Chicago eagle. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1889-19??, 1898-12-24
The VICIOUS WAREHOUSE AC1
or 1897.

The original warehouse law of iii.
nOis provided In sufficiently explicit
terms that the operator of warehouse.
class \. should receive for storage only
the grain of others. and should not
store nor deal In his own grain through
his own warehouse. If he bought or
stored his own grain ana sold 1t. he had
an advantage which his customers did
not possess. This Is the spirit of the
law of 1871 relating to warehouses and
OF It's amendments up to the session of
the doodle Legislature of 1897.
The reasonablcness of this Jaw Is
clearly set forth In the recent opinion
Of Justice Cartwright of the Supreme
Court In the warehouse eases. He says
that where one person occupies re-
latiOn In which he owes q duty to an
other he shall not place himself in any
position which will expose him TO the
temptation of acting contrary To that
duty or bring his interest In conflict
with his duty" II Is human rs well as
divine law that no man can serve two
masters. No warehOuseman can serve
his own interests and NJ the same time
serve the interests of his customer.
with whom he Is In competition as u
trader In grain. Then the court says:
"COurrS of equity have never allowed
n person occupying such n relation to
undertake the service Of TWO whose in
ierests are In conflict. but forblds such
% course of dealing. Irrespective Of his
goo,l faith or his bad faith. If the duty
OF the defendants rs public warehouse.
men stands in opposition to personal
Interests, as buyers ana dealers in grain
storing the same in their own ware.
houses, then the law lnterposaS n pre-
veniiyc check against any temptation
90 act from personal Interest by prohlb
Ting them from occupying any such po
sitlOn."
This was the Implication Of lha law oi
1871, which clearly separates the bust
ness al u warehouSrlnHn iruM TIT
business III dealer In grain. \ ware
house il a public utility the operations
of which are regulated by law. IL
owner, by buying grain, storing 1t II
his own bins without cost To himsel
ana selling 1t out, can pay more fo
grain ana sell for less than other trad
crs. 10 prevent this discrimination th'
law prohibiting warrhousrmrn from
dealing in grain was enacted.
Members Of the Board of Trade wilt
suffered IN business from his NE.
competition commenced lrga! proceed
ings 10 stop the handling of thc,r owl
grain by wIrrhOusem"n, The Sllt VA
IN 1hr Interest of every farmer AMI .
every dealer IN grain who did not owl
wlrruDuSr. While the suit was pend
ing the Doodle Leg stature o. lS'
passed an act which appar. nily author
lied reimbursement 10 deal IN ihr.g OW,
grain.
This was m attempt 10 lrgalZr hy
Corrupi statute n dishonest system %
business under which rlsra!ly ~ rim
jnallOn. might be- practice "vrrywarr
against farmers and homes Il +ilrrS !
farm products. II belonged 10 the SAN
class Of bal. corrupt AMI sranlaiOu
IraiSlI lon ~ the Gas Consolidation bl
AMI similar Doodle measures 81 the las
rg.-lliure.
Ia considering the warrhOuS. case
the supreme Court refused 10 r"opr
the proceedings for the purpose of nd
hitting plcadlngs and hearing argu
ments relating 10 the doodle warehOus
act Of 1891. The Inference j. pla!i
The court must have considered tina
the act VI the Doodle Legislature wa
void, ~ against public policy IN ~
th1rlzing vicious discrm in III
business Of buying aud selling grain.
II i, unfortunate thar the court d.
not reopen the case and decide the 81
tire question Of the validity q
the new acj ~ well a. to the lllcgallt
of dealings In grain by warchouscme