Difference between revisions of "Producers Warehouse Company"
| (3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Infobox_Industry | {{Infobox_Industry | ||
| primary_town = San Jose | | primary_town = San Jose | ||
| + | | primary_dates = 1919-1930 | ||
| + | | primary_industry = public warehouse | ||
| + | | successors = [[California Cooperative Canneries]] | ||
}} | }} | ||
'''Producers Warehouse Company''' was a public warehouse associated with [[California Cooperative Canneries]]. The company was building a plant in San Jose in 1918 between Jackson, Taylor, 9th, and 10th streets. [[Vernon Campbell]] was the general manager in 1918. | '''Producers Warehouse Company''' was a public warehouse associated with [[California Cooperative Canneries]]. The company was building a plant in San Jose in 1918 between Jackson, Taylor, 9th, and 10th streets. [[Vernon Campbell]] was the general manager in 1918. | ||
The company was mentioned in 1918 congressional testimony about the control Armour had over the raisin (and wider canning?) industry. Producers Warehouse was primarily selling to Armour, and Armour reserved the right to buy the cannery if they tried to sell. <ref>[http://books.google.com/books?id=J5IpAAAAYAAJ&lpg=PA933&ots=FxLUDUAnOM&dq=Producers%20warehouse%20company%20san%20jose&pg=PA929#v=onepage&q=Producers%20warehouse%20company%20san%20jose&f=false List of big packing companies handling unrelated lines].</ref> The case went to the Surpreme Court, alleging that the packer consent decree between Swift, Armour, and the US interfered with [[California Cooperative Canneries]] selling to them<ref>(U.S. v. CALIFORNIA CANNERIES 279 U.S. 553 (1929) UNITED STATES v. CALIFORNIA COOPERATIVE CANNERIES. No. 375. Supreme Court of United States. Argued April 16, 1929. Decided May 20, 1929.)</ref>. | The company was mentioned in 1918 congressional testimony about the control Armour had over the raisin (and wider canning?) industry. Producers Warehouse was primarily selling to Armour, and Armour reserved the right to buy the cannery if they tried to sell. <ref>[http://books.google.com/books?id=J5IpAAAAYAAJ&lpg=PA933&ots=FxLUDUAnOM&dq=Producers%20warehouse%20company%20san%20jose&pg=PA929#v=onepage&q=Producers%20warehouse%20company%20san%20jose&f=false List of big packing companies handling unrelated lines].</ref> The case went to the Surpreme Court, alleging that the packer consent decree between Swift, Armour, and the US interfered with [[California Cooperative Canneries]] selling to them<ref>(U.S. v. CALIFORNIA CANNERIES 279 U.S. 553 (1929) UNITED STATES v. CALIFORNIA COOPERATIVE CANNERIES. No. 375. Supreme Court of United States. Argued April 16, 1929. Decided May 20, 1929.)</ref>. | ||
| + | |||
| + | In the 1922 Senate hearing over the consent decree, [[Vernon Campbell]]'s petition mentioned that [[California Cooperative Canneries]] had initially been incorporated as Producers Warehouse, but the name had been changed<ref>[https://books.google.com/books?id=TVqWSyl8QS0C&lpg=PA703&ots=Uoc9ZpSbhV&dq=packers%20decree&pg=PA29#v=onepage&q=packers%20decree&f=false Packer's Consent Decree: Hearings Before a Subcommittee...], United States Senate, 1922.</ref>. The initial May 7, 1919 contract between Producers Warehouse and Armour declared that the cannery would produce the canned goods in amounts requested by Armour, and that Armour would pay the same prices that [[California Packing Corporation]] was offering to the trade. California Cooperative Canneries would have the right to sell any product not bought by Armour by the end of the year; labels would be designed by Armour, but provided by the cannery. Campbell declared that Armour was buying 52% of the cannery's production. | ||
A Mercury News article was happy about the initial lawsuit, claiming that [[California Cooperative Canneries]] was actually a "blind" for Armour - they wouldn't have been able to buy fruit under their actual name, so they needed the side company to do it. | A Mercury News article was happy about the initial lawsuit, claiming that [[California Cooperative Canneries]] was actually a "blind" for Armour - they wouldn't have been able to buy fruit under their actual name, so they needed the side company to do it. | ||
Latest revision as of 04:54, 2 July 2015
| Main Location |
San Jose |
|---|---|
| Active |
1919-1930 |
| Successors |
California Cooperative Canneries |
Producers Warehouse Company was a public warehouse associated with California Cooperative Canneries. The company was building a plant in San Jose in 1918 between Jackson, Taylor, 9th, and 10th streets. Vernon Campbell was the general manager in 1918. The company was mentioned in 1918 congressional testimony about the control Armour had over the raisin (and wider canning?) industry. Producers Warehouse was primarily selling to Armour, and Armour reserved the right to buy the cannery if they tried to sell. [1] The case went to the Surpreme Court, alleging that the packer consent decree between Swift, Armour, and the US interfered with California Cooperative Canneries selling to them[2].
In the 1922 Senate hearing over the consent decree, Vernon Campbell's petition mentioned that California Cooperative Canneries had initially been incorporated as Producers Warehouse, but the name had been changed[3]. The initial May 7, 1919 contract between Producers Warehouse and Armour declared that the cannery would produce the canned goods in amounts requested by Armour, and that Armour would pay the same prices that California Packing Corporation was offering to the trade. California Cooperative Canneries would have the right to sell any product not bought by Armour by the end of the year; labels would be designed by Armour, but provided by the cannery. Campbell declared that Armour was buying 52% of the cannery's production.
A Mercury News article was happy about the initial lawsuit, claiming that California Cooperative Canneries was actually a "blind" for Armour - they wouldn't have been able to buy fruit under their actual name, so they needed the side company to do it.
"Armour interests" sold the company to Tri-Valley Growers in late 1930's.
See also California Fruit News where they remark on the organization - new cooperative, related to California Growers Association of Los Angeles, and "generally accepted reports" say that some of the products will end up canned for Armour's labels.
Tomatoes, fruits, vegetables, cherries.
Locations
| Location | Years | Address | Details |
|---|---|---|---|
| San Jose | 1918 | Jackson and Tenth |
References
- ↑ List of big packing companies handling unrelated lines.
- ↑ (U.S. v. CALIFORNIA CANNERIES 279 U.S. 553 (1929) UNITED STATES v. CALIFORNIA COOPERATIVE CANNERIES. No. 375. Supreme Court of United States. Argued April 16, 1929. Decided May 20, 1929.)
- ↑ Packer's Consent Decree: Hearings Before a Subcommittee..., United States Senate, 1922.