Page 1 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission 

CEA CASES 

NAME: SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE V. ALEXANDER K. RUXTON 

DOCKET NUMBER: 26 

DATE: JUNE 18, 1941 

DOCUMENT TYPE: DECISION AND ORDER 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

BEFORE THE SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE 

CE-A Docket No. 26. 

Secretary of Agriculture, Complainant, v. Alexander K. Ruxton, Respondent. 

Proceedings, Findings of Fact, Conclusions, and Order. 

PROCEEDINGS 

On February 19, 1941, complaint was issued by the Assistant Secretary of 

Agriculture, pursuant to the Commodity Exchange Act (7 U. S. C. and Supp. V, §§ 

1-17a), against Alexander K. Ruxton, the respondent. It was alleged that 

Ruxton, without the prior consent of his customers, had taken the other side of 

their trades in Chicago wheat futures. Notice was given that a hearing would be 

held in Chicago on March 4, and it was ordered that an answer be filed in 10 

days. A copy of the complaint was served on the respondent by registered mail 

on February 24. 

The respondent, in his answer, denied that he had violated the act. After 

two continuances, the hearing was held in Chicago, Illinois, on April 4, 1941, 

before Jack W. Bain, the referee. 

Charles W. Bucy, Office of the Solicitor, Department of Agriculture, appeared 

for the Government. H. N. Gottlieb and Maurice Rosenfield, of the firm of 

Gottlieb and Schwartz, Chicago, appeared for the respondent. No testimony was 

taken, but a stipulation between counsel was placed of record, and the hearing 

was closed. 

According to the stipulation, the respondent made the trades set out in the 

complaint, taking the other side of customers' orders without their prior 

consent. He would testify that he did this not to defraud customers nor for his 

own profit, but so that he could report executions favorable to his customers. 

He would explain various trades as made to correct error when discovered, to 

obviate executions which would look bad due to market changes during partial 

executions, and the like. He handled many orders for E. T. Maynard, who often 

gave him discretion, and continues to give him orders after knowing of the 

complaint against him. Maynard would not object to the respondent's taking the 

other side of his trades in certain instances, and found, upon investigation, 

that where respondent had done so in executing Maynard's orders, results were 

favorable to Maynard. The respondent has been a member of the Board of Trade 

for 15 years, and has a good reputation for honesty and integrity. He believes 

that, in some instances, he did not actually take the other side of the order, 

but mistakes or inaccuracies in complete carding by other brokers made it appear 

that he did. 

The referee's report, recommending suspension of the respondent's 

registration and trading privileges for ninety days, was served on the 

respondent and on the Commodity Exchange Administration on June 4, 1941. On 
Page 2 

June 16, counsel for the respondent and for the Government filed statements that 

neither party intended to file exceptions to the report, and the respondent 

requested that whatever final order is issued, it be made effective at the 

earliest possible date. 

FINDINGS OF FACT 

1. Alexander K. Ruxton, the respondent, during January and February 1940, was 

a member of The Board of Trade of the City of Chicago, a contract market, 

engaged as a floor broker on that market, and was registered as a floor broker 

with the Secretary of Agriculture. He is registered as a floor broker for the 

year 1941. 

2. On January 2, 1940, the respondent, for a customer, executed an order for 

the sale of 5,000 bushels of wheat for future delivery in May, on the Chicago 

Board of Trade, at $ 1.06 3/4 per bushel, by himself becoming the buyer of such 

wheat, without the prior consent of the customer. 

3. On January 8, 9, 10, 11, 16, 22, 26, and 30, 1940, and on February 5, 8, 

16, 20, and 23, 1940, the respondent executed other orders of customers for 

Chicago wheat futures by himself becoming the buyer on their orders to sell, and 

the seller on their orders to buy, without their prior consent. 

CONCLUSIONS 

It is clear that the respondent, in many instances during the first two 

months of 1940, took the other side of customers' trades without their prior 

consent, in violation of Section 4b(D) of the Commodity Exchange Act. His claim 

that he did not intend to, and did not, defraud anyone does not lend legality to 

his assuming to represent the conflicting interests of buyer and seller without 

the full authorization required by the statute. For these violations, his 

registration and his trading privileges on contract markets should be suspended. 

ORDER 

IT IS ORDERED that the registration of Alexander K. Ruxton, the respondent, 

as a floor broker for the year 1941 be, and it is hereby, suspended for a period 

of ninety days, beginning on the effective date of this order. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all contract markets refuse Alexander K. Ruxton 

all trading privileges thereon for a period of ninety days, beginning on the 

effective date of this order. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy hereof be sent by registered mail to the 

respondent and to each contract market, and that this order shall be effective 

seven days after its date. 

(SEAL) 

Done at Washington, D. C., this 18th day of June, 1941. Witness my hand and 

the seal of the Department of Agriculture. 

/s/ Paul H. Appleby 

Under Secretary of Agriculture. 

LOAD-DATE: June 11, 2008 
Page 3