The morning times., 1896-02-14
ALL IRE bucket SHOPS
Courts Verdict May So Regard
All Brokers Places.
OLD DISTINCTION BFFACED
In the Case Before Judge Bradley
Ii Is Decided That All Dealings
in Options Is Gambling Before the
Law-So Debt Can BE Collected
in Such Transactions

The verdict in Judge BradIey's court yes
terday in regard 10 stock brokers opera
lions may ioad 10 the issue OF warrants
for many OF The more aristCoraiC dealers
IN options in this city.
The Times stated six months ago that
such a course was under consideration.
The warrant against Koppel Kurnitzki was
sent out about that time and since that
case little more has been done.
A distinction has always been made, how
ever, between what are known as bucket
Shops" such as Kurnitzki's WIS, and the
BO-Called legitimate concerns, or which
there IS q .CCusi sideTablC number. This dis
tinCtion IS pOken down by ttc finding OF
the Jury before Judge Bradley and The
attent ion or District Attorney BTney is
called sharply TO tie fact that all are alike
considered 10 lie gambling operations under
the laws CT the District.
The srit was that Of TilfOrd & Maynard
or No. 1871 T street northwest against w.
II. Denipsc-, TO recover $IG5 on deal
made November %. 1895. The firm got
q Judgment before Magistrate o'Noal De
cember ). but Mr.. X. b. BCail for Mr.
Dempsey toOk an appeal.
When tie case came before Judge Brad
ley the priH, pal question 10 bc considered
was whether the transaction was Il real
paid for, OF WAS merely a trade on margins
ALL is GAMBLING
It has been held recently by Judge Brad
ley that dealing in options is gambling
within the HiCaRing or the law and no debt
can be collected which arises in such
transactions. This opinion follows Bumer-
Gus decisions elsewhere.
It has teen believed, however, that deal
ings by members OF tie New York Stock
Exchange through The New York Clearing
house should be considered rcai trades and
brokers and employees have rad 10 hcsita-
ton 10 swear that there was actual de
livery of stock and payment therefor where
the New York rules say tbc parer opera
tions gone through with >baii constitute
such actual trading.
But with tifis view the jury in this case
disagreed. II their way of thinking should
prevail brokerage firms with New York
correspondents VIII be put upon level
with the most ordinary "bucket-shop," so
far as the law is concerned, and viii be
wholly at tire mercy Of customers in the
collection Of money due.
Testimony presented in the case included
affidayits from New York brokers regard
ing transactions there. One Of these,
Mr. Stuart Wortley. q member of Price
Mccormick & Co., who are the New York
correspondents Of Maynard & Tiford, said:
My opinion OF a bucket-Shop is that
1t differs from a stock brokers' business
to this extent, that in execution OF all
orders Eivea 20 a stock broker actual de-
livery is contemplated and takes place,
whereas IN hucket-shop transactions there
is no intention either 10 make delivery OF
TO make what | should call genuine trans
action
WHAT Is DELIVERY?
William Z. Young OF Z. b. Cuthbert s
TarF hat FsfTfsa f7nfT ~farK-
He says: The rulers OF the New York
stock exchange require that when stock
bought is what is termed 'ex-clearinghOuse'
delivery. that the seller shall send the
certificates for the amount OF stock in
question To the buyer and receive from
him on delivery cash or check in pa yment
In delivering stocks which are not de
Iiverable under The rule So-calied 'eX-clearing 9
house they are delivered by the seller
to the buyer on the clearing house sheets,
the next clearing house day following the
purchase or sale in question. This, under
the rules Of the New York Stock Exchange,
backed By legal opinion, makes legal
delivery"
Mr. Edwin NJ. Cox of Seymour Brothers
eXplained the transactions in 100 shares
OF sugar stock as it would appear upon the
books OF a brOkera ge firm. He said if a
customer sold 100 shares OF stock at 90
he was credited with S9,7S7.5O. If he
buys 100 shares at SO be has to pay SO,
$3.50. when asked what deposit was
required on 100 shares Nr. Cox said it de
pended on his business and financial stand
Ing aud a dozen different things. There
was no usual requirement. One man would
be required o deposit $500. another 81 .00t
on $1,000 transaction while for a third
thepurcbase e would be made wthoutmargiD
Judge Bradley cautioned the jury thai
IL makes no difference what is the law else
where; the Law here is as he Statedit. After
beinEout short time he jury found verdict
for Mr.. Dempsey.