Albuquerque morning journal. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1903-1926, 1922-10-31
GRAIN FUTURES
LAW ATTACKED
IN j. 6. COURT
Chicago Board of Trade
Asks for an Injunction to
Prevent the Government
From Enforcing the Act.

Chicago, oct. 3O--The Chicago
Board of Trade today made its
first move to test the constitution
ality of the grain futures act when
it filed in.the federal district court
here a petition for injunction re-
straining the government from en-
forcing the provisions Of the act.
District Judge Carpenter issued
a stay order preventing enforce
n1ent of the act until November
IS. when he will hear the petition
for a temporary injunction against
enforcement OF the regulating act.
The law, enacted to take the
place of the former Capper-Tin.
cher act declared unconstitutionai
by the supreme court, was passed
to become effective November l. |
The bill of complaint, filed by
Henry S. Robbins, counsel for the
board, charges that the law seeks
to regulate as interstate commerce, |
trade that is wholly state; that II |
interfered with state rights to
govern exchanges, and that it seeks /
to deprive board members of their I
property by admitting representa-
tives of cooperative bodies and .
permitting the INTO rebate commits
sions in violation of rules observed
by other members.
Further Charges.
Further charges of unconstitu-
tionality are made on the ground
that the law makes violation OF its
provisions a crime ''and constitutes
the secretary Of agriculture, the
secretary of commerce and the at
torney general a commission with
power to deprive offenders OF their
rights TO thereafter pursue a law
ful avocation: whereas. such crl"-
lnal laws are, under the coastitu-
ton, enforceable only in courts
with a jury trial"
Other sections granting Wlde
powers of control to the secretary
of agriculture. who is given auah-
ority to designate what exchanges
shall or shall not be contract mar
kets. are attacked as unsound.
Fear of what might resdll from
the drastic provisions of the law
the complaint says. may b.ins en-
"a serious disturbance of the grain
markets of the country
MANY owners of grain Il
states, will be deprived Of the
privilege of insuring themselves
against price fluctuations Though
hedging contracts and irrcparaole
loss to members and others would
result"
Alleged Marketing Evils.
Statements contained in that SEC
tfioff Of the law siinffarsMng az
legged evils of marketing are at
tackled by the exchange as 'inac-
curate." These assertions of sup
posed evils, the hoard contends,
were disproved at the numerous
/ hearings on the bill,
statements before committees
did not show that the transactions
and prices of grain in future trad
| ing are susceptible to speculation,
manipulation or control. to the del-
/ riment of producers and consulh-
! ers,'' the complaint says. Ih1
Statement did show. it continues
that such fluctuations as do oe-
| cur are not and never have been
an obstruction to, or burden upon,
/ interstate commerce in grain
The suit which resulted in the
former law being declared uncon-
/ stitutional was brought by ma
yidual members of the exchange
but Chief Justice Taft declared IN
the decision that the board itself
should have contested the law.
such a policy is being followed ny
/ the board in the present llsht'
with the approval of the other
| grain exchanges.