countries where associations or combinations among the traders in such countries may affect the foreign trade of the United States.

Except as above stated, we find no language in the law indicating that the Trade Commission either should or should not hold public hearings or otherwise make public any information obtained by it, in the exercise of its strictly inquisitorial powers.

The Bureau of Corporations has not conducted its investigations by public hearings and it seems to be entirely optional with the Trade Commission as to whether it shall do so or not. The Interstate Commerce Commission employs publicity in connection with many though not all of its investigations.

2. Judicial Functions.

The other form of power vested in the Trade Commission is the power to hold hearings and enter orders. It is to be noted that complaints may not be

filed by any person or corporation, but only by the Commission itself when it has reason to believe that the law has been violated. This applies to proceedings under both the Trade Commission law and the Clayton law.

There is a further limitation upon the power of the Commission which only applies to the filing of complaints by it against the use of unfair methods of competition. Such complaints may be filed only when the Commission believes that the proceeding "would be to the interest of the public." The clear intention of Congress in imposing this limitation was that strictly private controversies and matters of purely personal importance to the parties concerned should not be made the subject of complaint by the Commission. The action of the Commission in the matter of holding hearings and entering orders in pursuance thereof may only be invoked when the rights involved rise above the merely personal or selfish interests that may be affected and become of such importance and so far-reaching in their nature as to make them in fact of interest to the public.

The legal questions involved in the grant of power to hold hearings and enter orders are different from any that have been presented under the provisions of the Acts to Regulate Commerce conferring like power upon the Interstate Commerce Commission. These questions will not be discussed here, but this phase of the subject can be dismissed with the suggestion that in order to uphold the grant of such power to the Trade Commission it is doubtful whether that body can be held to be a department of the legislative branch of the government, but rather that the Trade Commission in exercising such power must be held to be acting as a judicial body.

The Commission may also act as a master in

chancery to report an appropriate form of decree in any suit in equity brought by the Attorney General under the Anti-trust laws.

COMMISSION PROCEDURE UNDER SECTION 5 OF THE TRADE COMMISSION LAW AND AS DEFINED IN THE CLAYTON LAW FOR THE ENFORCEMENT OF SECTIONS 2, 3, 7 AND 8 THEREOF.

Section 5 of the Trade Commission law and section 11 of the Clayton law lay down the manner in which the Trade Commission, and also the Interstate Commerce Commission and Federal Reserve Board as to the Clayton law, may enforce the various specific rules of law elsewhere defined in the two laws. These two sections are uniform in their provisions except as to the words in italics in the following excerpt from section 5 of the Trade Commission law:

"That when the Commission shall have reason to believe that any person, partnership or corporation has been or is using any unfair method of competition, and it shall appear to the Commission that a proceeding by it in respect thereof would be to the interest of the public, the Commission shall issue and serve upon the person, partnership or corporation a complaint stating the charges and containing the notice of hearing."

This provision as to the necessity of the public interest appearing is not found in section 11 of the Clayton law. The Clayton law therefore throws upon the Commission or Board the duty of acting if the Commission or Board has reason to believe a violation of the law has occurred. As elsewhere indicated in the discussion, this probably shows that Congress conclusively decided that violations of the Clayton law were matters affecting the public interest, while

it did not conclusively decide that violations of the rule against unfair methods of competition were necessarily matters of public interest. As we explain elsewhere, the Trade Commission under section 5, or either the Trade Commission, Interstate Commerce Commission or Federal Reserve Board under section 11, in enforcing the provisions of those sections and conducting hearings, exercises functions essentially judicial in their nature. This provision as to the public interest in section 5 of the Trade Commission law gives to the Trade Commission some measure of discretion not given by the other law. This discretion may not be exercised in an arbitrary manner. Mandamus would lie against the Commission if it arbitrarily refused to assume jurisdiction in a proper case. Since, however, section 5 expressly fails to provide for the filing of complaints by others than the Commission and leaves to the Commission to determine the manner in which it obtains information as to any alleged violation of law, it is difficult to understand how it could be made to appear that it was the duty of the Trade Commission to act in any given case. Under the power given to it by section 6 of the Trade Commission law to make rules and regulations, the Commission undoubtedly will promulgate rules as to the manner in which it may obtain information to serve as the basis of action by the Commission under this section.

Both sections 5 and 11 provide that proceedings shall be instituted by the filing of a complaint which shall be issued by the Commission or Board and served on the defendant and shall contain notice of hearing not less than 30 days after service. The defendant shall then have the right to appear and

6.-Interstate Commerce Commission vs. Humboldt Steamship Company, 224 U. S. 474 at page 484.