New-York tribune., 1910-01-21
ANOTHER FIRM
DOWN In CRASH
THIRD UCTIM OF
HOOKING BREAK.
Roberts, Hall s CIss Suspend
Follozring Reputation
of Orders.

A third Stock Exchange house. Rob-
erts. Hall & Criss. of which Hugh T
Crtss, the specialist in Columbus and
Hooking Coal and Iron, is member. an
nounced it's suspension yesterday morn
ing. following the failure OF Lathrop.
Haskins & Co. and J. NJ Ffske Co
on Wednesday, when the Columbus and
Hooking Coal and Iron pool went 20
pieces and the price OF the stock fell
from SS1s to %.
Much bitterness has developed as re-
suit OF this failure, the causes OF which
and of the occurrences OF Wednesday
are to be searchingly Investigated BY
the Stock Exchange authorities; and the
management Of the exchange itself was
a subject OF criticism yesterday, from
the fact that IL conducted an inquiry into
the pool last fall and gave IL a clean
bin of health" One or two explosions
and more suspensions from exchange
memberships are expected 70 result from
the present inquiry
The suspension OF Roberts, Hall &
Criss was directly due TO the continued
refusal OF the various houses which had
acted with Lathrop. Raskins & Co in thu
past in the pool operations In the stock
to acknowledge responsibility Tor the
purchases made on Wednesday by Mr.
Criss. acting under the instructions ot
Henry s. Haskins. OF Lathrop. Haskins
& Co, in the execution Of supporting or
ders. which were apportioned among
these houses pro rata according 10 tins
amount or their respective participations
in the pool
REPUTATION THE CAUSE.
This repudiation left Mr. Criss. Vho
had acted as "s2 broker" IN the posi-
tion of being himself the buyer OF the
stock in dispute. said to amount 10 some
thing less than $4,000 shares, which hs
purchased at from ssA TO around 20.
since recourse could not be had by him
to Lathrop, Haskins & Co. who had
failed Under that burden his firm neces-
sariIy made its assignment
Mr.. Criss said yesterday afternoon. in
speaking Of the action OF the houses
which had declined 70 recognize liability
for the purchases made by him. for their
account. as he had supposed:
took the orders in good faith and exc
cuted them in the regular way for people
presumed TO be responsible. but they re-
pudiated all except the written orders.
thereby saddling their losses upon Us II
they are allowed 10 welch on their orders
] do not know where We viii come out.
liza biities at IS 30ae.Go0 II thew are raJa
u settle We VIII be able TO pay our cretfi-
tors dollar for dollar. II looks as II the
members OF the pool were trying 20 make
me the goat and il is up to the governing
committee OF the Exchange 70 decide
whether or not these men shall be allowed
N on 1e,f~ 1rf]a TffeaT~ vr1 h-~L
on their word. and what they did is
better than the act of man who welchss
on poker debt
Although Mr.. Criss did not 20 into
details in regard 10 his estimate OF S.
100000 as the amount Of his firms fail
ure. it was understood that it's losses
on Hooking Coal and Iron stock did not
come anywhere near this figure. but that
the sum mentioned constituted the as-
gregate liabilities Of the house.
A member OF one OF the firms which
refused TO be bound by Mr. Criss's ac-
ton on Wednesday said yesterday that
there never had been any standing pool
agreement. but simply a day TO day
agreement with the specialist under
which Mr. Haskins would apportion tbs
amount Of stock which was TO be taken
each day by the several houses which
were parties 10 this understanding. IN
der this arrangement they would clear
for Mr. Criss and deliver the stock to
Lathrop. Haskius & Co
II was entirely optional with each Of
these houses. this man insisted. whether
or not they should take the stock day
after day, and when il became evident
Haskins & Co. were no longer in a posi-
tion TO take care OF the stock there vas
no obligation resting upon these tru1s to
take it over. Mr.. Haskins. he added.
had exceeded his authority in giving his
buying instructions 70 Mr. Criss On
Wednesday morning.
WRITTEN AGREEMENT. he SATs-
II appears TO be the fact. however.
that there was a written agreement
Henry D. Hotchkiss. receiver for La
throp. Haskius & Co., is one OF those
who vouch for the existence of such an
instrument He said yesterday:
There was a written agreement among
member all the details OF it, / saw the
original copy. signed by all the members.
and il is locked up there with their other
papers To the best OF my recollection X
was the ordinary pool agreement
In regard 10 a report that suit might
be brought against the members OF the
pool who had repudiated buying orders
in the stock given in their names by
Henry S Haskins. who had charge OF
the POOLS operations the floor OF the
exchange. Mr. Hotchkiss said that that
was a matter with which. as receiver. he
had nothing 10 do. but that he did not
belisve any such suit would be brought
As rule. he said. pool members settled
these things among themselves. and IL
vas probable that this would be the case
In the present instance II was possible
however. he added. that such a suit
might be brought. although he. as re-
ceiver. would take no part in any such
action
Under the agreement. IL is said. Mr.
Haskins had authority 10 purchase a
certain amount OF Columbus and Hooking
stock each day. apportioning II after the
lose OF business among the houses which
> ere members of the pool. and also ap-
oortIoning the buying orders for the fol-
owing day. tnstructing Mr.. Criss for
,ow many shares he was TO give up