Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1882-02-25
FIGHTING FUTURES.
Judge Pierce Charges the Grand Jury
to Indict the Men Wbe Run the
"Bucket-Shops.o
He Declares that the Speculation of Flu.
ture Delivery Cotton and Grain is
Gambling, "Simon Pure"

Yesterday morning Judge Pierce cast
| b6mbshell into the csmp of the bucket-shops
! During the absence of Judge Horrigan il
1 New Orleans, Judge Pierce has received the
reports of the grand jury. The judge has 8
decided opinion that the bucket-shop trans
actions amount to gambling, and that q
! bucket shop is better than a gambling.
hell so far as the law is concerned.
1t is understood that the grain sold for
| future delivery is a genuine transaction at
! the bucket-shop-at least there are printed
| contracts 80 declaring. The cotton transac-
tiOns do not contemplate the
HANDLING OF THE "FLEEcY"
at all. During the year fully five hundred
thousand bales of future cotton are sold to
and from in Memphis. The middlemen
make a large amount of money, probably
sixty cents TO the bale. The number of men
who speculate in futures, and who are ruined
by it, is very large. The shop never loses.
During the last few weeks the amount of
money changing hands has been enormous
The poor devils who hang around the boards,
we'll as the respectable church members
who like little sly speculation, have all
been screwed by the remorseless tumbles.
ONE OF THE VICTIMS
of bad luck, 7. B. Micou, has brought suit in
the Circuit Court against the Tennessee
Brokerage Association for $500 damages.
1t is understood that his actual losses have
been about $500.
Judge Pierce, yesterday, sent for the grand
jury aud charged them concerning gambling
in futures as follows:
GENTLEMEN You have been charged
generally upon the law of gaming, but the
court thinks it proper to charge you spe-
cislly as to a species of gaming that has
come to the attention of the court through
the public prints and otherwise; and that il
wagering to the possible future prices of
products, stocks or other property. III
person should make a contract to buy or sell
any product or other property at given
price, TO be delivered at a flu ure day, and
actually intends to handle and deliver said
product or commodity, even if he had not
the property in his possession, provided he
had = reasonable expectation of acquiring it
in time for the future delivery, this would
be legitimate business transaction. But if
person makes contract similar to that in
form, expecting in the end to pay or
SETTLE THE DIFFERENCES ONLY,
and has no intention or reasonable expecta-
ton of ever handling delivering said pro-
duct or property, this amounts merely to a
wager as to what the future price will be;
and the court charges you that this Is playing
at game of hazard or chance within the
of the law; and is in violation of
the law and should be presented by indict-
nent. And any one who keeps open a
place for the carrying on of such transac-
lions is
KEEPING A GAMINGHOUsE
within the meaning of the law, and is liable |
70 Indictment therefor. This is great evil |
n this community and one which demands |
your attention. You will, however, examine |
With care the cases presented and find in
iictments only where the same in your
alignment can be sustained by the proof in |
his court