Daily globe., 1882-09-23
was entirely nominal. Sample lots were
also weaker and slow.

based on yesterdays closing quotations on
change. October fell off 171ac and Janu-
ary 10c. November was 1Oc higher, and
futures beyond January were quiet. Year
was higher than on Change yesterday,
though the closing showed a decline of 1Oc
from the figures realized at yesterdays
call. A fair business was transacted. Cash
sold sparingly. The call board market
was firmer, and quotations were better.
Lard was weak, and during the day sold
generally at decline.
The recent bull movements of provisions
has attracted good deal of inquiry. 1t
has even divided with corn the atten-
ton of the guild nuncs, who are forever
asking the why's and wherefores of
each adv ance or decline in the market
The advance in lard has been SO rapid as
bulls and bears. A few days ago 5000
tierces of lard, $375,OoO worth of property,
were loaded on a propeller and started for
New York. They were shipped by Fowler
Bros, of the Anglo-American packing
company, to fill sales which had been
made on the advance there. After the
property bad been started the lard market
here began to advance and moved up very
much faster than New York. Fowler Bros.
telegraphed the propeller at Buffalo to
turn about and bring her cargo back.
They bought in their shorts in New York
and resold the lard here at much larger
profit than would have been made if the
000 ho1
York.
memberships.
Notice was posted on Change to-day that
application would be made to amend rule
II, section to increase the price of board
of trade membership from $4,000 to $1O,-
900. 1t was signed by 100 members, al
though none of the names of the kings ap-
peared. The move is quite generally
favored, as it virtually puts
$4,000 in the pockets of each
present member. Another project that
has its advocates is the formation of
baard of trade benefit fund. When the
price of membership is raised it is pro-
posed to limit the membership to $500,
each one of whom at the death of one of
their number shall be assessed SIS, and the
$12,5OO realized thereby paid over to his
heirs. This would be cheap insurance of
the 1000 men now belonging, but five or
six dying each year. If ten should die out
of $500, the insurance would cost but $50.
Coming in small assessments and for a
worthy cause, it would not be felt by
anybody, while the benefit would be a
magnificent thing for needy widow.
Probably 1,5O0 of the present members
are entirely dependent upon their business.
To-day member is worth $4,000, per-
haps 100000, tomorrow comparatively
nothing. If this plan is carried into eff
feet, memberships would be in demand as
high, perhaps, as $4,000. The present
quotation of memberships in the New York
stock exchange, where similar plan is in
operation is $4,000.
SUIT DECIDED.
The Ellis g. Lightner suit against
| Cothran, which has been on
trial before Judge Gary,
is concluded, the former scoring victory.
1t involved the obligations of a dealer in
options to put up margins when demanded
of him by his brokers, and brings to light
the dealings of a prominent lawyer in the
city. Mr.. G. W. Cathron, formerly Judge
in New York, began speculating in Decem-
Der last through the firm of Ellis & Light
ner, commission merchants. He bought
and sold wheat with varying degrees of
success, putting up margins when called
for at one time, and at another, resorting
| to the skllful practice of hedging" as it
is known on the board-that is, buying or
selling when the market was going
against deal already in hand to offset the
loss occasioned by the adverse movement
Of the market in the former instance. The
suit was begun by Ellis & Lightner to re-
cover some $4,000 alleged to be due on
margins. It was claimed by them that
they continued Cothran's deals after his
margin had been exhausted precisely as
he had directed, and then, when the mark
ct went against him, he refused to pay the
balance due from him. The transactions
in dispute continued from December
to February. Cothran. on the
other hand, claims that they
uAu Aob ODcy Ills luStruct1OnS.
For example, he was advised by competent
parties that the market was going down,
| and he ordered them to sell. They insisted
| that it would go the other way. and held on
to his interest. The market went as he
| had been advised, and the result was a
serious loss. This way of doing business
was persisted in, the defendant claimed.
until the complainants were indebted to
him some $1,000 for profits which would
have been made had they followed his in
structions. The parties to the suit waived
trial by jury, and the evidence was heard
| by Judge Gary. His decision was
brief, and involved nothing but the right
of dealer to hedge his transactions. The
judge held that one deal could not offset
another. If the market was adverse to a
pending deal, and there was call for mar
gins or it would be closed out, the operator
could not buy or sell as the case might be-
and expect the profit in the latter case to
stand as margins on the former. Both
deals must be considered distinct and
separate. The Judge found that the com