Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1888-05-19
AN INTERESTING ARGUMENT.

Mr.. Enloe, of Tennessee, has bill in
Congress to prohibit the dealing in
futures in agricultural products. Re
Gently Mr.. Enloe had hearing before the
Committee on Agriculture, when he
argued for the constitutional power OF
Congress to prohibit such dealing. The
debate on that occasion was exceedingly
interesting, and justifes a sketch of the
arguments made, for the reflection of
readers. Mr.. Enloe's bill is intended to
prevent the unlawful buying or selling
of the products of the soil for future de-
livery where actual delivery of such pro-
duct is not contemplated at the time the
contract is made, and to provide such
penalties as will secure an observance of
the law.
The Courts, he pointed out, have re-
| peatedly held such contracts to be void, as
against public policy, but the question to
which the committee requested him TO adj
dress himself was the constitutional power
of Congress to legislate in the matter In
response he claimed that the "evil I" has
outgrown the limits of the States. He
would, therefore, have Congress interfere,
and he bases his claim of the right of that
body on the assumption that the practice
| aimed at has become a means of obstruc-
ton to free commercial intercourse "among
the several States and "with foreign ma
tions."
Congress is given the express power " to
regulate commerce among the several
States" and it has, he claimed, power to
| remove distractions to such commerce,
| and that the buying and selling of futures
in agricultural products consti-
tute an obstruction to free COM
mercial intercourse among the sew
eral States. He quoted Story in def
milton of the express grant to Congress re-
ferred to-that "to regulate commerce
is to prescribe the rule by which COM
merce is to be governed. Commerce is
traffic, but it is something more-it is
intercourse. 1t describes the commercial
intercourse between nations ard parts Of
nationsin all its branches and is regu-
lated by prescribing rules for carrying on
that intercourse" He further quoted the
great law-writer as placing within the
power granted the power to regulate
buying and selling" and as holding that
Congress is given the EXPRESS power to
prescribe rules for the conduct of indi-
viduals in the actual employment of buy
ing, selling or barter" He also quoted
Cooley, the constitutional commentator
and Chief Justice Marshall in support of
the view that transportation is not COM
merce, but only an incident of it, while
buying and selling" constitute the very
essence of commerce.
His Interpretation of selling and buying
futures " was that it is speculation, in
juring not only the unsuccessful trader,
Spectator or gambler, but, in cases in
yolving products of the soil, ipjuring both
producer and consumer and interfering with
the regular and legitimate exchange of
the commodities through established
channels of commerce. Thus combina-
ton of individuals is formed to accumu-
late product, and price is fixed at
which the producer must sell by bring
ing the combination purchases into COM
petition with his product when he
enters the market, and depressing
prices until ne is forced to sell. By com
ing between producer and consumer, the
prices for each are fixed. The "conl-
bine' breaks the market by flooding it
when the producers would sell, and forces
it up by Withholding the Accommodations
from market after the producers have sold
the bulk of their crops. These are cases
where actual delivery is made, but they
are the smallest part of the business. The
fictitious trades represent the richest part
of the harvest, and every year represent
many times the aggregate of any and of
all the products that are made the subject
of speculation. Thus, the free and natural
interchange of commodities is DISTRACTED.
Thus far the argument was ingenious,
and appears not to have caused Interrupt
ton by the committee But when he
proceeded to further consideration of con-
tracts for futures" the committee was anx-
ious to ascertain if lie contended that a
gambling contract-such as his bill aims
to erush-between citizens of different
States would come within the commerce
clause OF the Constitution? Mr.. Enloe
replied in the negative, subject to the ex-
ception of such contracts, the operations
under which would tend to obstrsct and
interfere with the exchange of commodi-
ties between the different States. But this
brought him to the necessity of saving
that the bill must, if effective for any.
thing, also apply to all such contracts be-
tween citizens of the same State. Here.
probably, Is the weakest spot in the Con-
CHEESEMAN'S defensive armor. 1t is unques-
tionable that the States viii contest any
construction of the Constitution on which
such law must be had. Mr.. Morgan
asked the author of the bill If, after all.
the buying and selling of futures is not an
incident in regard TO gambling in the go
ing Up and down of prices, and added
the suggestive inquiry: is it not
simply bet?" Mr.. Enloe replied