New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1905-05-09
FUTURES NOT GAMBLING.
Chicago Board of Trade WinS SALTS
in Suprenle Court.

Washington, May S.-The Supreme Court Of
the United States to-day decided the cases OF
the Board OF Trade Of Chicago against the c. O.
Christie Commission Company OF Kansas CITY
ana the Kinsey Company Of Chicago, involving
the right OF the private concerns to use the
continuous quotations OF the board, in favor or
the contentious of the Board Of Trade Both
concerns resented the designation Of bucketshop.
and &c was charged that the transactions OF the
board are Of a nature TO Justify the character
iEation Of the board q bucketshop, ma
pority OF them involving no physical transfer Of
the property supposed to be transferred Sum-
ming up the points. involved Justice Holmes, in
delivering the opinion OF the court, said that the
board supplies its quotations to the telegraph
companies under a contract not TO deliver them
10 bucketshops, and the cases were instituted TO
prevent the use Of the figures by the private
houses without contracts with the Board Of
Trade he added that majority Of the court
was not prepared TO say that the transactions
Of the board constitute gambling, and the de-
cison was that the injunction should be granted
as prayed for,
Justices Harlan. Brewer and Day dissented
In his opinion, Justice Holmes characterized
the Board OF Trade great market where,
through it's 500 members, is transacted q large
part Of the grain and provision business Of the
world" Speaking OF dealings in futures, he said:
People viii endeavor TO forecast the future
and 70 make agreements according to their
prophecy. Speculation Of this kind by competent
men is the self adjustment of society TO the
probable. It's value is well known as a means
Of avoiding mitigating catastrophes, eQualiZ-
ing prices and providing Tor periods OF want
4. When the Chicago Board Of Trade was or
gan.zed we cannot doubt that il was expected
20 afford a market for future well as present
sales, with the necessary incidents Of such
market, and while the state Of Illinois allows
the charter 10 stand, cannot believe that the
pits, merely as places where future sales are
made, are forbidden by the law.
He said that agreements made on the ex-
change are IN the nature Of contracts, and con-
tinued:
The fact that contracts are satisfied by set
offs and by the payment OF differences detracts
IN 10 6esree from the good faith Of the parties;
and Il the parties know when they make such
contracts that they are very likely TO have q
chance 10 satisfy them in that way and intend TO
make use Of II, that fact is perfectly consistent
witha serious business purpose and an intent
that the contract shall mean what it says
It seems 10 Us an unlikely and an extraordinary
proposition that the dealings which give its
character 10 the great market for future sales
n this country are TO be regarded mere
wagers or as pretended buying or selling, with
bought, or Of delivering the property sold, within
the meaning Of the Illinois act The
sales tie pits not pretended, but are
meant and supposed TO BE- binding. A set-of is
in legal effect delivery.
Even admitting. the justice said, that the
Board Of Trade does maintain place where I'M
lawful transactions are permitted, II does not
follow that it should not be protected in this
suit The board has the right TO keep the
work which II has done or paid for doing to
Itself"