The Birmingham age-herald., 1902-09-14
Judge UphOIds Injunction in July
 Oats Gases
MAY PUT END ID CORNERS
Decision Goes Further and Strikes at Very Life of Board of Trade. Cannot Adjudicate Prop
 erty Rights.

Chicago x September 13.-A most im- portant decision against the Chicago board of trade was rendered today by Judge Akel Chyraus in the July oats corner" injunction cases. Not only does the opinion of the court. if sustained by higher tribunals. put an end to all cor ners in commodities on this exchange, but 1t strikes at the very life of the in- stitution as now organized. The direc- tors for all time have had their powers so curtailed that they cannot longer ad- indicate upon property rights of the members of the association. Judge Chy- traus goes even farther and says that under the charter of the board of trade there Is no provision for succession of membership. and he asks the pertinent question: What should become of the corporation when persons now composing the original board will be dead?'
 The case in question was one brought by the commission firm of Waite, Tho burn & Go. against the Chicago board of trade the Bank of Montreal and several prominent membrs of the board of trade, in which a temporary injunction was granted to prevent margins that were put up by the complainants from being handed down to the contracting defen- dants.
 Corner on July Oats.
 The claim was made that the defend- ants had run a corner in July standard oats. The ccmplainants who had sold short" to the defendants while not 11 T ,Io ing their purpose to make good these contracts, made protest against having the case adjudicated by the board of trade as provided in the bylaws of the association. She standard" oats in ques- association. The ''standard' oats in eues- impos sible to obtain in sufficient qdan- tity to fill contracts during July because of delay to crcps by rainy weather. In the pit on change highly fictitious prices hal been put on this commodity and the conplainants asked the court to set a fair price between which price and the one at which they had contracted the diff fernce might be paid. This case was filled July 20, one day before settlements were required. Shortly after this, twen- ty three other cases were filed by the same complainants against various de- fendants; ten cases by Pratt, Bucking & Co.,, six by H. c. Avery & Co. and one by Il. Henry Norton. By cJmIaon consent all cases are affected by the same ruling
 Honest Price Intended.
 The court said in ruling that as far as tre merits of the case were concerned, tt did not ms ter whether there was a corner, for 1t was taken for grsnte3 that an honest price was intended. This part of the matter can be decided at a further hearing which will be held. The dcclsion makes the injunction in force until this hearing of facts is had. The losing par ties have appealed, but this does not pre- vent further hearing.
 The gist of the decision is that special committee, which, according to the board rules, should be appointed by the Presi- dent to adjudicate such differences, has not authority to act In matters where pro operty rights are involved
 The right of the directors Of the board to preserve the integrity of it's rules, so far as disoiplining members is concerned by fine, suspension or expulsion, is up- held by the court as their proper rights. but he rules against the question that against the will of the compliments the power of disposal over that money which in a sense has been placed in trust or es- crew, exists in a select committee of three disinterested persons, members of tho association to be appointed by the president that is, whether that the money can b. appropriated by such a commit tee to the contracting defendants"
 Complainants Not Bound.
 Regardless of the fact that the com plainants are to be bound by the rules which provide for settlements or disagree ments, me court ruled that they were not bound, that the arrogating of such power to such body was against public policy, and that 'it would be introducing sovereignty within a sovereignty for the function of constructing the law"
 The court holds that as a corporation not for profit the board of trade pos sesses governmental and disciplinary powers over the members that are not possessed by stock corporations, where money or property rights are directly in- volved. The general power to pass upon the right of property in the margins in question, however, is held judicial power, which never can be considered to have been delegated or confirmed by dubious implication.
 ''The ordinary courts of justice" said the court, constituting one of the branches of our government ought not to be- and should not submit to being, cx- cluded or outside of Jurisdiction by in- tendment'
 With some sarcasm the court adds:
 'The masterly ingenuity of the plan contrived to prevent appeals to the com mon law courts of the state commands our admiration. Think of the long time of operation that has proved tho scheme a successful onel The lose- who may feel himself aggrieved and who may know himself to have been wronged by the operation of a corner or otherwise, at law, can only sue to get his money back.
 'Even that remedy Is by the resource fulness of the scheme abridged. For it is possible for him to do even that only if he has an award or adjudication against him by this board Of trade com mttee or tribunal"