Hearings Before the Committee on Agriculture During the Second Session of the Sixty-first Congress, Volume 2
U.S. Government Printing Office, 1910 - Commodity exchanges
What people are saying - Write a review
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.
Other editions - View all
actual amount answer bales of cotton BEALL believe bill bought BROOKS BURLESON bushels buyer carried cents CHAIRMAN Chicago comes committee consumer contract corn course crop deal deliver delivery demand difference effect eliminate exist fact farmer Fitch fixed fluctuations future future contracts gentlemen give grades grain hand handling HAUGEN hedge intended interest kind LATHAM legitimate LEVER MANDELBAUM manufacturer margin MARSH matter mean merchant MERRILL middling mill month never NEVILLE operations opinion Orleans PARKER possible practically present producer profit protect question reason receive represent risk rules sell seller Sims SNYDER sold South speculation spinner spot cotton statement supply suppose tell thing THOMPSON tion trade transactions true understand United warehouse wheat York Cotton Exchange
Page 650 - We admit, as all must admit, that the powers of the Government are limited, and that its limits are not to be transcended But we think the sound construction of the Constitution must allow to the National Legislature that discretion, with respect to the means by which the powers it confers are to be carried into execution, which will enable that body to perform the high duties assigned to it in the manner most beneficial to the people.
Page 651 - The liberty mentioned in that Amendment means not only the right of the citizen to be free from the mere physical restraint of his person, as by incarceration, but the term is deemed to embrace the right of the citizen to be free in the enjoyment of all his faculties; to be free to use them in all lawful ways; to live and work where he will; to earn his livelihood by any lawful calling; to pursue any livelihood or avocation, and for that purpose to enter into all contracts which may be proper, necessary,...
Page 651 - widespread pestilence of lotteries' and to protect the commerce which concerns all the States, may prohibit the carrying of lottery tickets from one State to another. In legislating upon the subject of the traffic in lottery tickets, as carried on through interstate commerce, Congress only supplemented the action of those States — perhaps all of them — which, for the protection of the public morals, prohibit the drawing of lotteries, as well as the sale or circulation of lottery tickets within...
Page 306 - Now, I want to ask you if it is not a fact that the safety of a hedge depends upon a parity being maintained between the future price and the spot price ? Mr.
Page 652 - States — perhaps all of them • — which, for the protection of the public morals, prohibit the drawing of lotteries, as well as the sale or circulation of lottery tickets, within their respective limits. It said, in effect, that it would not permit the declared policy of the States, which sought to protect their people against the mischiefs of the lottery business, to be overthrown or disregarded by the agency of interstate commerce.
Page 649 - If, as has always been understood, the sovereignty of congress, though limited to specified objects, is plenary as to those objects, the power over commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, is vested in congress as absolutely as it would be in a single government, having in its constitution the same restrictions on the exercise of the power as are found in the constitution of the United States.
Page 660 - Territory, or from any place in the United States to an adjacent foreign country, or from any place in the United States...
Page 653 - We decide nothing more in the present case than that lottery tickets are subjects of traffic among those who choose to -sell or buy them; that the carriage of such tickets by independent carriers from one State to another is therefore interstate commerce...
Page 653 - The whole subject s too important, and the questions suggested by its consideration are too difficult of solution, to justify any attempt to lay down a rule for determining in advance the validity of every statute that may be enacted under the commerce clause.