Bouldin v. Alexander

Decision Date01 December 1872
Citation21 L.Ed. 69,82 U.S. 131,15 Wall. 131
PartiesBOULDIN v. ALEXANDER
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

APPEAL from the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia, in a case arising out of a controversy in an unincorporated religious society of colored persons, in Washington, calling themselves the 'Third Baptist Church.' The case was thus:

From about the 1st of September, 1857, a small number of colored persons were in the habit of consociating in prayer-meetings and other religious conferences at the house of one Albert Bouldin, a colored man from Virginia, who had been licensed to preach, and was so styled the Reverend Albert Bouldin; he being always a chief actor in the assemblages. The persons were, at first, few in number, feeble in resources, and without any church edifice. But under Bouldin's leadership they increased in strength, and, after a certain time, went to work to raise money to build a meeting-house; Bouldin taking the lead in the whole matter, the temporal part as much as the spiritual, and being at once pastor, collector, treasurer, chief agent, and actor in the enterprise, and getting into his own hands most of the moneys collected. Having bought a lot on which to build a church, he took a deed for it in his own name, and proceeded to have the church built, which under his superintendence was done; a building now standing, on the corner of Fourth and L Streets, northwest. Some of the chief persons in the work, however, were apparently dissatisfied with Bouldin's having the title to the property in his own name. Hereupon, April 1st, 1864, he and his wife conveyed a large part of the lot, including that on which the church was built, but apparently not the whole of the lot, to four persons, Joseph Alexander, Charles Alexander, John Middleton, and William Minor, as trustees, to be used, with the buildings on it, as 'the Third Colored Baptist Church of the City of Washington;' these persons, in return, giving him their promissory notes and a deed of trust on the property to secure them; the notes being for a sum which Bouldin represented to them that he was in advance from his private funds beyond moneys received by him from collections.

A congregation had by this time been organized with sufficient regularity and in full conformity with the constitution of the general Baptist Church of the United States, in which, as is known, the congregational form of government prevails; and there was at this time no serious dissensions in the particular Third Church of which we are speaking. 'The Rules of Church Order,' making part of the Baptist Manual, an authoritative book in the Baptist church generally, required that 'seven trustees' should be elected in January of each year, but provided that in case of any omission to hold an election then, the election should be held 'at the next regular meeting for business.' And the minutes of this church, which had been kept apparently with essential order, though not in a highly clerical style, by Bouldin, one Lee, or some other person elected as clerk, from the origin of the church till the time when some troubles, hereinafter mentioned, arose, showed that seven persons, Joseph Alexander, Henry Watson, Henry Scott, John Wiggins, John Middleton, William Laws, and W. J. Minor, were duly elected trustees, at a regular meeting of the church for business, on the 15th of February, 1867; the ordinary meeting, apparently, not having been held. These persons, the minute-book showed, had received about 200 votes of a not much larger number cast. After the troubles above referred to arose, the minute-book passed from one hand to another, and Bouldin swore in the court below that this minute about the election was a forgery; and that no such election had ever taken place. The books were brought into this court, and showed some erasures and the cutting out apparently of some leaves, but little or nothing beyond Bouldin's statement to prove that this particular minute was not entitled to as much respect as others in the book. Minutes following it were made by Bouldin himself.

Very soon after the completion of the church edifice, already mentioned, dissensions arose in the congregation, and the church was divided into two parties, each asserting itself to be the true 'Third Colored Baptist Church.' On the 7th of June, 1867, one of these parties, being a very small minority of the church, and being probably about fifteen in number, including Bouldin, resolved to 'turn out' four trustees, without naming them, and proceeded to elect four others in their stead. The persons thus elected were Manson Robinson, Julius Bouldin, William Pearson and Charles Pearson. The attempted ejection of the old trustees was without citation, trial, or charges preferred. It was also, the reader will observe, at a time when, according to the rules of the church, an election of trustees was not in order; the rules that exist in Baptist churches generally, providing, as already mentioned, that trustees shall be elected in January of every year, or in case of failure to hold the election, at the next regular meeting for business. A few days afterwards, on the 10th or 17th of June, 1867, the same minority proceeded to 'turn out' forty-one members of the church, also without citation or trial. Having thus got the control of the church property in their own hands, some of the persons elected to be trustees in place of former trustees caused the locks to be taken from the church doors, and new locks to be put on in their places, and they with Bouldin claimed and retained possession of the property from that time forth. Hereupon the four persons to whom Bouldin and wife had conveyed the property in trust and the seven that had been elected trustees in February 1867, worshipped in a school-house or in a place called Miller's Hall; retaining the old organization, with a new preacher named Jefferson, who had been licensed under Bouldin, and who (Bouldin having been dismissed by the party shut out from the church), was now acting temporarily as preacher, or by way of 'supply.' Such was the condition of things in the summer of 1867.

