A(;Ri(ui/rrRAL appropriation ihij^ mm. 505 



Mr. Anokuson. Do I uiiiirrMtniul y<ni to say »' •• •■ ^ ^r 



as tluMvvclmnp's yoii Imvc rnMiiHTnliMr uilh th»' < ' 



arc concrrruvl. is iiioponitivo noN\ 



Mr. MoKini.i.. It !>; inop^'nitivf jii>i now. \\ .• nliii nu 

 tho Clu<a^'o Hoanl of Trado rns«« whuli pn'-smUul our ; .. ^j....;.;, 

 for tlio reason tluit wc woro in douht whrtlicr the (i«iv«Tnnwnl roiilH 

 affonl to admit any of the aIN'pitions in thr Will of f-on)()lHinl UUni 

 l)V the ('hi<'a^o hoard of 'Prad<\ aiul h('<-ansr tin* ('ln«iii;o I'.. ' f 

 '1 rndo attempts in its hill <»f complaint to nejjutive tin- nlli 

 in the act itself as to the nature of the hti.siness. thii.s rni^in^ i 

 of fact; but annarently tlie rourt at ('hira^;o took the view that it 

 nii'jht he possil)l(' for the Supreme (Vmrt of the I'nitcd Stnt«-< to take 

 sufii<ient judicial notice of the facts to pass upon the hill of conipluuit 

 without a iiearitif;. As a matter of fa<'t, a liearin^ in the lower court, 

 involviuj]^ tlie takinj; of evidence at every turn, would he n <piite 

 expensive and (piite ion<^ drawn out matter. Wc have rontinu'>t: ' 

 ♦ lurinjj the past year kept a num at (Mncapo and Minneap«»lis. in ai> 

 ipation either of litijjation or of enforcement of the law, pettrng 

 to«]^ether all tlu> information that he could «^et n.s to tlie operation <»f 

 hoth of those hoards of trade, usiti}]; the n'cords of the Hurcau of 

 Internal Revenue to a c()nsiderahle extent, and thus geltinj; ac- 

 quainted with the various commission men and otlier traders on the 

 ex^hano;es, their lines of husincss, tlii-ir sources <»f husiness, the 

 metho(is tluit they employ in doini^ husincss, etc. 



Mr. AxDERSON. To what extent has tiie prohibit ion of puts anti 

 calls reduced the number of transactions or narrowed the market? 



Mr. Morrill. We liav(» no record (^f the lunnher of puts an<l (alt- 

 hut that does not affect tiie transactions in the pit at all. The put 

 and call transactions were outside of the pit. I do not see that the 

 elimination of puts and calls has in any wav narrowed the market, 

 nor that it has in any way operat^^d to the disadvanta«;e of the 

 market. 



Mr. Anderson. I have recently had a number of men to complain 

 very bitterly because of the allecjed effect of this act on the market. 

 But 1 do not see how that could possibly happen. 



EFFECT OP ACT OM THE MARKET. 



Mr. Morrill. I have some concrete facts on that subject that I 

 think will answer your (juestion. Or men have been at work j^ettini; 

 facts, and I think somethinpj can be said about that. Takinji the 

 Chicago Board of Trade, the total number of bushels of wheat 

 futures sold during the eight-month period in 1922 — that i.«i. during 

 the first eij^ht months endintr with Aujrust -were S.OSH. 122,000. as 

 compared with 7,784,822,000 bushels for the same perio«l in I"'' 

 That is an increase of approximately .^00,000,000 bushels diirinir tl 

 eight months. ''M' 



Now, as a matter of fact, our figures up to date wulicali* th.ii m all 

 futures — that is, including corn, oats, and other grains there has 

 been some decrease in the volume of trading up to date this vear as 

 compared with last year, although the first eight months <li(l not 

 show any decrease in wheat, but, on the contrary, showed an incrc 

 We think, however, that that is not due to the law. We think : 

 that there are a good many things being said about the law by pets - 



