Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1882-05-24
The Louisiana Courts ON Cotton
FUfurps


Futures.
On Monday of last week the Court Of
Appeals of Louisiana passed upon the
question of the legality of contracts for
the future delivery Of cotton, in the suit
of A. E. Bignon against the successors
of Patrick Condor. The point at issue
was the validity of note for 800 which
had been executed by Condor IN favor
Of Bignon for balance due against the
former upon speculations in cotton fu.
lures. The heirs of Condor resisted
payment of the note on the ground that
the transaction with which it was
connected was of gambling nature, and
that therefore it was not enforcible. In
proof of this position it was shown that
Condor had dealt for some time with
Bignon, who represented New York
firm, and that their dealings together
were entirely in the purchase and sale of
cotton contracts.
The court wholly favored tie position
of the defendants In its decision it held
that dealing in cotton futures is the most
dangerous and demoralizing species Of
gambling, and that it should not be
countenanced, as will be seen from the
following extract from It's opinion, which
we gather from the Galveston Netcs
Says the Judge who rendered the deci-
sion:
Courts which would direct their efforts
at the enforcement of legislation of the
character now under consideration
against the mere card-player alone, or
to the ordinary bettor of any kind, and
shrink from extending a similar treat
ment to his more dangerous and power
full brother, the commercial gambler,
would merit the contempt of honorable
men.
The commercial gambler, however,
really makes no sale, and contemplates
no delivery or receipt, and no payment
of a price. He merely selects an OppO-
nent at play and pits his o n Judgment
against that of the latter, jp-t as one who
bets at cards or upon a horse might do,
only the matter upon which the stakes
ere laid in his case is the state of the
market, as to some particular commodi.
tv. at some special date in the future
With him payment either way depends
solely upon chance, as does also the
amount, if any, which is to be paid. \
How can it be reasonably commended that
system of dealing in futures
which in its proportions is so
infinitely beyond the capacity of the pro-
ductiOn of the article it claims to handle,
can be one which, as system, does not
contemplate or involve a mere wagering
upon prices? All of these facts we con-
slider as establishing, by sufficient pre-
sumption, the accountants contention,
and is making good his defense, in de-
fault Of contrary proof from the holder
of this note. In other words. we con-
slider that they have shifted the burden
of proof, and that, being uncontra-
dicted, they have justified the Judge
quo in his finding.
1t is not my purpose to go beyond the
merits of this case. The law regarding
contracts for future delivery cannot be
misunderstood, that they are valid and
can be enforced when made bona fide.
and with the essential requisites of all
contracts of sale no one doubts, and that
it is equally proper to adjust an origi-
nally valid contract, to agree not to en-
force a specific performance, but to pay
sum in damages or a difference. is also
clear; but here we are told, not that cot
ton is sold or purchased, but a future
contract, which represents nothing, is
passed from hand to hand and assumes
no character, except such as the caprice
of individuals may choose to give it.
This is very strong language. still it is
in strict accordance with similar deci-
sions in other States, among which is
Georgia. Here the law is directly OPP
posed to dealing in futures, and when
ever the question mas come up in our
courts, the law has always been fully
sustained Nevertheless, to great ex-
tent, such law must always prove in
operative and void, for the simple reason
that the commercial world differs from
the courts and the Legislature, and looks
upon future" transactions as legitimate
business speculations. If man enters
luIO SuCu 5ptCuldblOun anu lOcCo3 uC hidF
successfully resist payment of his losses,
but if he does so, he forever after
forfeits his credit and standing
among business men. This, even if
the losing speculator did not regard his
honor involved, will always, in the
majority of cases, effectually prevent
resort to the courts, and render the law
impracticable. So long as commercial
exchanges and business bodies sanction
transactions in cultures" so long will
they be carried on, and as such trans
actions form a very large proportion of
every day business life, we may antici-
pate that, despite all adverse laws and
adverse decisions, futures" will con-
tinue to be the favorite game of the
Spectator.