The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1905-03-09
BROKERS HOLD OFF.
Waiting For Advice On
WOOdard Bill
Unconstitutional.

While the Ware and Leland Com
mission House was still open on yes
terday, there was posted a conspicu-
Gus notice to the effect that no new
trades were being made, the quota
tions which were received being sim
ply for the convenience of customers
who had been patronizing the firm
and who were still in the market.
This action of the house referred
to does not mean that the Woodard
bill is to be no longer contested; but
simply that the management is await
ing advices as to the course to be. pur-
sued. 1t is understood that counsel
have been engaged by the several
firms doing business in the State, who
are representative of brokerage firms
having seats on the various regular
exchanges and are awaiting their
formal opinion as to the effect OF the
act before again commencing business.
If the legal advice should be that the
law is unconstitutional, the course to
be followed would probably be to
have an indictment brought for the
purpose of testing the law, as the case
would thus the more quickly get be-
fore the Supreme Court, the manager
moving a dismissal of the case on the
ground of the unconstitutionality of
the act.
The theory of the brokerage houses
is thatth amendment to the original
Woodard bill permitting the use of
the quotations by manufactures,
wholesalers, ETC., constitutes piece
of class legislation which is repug-
nant to the provisions of the Four
teenth Amendment of the Constitu-
ton of the United States.
There have been several recent de-
cisions of the United States upreme
Court, in which it was held that anti
trust laws. exempting from their pro-
visions the organization of farmers
and labor unions were unconstitution-
al under the provisions of the clause
of the Constitution referred to, and
il is to these cases that the brokerage
people look for relief. This was so
i'm the cases of the Texas anti-trust
law, the Nebraska law of 1897 and
an Illinois statute which Disseminated
i'm favor of farmers or raisers of live
stock.
The theory of the courts in the
cases above referred to has been that
While a State may, in its discretion,
make classification of persons, firms,
corporations and associations in order
to subserve public objects, such classi-
fication must always rest upon some
difference which bears a reasonable
and just relation to the act in respect
to which the classification is proposed,
and can never be made arbitrarily and
without any such basis. Arbitrary
selection can never be justified by
calling it classification, the equal pro-
lection demanded by the Fourteenth
Amendment forbidding such discrim-
ination.
AS it is held by the court that when
such class legislation is attempted 1t
renders the entire act void, the
brokerage firms put high hopes in
these decisions. The question will
therefore be, is or is not the amend
ment giving the manufacturers and
wholesalers the right to engage in and
make contracts denied tothe re-
)mainder of the public classification
resting upon a difference which bears
a reasonable and just relation to the
act in respect to which the classiti-
cation is proposed?
While the Woodard bill excuses a
witness who testifies his act in buy
ing a future contract is still a crimi-
nal one while the manufactures is
permitted to so contract. 1t is this
discrimination which the firms con-
cerned claim is in violation of the
Fourteenth Amendment
1t was rumored on Tuesday that
the local brokerage house was trans
acting business as usual, in spite or
the Woodard bill. 1t was at least re-
epected yesterday to the extent of the
notice mentioned above.