On the 28th of September of that year the four trustees named in the deed of the church lot, from Bouldin and wife, and also the seven persons who professed to have been elected trustees of the church, on the 15th of February, 1867, at the annual election provided for by the general rules of Baptist churches, filed a bill against Bouldin, who had received the money of the church, and who also professed to be a trustee, without, however, any election, and against three of the persons who professed to have been elected trustees at the meeting of the minority on the 7th of June, who took possession of the church, together with some other trustees in deeds of trust for Bouldin. The bill sought a discovery, and an account of the money received and expended by Bouldin, a release of deeds of trust of the church property given to secure notes held by Bouldin, a surrender and cancellation of the notes, alleging them to have been satisfied, and the restoration of possession of the church property to the complainants as the lawful trustees. It sought also an injunction against future interference by the defendants with the church property, against the sale of the notes, and against sale or foreclosure under the deed of trust. The bill charged that there was a plain mistake in the deed from Bouldin and wife, to the trustees of the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
98 cases
  • Moses v. Diocese of Colorado
    • United States
    • Colorado Supreme Court
    • November 15, 1993
    ... ... See Bouldin v. Alexander, ... Page 320 ... 82 U.S. (15 Wall.) 131, 21 L.Ed. 69 (1872) (stating civil courts have no power to question ordinary acts of ... ...
  • Boyles v. Roberts
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • June 8, 1909
    ...Watson v. Avery, 2 Bush (Ky.) 332; Perry v. Wheeler, 12 Bush (Ky.) loc. cit. 549; Gartin v. Penick, 5 Bush (Ky.) 110; Bouldin v. Alexander, 15 Wall. 131, 21 L. Ed. 69; Krecker v. Shirey, 163 Pa., loc. cit. 551, 30 Atl. 440, 29 L. R. A. 476; Brundage v. Deardorf (C. C.) 55 Fed. 839; Kerr's A......
  • Heritage Village Church and Missionary Fellowship, Inc. v. State
    • United States
    • North Carolina Court of Appeals
    • April 3, 1979
    ...Legislature's very attempt to define, of its own accord, who church members are is constitutionally suspect. See Bouldin v. Alexander, 82 U.S. (15 Wall.) 131, 21 L.Ed. 69 (1872). In summary, we have held that: (1) plaintiffs' solicitation of religious funds from nonmembers is a religious ac......
  • Singh v. Singh
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • January 20, 2004
    ...its own membership and that courts should not resolve disputes over who is or can be a member. (See, e.g., Bouldin v. Alexander (1872) 82 U.S. (15 Wall.) 131, 139-140, 21 L.Ed. 69.) We agree. However, the court did not rule that it has the discretion to determine who qualifies as a member. ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
3 books & journal articles
  • RACE IN CONTRACT LAW.
    • United States
    • University of Pennsylvania Law Review Vol. 170 No. 5, May 2022
    • May 1, 2022
    ...4:21,4:23,4:25,7:46. (174) See Penningroth, supra note 5, at 882-84, 888-89, 896-97. Until the 1960s, Bouldin v. Alexander, 82 U.S. 131 (1872), was the leading case on the private law of religion as applied to congregational denominations. See Serbian E. Orthodox Diocese for U.S. v. Milivoj......
  • Debt Among the Faithful
    • United States
    • Kansas Bar Association KBA Bar Journal No. 88-6, June 2019
    • Invalid date
    ...v. Presbyterian Church of Stanley, Inc., 53 Kan. App. 2d 622, 641, 390 P.3d 581, 593-94 (2017). [79] See e.g., Bouldin v. Alexander, 82 U.S. 131, 21 L. Ed. 69, 15 Wall. 131 (1872). [80] Jones v. Wolf, 443 U.S. 595, 603, 99 S. Ct. 3020, 61 L. Ed. 2d 775 (1979). [81] In re Roman Catholic Arch......
  • Debt Among the Faithful: Churches, Lenders & Troubled Loans in Kansas
    • United States
    • Kansas Bar Association KBA Bar Journal No. 88-6, June 2019
    • Invalid date
    ...v. Presbyterian Church of Stanley, Inc., 53 Kan.App.2d 622, 641, 390 P.3d 581, 593-94 (2017). [79] See e.g., Bouldin v. Alexander, 82 U.S. 131, 21 L.Ed. 69, 15 Wall. 131 (1872). [80] Jones v. Wolf, 443 U.S. 595, 603, 99 S.Ct. 3020, 61 L.Ed.2d 775 (1979). [81] In re Roman Catholic Archbishop......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT