Ashworth v. Brown, 2 Div. 162.

• Decision Date: 10 October 1940
• Docket Number: 2 Div. 162.
• Parties: ASHWORTH v. BROWN ET AL.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

198 So. 135

240 Ala. 164

ASHWORTH v. BROWN ET AL.

2 Div. 162.

Supreme Court of Alabama

October 10, 1940

Appeal from Circuit Court, Hale County; John Miller, Judge.

Bill in equity by Mose Brown and others, as Trustees of St Paul's Colored Methodist Episcopal Church, Greensboro Alabama, against J. L. Ashworth, to enjoin interference with use of church property, cancellation of deeds as clouds on title and for an accounting. From a decree overruling a demurrer to the bill, respondent appeals.

Affirmed.

S. W H. Williams, of Greensboro, and Reuben H. Wright and Ward W McFarland, both of Tuscaloosa, for appellant.

W. R. Withers, of Greensboro, for appellees.

BOULDIN Justice.

Religious freedom is fundamental in this country. This is known of all men. It need merely to be announced when this right is invaded. Incident to this is the right of assembly for religious worship; to form religious societies with discipline and doctrines expressive of their religious convictions; to conduct religious services, and generally to promote religious influences and enterprises among men.

To this end a spot of ground may be acquired, a building may be erected, both dedicated to religious uses. The right to their uninterrupted and continuous use as a place of worship, for preaching, teaching, and other religious activities, is an element of religious freedom. In protecting such properties from trespassers, outsiders who enter upon, dismantle, or otherwise deprive those entitled to worship there of the continuous use of such properties, the courts are safeguarding the right of religious freedom.

We write this to give emphasis to the fact that in such case there is something more than a mere trespass on private property; and that injunctive relief does not depend solely on continuous or recurrent trespasses destructive of private property rights as recognized in our decisions. No money standards can measure or redress such wrongs. The continuous and uninterrupted use of church property for the purpose to which it is dedicated is the right to be protected. An injunction putting a stop to such interference is a more adequate and complete remedy, to say nothing of removal of clouds on title, &c. Gewin et al. v. Mt. Pilgrim Baptist Church, 166 Ala. 345, 51 So. 947, 139 Am.St.Rep. 41; Christian Church of Huntsville et al. v. Sommer et al., 149 Ala. 145, 43 So. 8, 8 L.R.A.,N.S., 1031, 123 Am.St.Rep. 27; Guin et al. v. Johnson et al., 230 Ala. 427, 161 So. 810; Manning et al. v. Yeager et al., 203 Ala. 185, 82 So. 435.

The bill, in this cause, alleges that complainants are members of and constitute a majority of the trustees of St. Paul Colored Methodist Episcopal Church, Greensboro, Alabama; that the church lot described in the bill and the church building thereon are the property of the local congregation, and was being regularly used as a place of worship at the time of the matters complained of.

The alleged canons of the church relating to the sale of church properties are set out. From these it appears that local church...