People Ex Rel. Thomas B. Rice v. the Bd. of Trade of Chicago.
| Decision Date | 30 September 1875 |
| Citation | 80 Ill. 134,1875 WL 8723 |
| Parties | THE PEOPLE ex rel. Thomas B. Ricev.THE BOARD OF TRADE OF CHICAGO. |
| Court | Illinois Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
APPEAL from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. SAMUEL M. MOORE, Judge, presiding.
Mr. LEONARD SWETT, Mr. JOHN J. HERRICK, Messrs. MONROE & MCKINNON, and Messrs. HARDY & HERRICK, for the appellant.
Messrs. LAWRENCE, WINSTON, CAMPBELL & LAWRENCE, and Messrs. DENT & BLACK, for the appellee.
The General Assembly granted a charter authorizing a number of persons and their associates to form, in the city of Chicago, a board of trade. The organization was perfected, officers elected, by-laws adopted and the objects of the incorporation carried into operation. Thomas Rice, the relator, applied to and became a member of the body. In the year 1872, he was a member of the firm of John B. Lyon & Co., which consisted of Lyon, Rice and George J. Brine. The firm was largely engaged in buying and selling grain during the month of August of that year. They purchased a considerable quantity of wheat of Dugan, Case & Co., and, also, of the firm of T. H. Seymour & Co.; also, 10,000 bushels of corn of this latter firm.
On the 22d of August, 1872, wheat suddenly declined largely in price. The wheat and corn was deliverable at the sellers' option--a portion during that month and a portion at any time during the year. On this decline in price, the sellers, who had deposited margins, according to the rules of the board of trade, necessary to secure the performance of their part of the contract, called on the firm of J. B. Lyon & Co. to deposit further margins, as they were authorized to do by the rules of the board of trade. This, J. B. Lyon & Co. failed to do, and thereupon the respective vendors proceeded, under the second section of the ninth rule of the board of trade, to give notice to Lyon & Co. that the contract must be considered as filled at the market price, and demanded payment of the difference between the selling and the market price. The bill for the difference was presented for payment. Its correctness was admitted, and they, at different times, made various propositions for the settlement of the claim.
In October, 1873, Dugan, Case & Co. filed a complaint against J. B. Lyon & Co. with the board of directors of the board of trade. The members of the firm were notified to appear and defend themselves against the charges. They appeared, and the hearing was continued from time to time until the 17th of March, 1874, when, on a hearing, the prosecution was dismissed without prejudice.
On the 3d day of April following, Dugan, Case & Co. petitioned for a rehearing, which was granted, and an order was passed allowing appellant and the other members of his firm to be permitted to appear by counsel, which had been previously denied them. Notice was served upon them, and, on the 13th day of April, they attended, with counsel, and obtained a continuance, and subsequently another continuance was granted them. They appeared in person, and protested against the trial, denying any jurisdiction of the board of directors to try them, and withdrew, declining to offer evidence or make any defense.
The case was heard again, and, on the 28th of April, the several members of the firm were...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Charles O. Finley & Co., Inc. v. Kuhn, 77-2008
...People v. Order of Foresters, 162 Ill. 78, 44 N.E. 401 (1896); Board of Trade v. Nelson, 162 Ill. 431, 44 N.E. 743 (1896); Rice v. Board of Trade, 80 Ill. 134 (1875).57 See Part II of this opinion for a discussion of the historical development and present extent of the Commissioner's powers......
-
The State ex rel. Hyde v. Jackson County Medical Society
...635; Wellenvoss v. Grand Lodge, 103 Ky. 415; Clark v. Wallace, 20 Ky. L. 154; White v. Brownell, 4 Abb. P. (N. S.) 191; People ex rel. v. Board of Trade, 80 Ill. 134; Sale v. Baptist Church (Inc.), 62 Iowa Lawson v. Hewell, 118 Cal. 613. (b) Incorporation of society makes no difference. It ......
-
Van Daele v. Vinci, Gen. No. 54576
...that they would not interfere with or regulate the internal activities of a voluntary association. People ex rel. Rice v. Board of Trade, 80 Ill. 134; Sturges v. Board of Trade, 86 Ill. 441; Pitcher v. Board of Trade, 121 Ill. 412, 13 N.E. 187; Ryan v. Cudahy, 157 Ill. 108, 41 N.E. 760; Peo......
-
Albers v. Merchants' Exchange of St. Louis
... ... v. Yale, 47 La. Ann. 690; ... State ex rel. Patterson v. Tittmann, 35 S.W. 581 ... (3) In ... Vandyke, 2 ... Wharton, 309; People v. Chicago Board of Trade, ... 80 Ill. 134; ... 112; People ex rel ... Rice v. Board of Trade , 80 Ill. 134; People ex rel ... ...