The New York herald., 1922-05-19
AMERICAN COTTON
EXCHANGE ON TRIAL
Seven Jurors Chosen to Hear
Bucketing Charge Against
Corporation.
SOME ADMIT PREJUDICE
One Talesman 'Stung,' Ex-
cused; Others Have No Idea
What Bucket ShOpiIs.
SOME ADMIT PREJUDICE

One OF the larger prosecutions under
the bucket shop law which resulted from
District Attorney Banton's investigation
after the series OF articles in TIE NEW
York HERALD began yesterday In the
criminal branch of the Supreme Court,
the American Cotton Exchange being
brought to trial as corporation. Before
the close of the day seven jurors had
been chosen.
The Indictment charges bucketing OF
cotton orders, it being asserted thaai 81
per cent. of the orders received by the
Exchange from the South were newer
actually executed. The penalty Is a
maximum fine of $4,000. Two conv1c-
tions would bring about the abrogatiosl
of the corporations charter. SeVerai
individuals are mentioned In the lndlcu~
ment. but these will not be brought "a
trial until after the case against the
corporation Is decided.
Selecting the Jurors.
The case Is to be heard by Justice L.
H. Marcus Of Buffalo, who is sitting in
this district as part of. the program Of
clearing the calendars. George Gordon
Battle is chief counsel for the defense,
his chief assistant being Albert Massey
The prosecution Is in the hands OF
Assistant District Attorney Hugo Whit
ner, assisted by Assistant District At
torney Benjamin Schrefber. Counsel for
the New York Cotton Exchange was
also represented.
In choosing the jurymen Mr.. Wintner
was particular to get men who seemed
to be capable of understanding the
bucket shop law and who had some
knowledge of bookkeeping. Once or
twice the question was asked, What is
a. bucket shop?" The answers varied
widely and it was clear that some of the
talesmen had no idea. Others made
close guesses. One said that IL
customer bought stocks and the market
rose and the broker did not pay he was
operating a bucket shop.
Charles r. Barrett. who had been in
the stock and grain business and was for
twenty years a member of the Chicago
Board of Trade, was excused because
he admitted he had a prejudice that it
would tae a great deal of evidence of
conclusive character to overcome.
Louis Degginger, manufacturer Of paper
boxes, was also excused for prejudice
Examined by Mr.. Wintner he said he
had invested in stocks in Western city.
Asked where, he replied:
"In bucket shops"
Did they sting you'
considerably"
What is bucketing?"
Just a gamble on the ups and downs
of the market"
Investor Is Challenged.
The only challenge was used by the
defense in the case of man who had
bought fountain pen stock and lost
money, but who had hopes as to some
oil stocks.
The jurymen chosen at the close of
the session were: John Wrieden, apart
ment house superintendent. 575 West
172d street; Jacob Rabinowitz, knit
goods, 1910 Broadway; William Bloch,
fur manufacturer. $40 West II 9Th street !;
Walter W. Newcomer. composer. 143
West 147thi street: Aaron f. Chamber
lain. electrical supplies, 52s West 111th
street: Michael T. Mannion, woolens
263 West 153d street, and Harvey G.
Ockendon. restaurant 935 st. Nicholas
avenue.
The trial WILL be continued this morn
ing at 10 80.