The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1902-03-04
statute Imposing a Fine of SO to
$1,000 Upheld by the United
states Supreme Court.
OPINION BY JUSTICE HARLAN
SENTENCE OF ALFRED G.. BOOTH
PRACTICALLY AFFIRMED.
Detroit's Three-Cent Fare Ordinance
InvaIid-Case of Mrs. COrdeIia
Botkin Dismissed.

decree of the Supreme Court or Illinois |
I'm the case of Alfred G.. Booth VS.. the |
State of Illinois. involving the validity of
the State statute imposing a fine of from
$40 to 900 for dealing in futures. The de-
cision of the State court upheld the law,
and to-days opinion sustained that de-
cision The opinion was handed down by
Justice Fuller and was dissented from by
Justices Brewer and Peckham.
The Illinois law involved Section $50 of
the criminal code of the State, and it pro-
vides that whoever contracts to have or
give to himself or another the option to sell
or buy at future time any grain or other
commodity, or forestaIls the market by
spreading false rumors to influence the
price of commodities or corners the mar
ket, shall be fined not less than SO nor
more than $1,000, or confined in the county
Jail not exceeding one year, or both.
In delivering the opinion Of the court
Justice Harlan said that Booth had been
indicted ION the charge of violating the
statute so far as it related to options to
buy grain or other commodities at flu
ture time" He was found guilty and adj
judged to pay fine of 800. In the course
of his opinion Justice Harlan said:
1--WE cannot say from any facts judicially
known to the court or from the evidence
in this case that the prohibition of options
TO sell grain al a future time has in itself
no possible relation to the suppression of
gambling in grain contracts in respect of
which the parties contemplate only a set
Element on the basis of differences in the
contract and make the prices. Perhaps
the Legislature thought that the dealings
in options to sell or buy at a. future time.
gambling, may have the effect TO keep out
of the market while the option lasts the
property which is the subject of the OPP
III fhrrc ciGf N fO acfg h
lish for a time what are known as corners,
whereby the ordinary and regular sales or
exchanges of such property based upon ex-
listing prices may be interfered with, and
persons who have in fact grain and do
not care to handle any are enabled to
practically control prices. Or the Legisla-
ture may have thought that options to sell
buy at future time were mere specu-
latiOns in prices and tended to foster a
spirit of gambling. In all these the Legis-
lature may have been mistaken. If so, the
mistake was not such as to justify the
conclusion that the statute was mere
cover to destroy a particular kind of bust
ness not inherently harmful immoral.
1t must be assumed that the Legislature
was of opinion that an effectual mode to
suppress gambling grain contracts to
J declare Illegal all options to sell or buy at
a future time The court is unable to say
! that the means employed were not appro-
/ pirate to the end sought to be attained
and which it was competent for the State
TO accomplish. We cannot Judge that the
Legislature of Illinois transcribed the lin
it's of constitutional authority when
acting the statute in question" The opinion
of the Supreme Court of Illinois was af
firmed.
In another decision rendered by the Su-
preme Court it was held that the ordinance
enacted by the city government of Detroit
Mich, arbitrarily reducing street-car fares
10 cents was irregular and without bind
ing effect. This decision was based upon
the fact that previous ordinances had been
passed fixing the street-car fares at
cents. These original ordinances were con-
strued by the court to be in the nature of
contracts The opinion was delivered by
Justice Peckham. and affirmed the opinion
Eastern district of Michigan.
In passing on the question Of control
Justice Peckham. who delivered the opin-
having been fixed by positive agreement
under the expressed Legislative authority.
the question is not open to alteration by
/ the Common Council alone: nor the right
/ to prescribe from time to time the rules
and regulations for the running and OPP
/ Grafton OF the road Nor does the Ian
! guage of the ordinance, which provides
/ that the rate of fare for passenger
/ shall not be more than cents, give any
right TO the city to reduce 1t below the
/ rate of cents established by the company.
/ It is a contract which gives the company
/ the right TO charge a rate Of fare I'D TO
h nd en1e 81 no to city TeGe
ii without the consent of the company"
| XXX
! The court dismissed the case of Mrs. Cor
della BOtkin VS.. the People of the State of
! California. The dismissal was ordered upon
/ the presentation by the clerk of the court
/ OF stipulation from Mrs. Botkin's coun-
sci authorizing such proceedings. The case
\ came TO this court from the decision of the
/ Superior Court of San Francisco. and was
\ instituted to secure the release of Mrs.
4 Botkin who is under sentence OF life i'm
-
Mrs. Cumming by sending to her a box of
poisoned candy.
Justice Shiras delivered the opinion of
that court in the case of Wilson VS.. Stand
efer. affirming the decision of the Court
of Civil Appeals for the Third supreme
judicial district of Texas. The case in
volved the question as to whether the pro-
visions of the act Of the Texas LEGISLATURE
/ of 1879 FORGETTING the purchase of lands
| from the State on account OF failure TO
pay interest as prescribed were rendered
act dispensing with the requirement for
a judicial inquiry in such proceedings.
The opinion handed down to-day holds that
no contracts under the act of 1879 were i'm
paired by subsequent legislation.
XXX
The case of the United States VS.. the
Rio Grande Dam and Navigation Company
to-day was passed upon again by the Su-
7 preme Court of the United States and
again remanded to the territorial courts of
I New Mexico for the further taking of testi-
mOny. The case involves the right TO con-
struct a dam at Elphant Buttes in New
7 Mexico under the treaty with Mexico pro-
hibiting the placing of any obstruction In
the river calculated to prevent the naviga-
tion of the stream The case was heard
by this court I'm 1899 and remanded for the
I purpose of making inquiry as To the eff
feet the dam could have the naviga bill
/ ity OF the stream below the dam.
Justice Harlan handed down the opinion
1 of the court to-day. and he intimated that
/ the territorial courts had acted too pre-
/ cipitately in refusing TO grant more time
| with the request of the United States for
| such extension. He did not. however, re-
verse the verdict on this ground. but on
I the general principle that il is an equity
I proceeding affOrding the widest latitude
I in such matters. We cannot" he said
I resist the conviction that II We proceed
I To a final decree upon the present record
I great injustice may be done 10 the United
States as well as 10 all interested In pre-
serving the navigabilty of the Rio
I Csrande" Under the order of the court
! both sides 20 have opportunity 10 ad-
I duce further evidence.
The bill In equity against the Northern
Securities Company. J. Pierpont Morgon. J.
/ 7 TJtlI and others 10 prevent the merger Of