STOCK EXCHANGE. A building or room in which stock-brokers meet to transact their business of purchasing or selling stocks.
A voluntary association (usually unincor porated) of persons who for convenience in the transaction of business with each other, have associated themselves to provide a com mon place for the transaction of their busi ness. See Dos Passos, St. Brok. 14; Biddle, St. Brok. 40, 43 ; Leech v. Harris, 2 Brewst. (Pa.) 571; White v. Brownell, 2 Daly (N. Y.) 329. It is usually not a corporation, and in such case it is not a partnership. In the ab sence of a statute its real estate is held by all the members in the same way as partner ship real estate. At common law, all the members had to be joined in a suit ; Dicey, Parties, 2d Am. ed. 148, 266 ; East Haddam Cent. B. Church v. Ecclesiastical Soc., 44 Conn. 259 ; though actions have been sus tained against the exchange as a body ; Leech v. Harris, 2 Brewst. (Pa.) 571; Appeal of Moxey, 9 Wkly. Notes Cas. (Pa.) 441.
The members may make such reasonable regulations for the government of the body as they may think best ; see People v. Medi cal Soc., 24 Barb. (N. Y.) 570 ; such rules bind the members assenting to them ; Corn Exch. Ins. Co. v. Babcock, 4 Abb. Pr. (N. S.) 162 ; but their personal assent must appear; Austin v. Searing, 16 N. Y. 112, 69 Am. Dec. 665 ; it may be inferred from circumstances, as from their admissions and acting as mem bers ; L. R. 5 Eq. 63 ; Palmyra v. Morton, 25 Mo. 593 ; and a member is bound by a by-law passed during his membership, wheth er he votes for it or not; MacDowell v. Ack ley, S Wkly. Notes Cas. (Pa.) 464. It is said that the courts will prevent the interference with a methher's rights in an unincorporated association where the latter is acting under a by-law which is unreasonable or contrary to public policy: Dos Passos, St. Brok. 36; White v. Brownell, 4 Abb. Pr. (N. S.) (N. Y.) 162 ; State v. Chamber of Commerce, 47 Wis. 670, 3 N. W. 760 ; but see People v. Board of Trade, SO Ill. 134.
Stock Exchange, Seat in. Members of a stock exchange are entitled to w hat is known as a seat. Seats are held subject to the rules of the exchange. They are a species of in corporeal property—a personal, individual right to exercise a certain calling in a certain place, but without the attributes of descendi bility or assignability, which are characteris tic of other species of property; Dos Passos, St. Brok. 87; Biddle, St. Brok. 50. There
has been much controversy as to whether a seat can be reached by an execution.
It has been said: "1. In the disposition of a seat or the proceeds thereof, the members of the exchange will be preferred to outside creditors. 2. The seat is not the subject of seizure and sale on attachment and execu tion. 3. The proceeds of the seat, in the hands of the exchange, are capable of being reached after members' claims have been sat isfied, to the same extent and in the same manner as any other money or property of a debtor. 4. A person owning a seat in the exchange can be compelled, by proceedings subsequent to execution, or under the direc tion of a receiver, to sell his seat to a per son acceptable to the exchange, and devote the proceeds to the satisfaction of his judg ment debts." Dos Passos, St. Brok. 96. See. 20 Alb. L. J. 414 ; Habenicht v. Lissak, 78 Cal. 351, 20 Pac. 874, 5 L. R. A. 713, 12 Am. St. Rep. 63. In Sparhawk v. Yerkes, 142 U. S. 1, 12 Sup. Ct. 104, 35 L. Ed. 915, it was held that a seat in a stock exchange is property, and passes to assignees in bankruptcy subject to the rules of the stock board. See Powell v. Waldron, 89 N. Y. 328, 42 Am. Rep. 301; Bel ton v. Hatch, 109 N. Y. 593, 17 N. E. 225, 4 Am. St. Rep. 495 ; Weaver v. Fisher, 110 146.
A seat on the stock exchange is property and can be pledged ; Nashua Say. Bk. v. Ab bott, 181 Mass. 531, 63 N. E. 1058, 92 Am. St. Rep. 430. It is property, though incumbered with conditions when purchased ; Hyde v. Woods, 94 U. S. 523, 24 L. Ed. 264. But it is held in Pennsylvania that a seat on the ex change was not property subject to execution in any form; Pancoast v. Gowen, 93 Pa. 66; at least, not until the owner's debts due mem bers of the board are paid; Pancoast v. Houston, 5 Wkly. Notes Cas. (Pa.) 36 ; that it is personal and cannot be transferred with out the approval of the board ; Shoemaker v. Produce Exchange, 15 Phila. (Pa.) 103. Stock exchange rules usually, provide that seats are liable first to pay the members' debts to a fellow-member, or a firm of which the latter is a member ; and also for arbitra tion committees to settle differences between members ; Cochran v. Adams, 180 Pa. 289, 36 Atl. 854.