Canadian Religious Ass'n of North Brookfield v. Parmenter

• Decision Date: 26 February 1902
• Parties: CANADIAN RELIGIOUS ASS'N OF NORTH BROOKFIELD et al. v. PARMENTER et al.
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

180 Mass. 415

62 N.E. 740

CANADIAN RELIGIOUS ASS'N OF NORTH BROOKFIELD et al. v. PARMENTER et al.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Worcester.

February 26, 1902

COUNSEL

Henry E. Cottle, for petitioners.

Timothy Howard, for respondents

OPINION

BARKER J.

The circumstances out of which this suit has arisen are these: A number of French people living in North Brookfield, where a Roman Catholic church in regular standing was already established, having formed a voluntary religious society for the purpose of building a house of worship and holding religious services therein, afterwards became incorporated under the provisions of Pub. St. c. 38, § 24, by the name of the 'Canadian Religious Association.' The object of the corporation, as stated in the document called its constitution, and which is, in effect, its code of by-laws was 'to build a church for the public advancement of the worship of God and to insure religious instruction on Sundays.' The constitution provides for a moderator clerk, treasurer, auditor, and three syndics or trustees. The syndics or trustees are clothed with the powers conferred upon standing committees of religious societies by Pub. St c. 38, § 10. One article of the constitution provides that any member acting against the interest of the society may be expelled from it at any meeting by a vote of two-thirds of the present voting members. Another article provides for keeping an account of the individual contributions made to the society by its members, and, if the society votes to disband, for the conversion of its property into money, and the division of the money among the contributing members, their heirs, executors, administrators, or assigns, the distribution to be made pro rata according to the amounts individually contributed. After organizing under the statute and choosing officers, the society raised money, built a house of worship, engaged a religious teacher, and held services for the worship of God and for religious instruction. The people who organized this society were Roman Catholics, and, while there was no such statement in the constitution, their purpose was to have a French church of the Roman Catholic faith, with a French Roman Catholic priest as pastor, and under the same general government and authority as other Roman Catholic churches. Before the incorporation, and before the building of the church, the voluntary association had made application to the Roman Catholic bishop at Springfield for a French priest to act as their pastor. This application was denied by the bishop, because he did not approve the establishment of another Roman Catholic church at North Brookfield. Notwithstanding this, the people went on, and procured the incorporation, purchased land for a building site and cemetery, and erected and furnished a church building, hoping that the bishop would approve, send them a pastor, and recognize them as a church subject to the Roman Catholic Church government, and entitled to its privileges. After building the church, they renewed their application to the bishop, and he again denied it. They then engaged a pastor, who came and settled in North Brookfield, and has been and still is with them, performing the ministrations of a priest for their church. Subsequently to the settlement of the pastor the bishop notified them that those who continued to attend the church would be excommunicated. Some of the members left, and again attended the established church; others attended nowhere; and a considerable number remained with the new church, and have continued to support their pastor. Because of the bishop's order of excommunication the three respondents, who were the syndics or trustees of the society, closed and fastened the doors of the church building, and thus for a time prevented religious worship therein. After this others of the society who wished to continue religious services in the building opened its doors, and have maintained possession of it, and services have been since held in it with the pastor officiating as before. The respondents having been asked to call a meeting of the society and refused to do so, a meeting was called by a justice of the peace. One article of the warrant calling this meeting was this: 'Art. 5. To see if said association will vote to revise its list of membership.' At this meeting, and at an adjournment thereof, it was voted that the church be opened for religious services by the pastor; that only persons regularly attending there be considered members of the society, and that any one retiring from the church be considered as leaving the society; that his name be crossed off the list of members, and that the list of members be revised accordingly. A committee of three was chosen, with power to revise the list of members accordingly, and the meeting was adjourned to give the committee time to revise the list of members. At the adjourned meeting the committee reported in writing a list of the members as revised by the committee, and also the list of names crossed off by them from the old list of members for having left the church and worked against the interest of the association. Thereupon the meeting unanimously accepted the report of the committee as it had been made, and then voted that new officers be elected to fill the vacancies caused by the revision of the list of members. The list of members whose names had been crossed off as having left the church and worked against the interest of the society included the moderator, clerk, treasurer, and the syndics or trustees, and the meeting chose new officers in their places, the three persons who join with the association in their present petition being so chosen as the syndics or trustees. After this meeting, the respondents, claiming still to be the trustees of the society, served a notice upon the pastor that they had voted to close the church, and that his services would no longer be required there, and issued a call for a meeting of the society, at which it was voted that the society would take possession of its furniture, hand over the keys of the church to the treasurer, and that the church should remain closed until further orders from the trustees. This meeting was held on November 21, 1900, and on November 27, 1900, the present petition in equity was brought in the names of the corporation and of the persons claiming to have been chosen trustees against the trustees originally chosen. During its pendency the church has remained open for the usual services under an order of the superior court.

The petition was referred to a master, and is before us by a reservation to this court upon the pleadings, the master's report, and the exceptions of both parties thereto. The evidence is not stated in the report, neither party having requested the master to state it. He finds, subject to certain questions of law as to the calling of meetings and the votes passed, that the votes revising the membership and expelling the old officers and choosing the new ones were void; that the respondents are still the trustees of the society, and that the three individual petitioners are not its trustees; that the present membership of the society is composed of the persons of full age whose names appear of record as members upon its books, regardless of the action purporting to revise the membership; and that the respondents exceeded their powers in closing the church, and that it should be kept open for religious services so long as a minority of the members of the society object to the closing of the church and desire to worship therein, it being held in trust for the use of all the members; also that the refusal of the bishop to approve the doings of the society does not prevent it from continuing to exercise its functions as a religious society, nor its members from maintaining their religious worship, and that a considerable number of the members of the society still object to the closing of the church.

The first exception to the report on the part of the petitioners is to the master's refusal to make certain rulings requested by them as to the effect of the petition and answer. No particular in which this refusal was prejudicial to the petitioners is pointed out by their brief, and none occurs to us. This exception therefore is overruled.

The second exception of the petitioners is to the finding that the action of the meeting called by the justice of the peace worked no change in the membership of the association. This finding is contained in paragraph 14 of the report. The fifteenth article of the constitution provided that 'any member acting against the interest of the society may be expelled at any meeting by a vote of two-thirds of the members present voting.' The warrant by which the meeting was called had an article which in general terms gave notice that the membership of the society might be revised at that meeting. The appointment of the committee, its report, and the action of the meeting upon the report were a plain adjudication on the part of the society that the persons whose names were crossed off from the list of members had worked against the interests of the society, and that they were expelled therefor, as provided in article 15. The master's finding that this action was not effectual to expel the members whose names were dropped is put by him solely upon the ground that the evidence presented to him did not show that they had left the church and worked against the interests of the association. But, if the action of the association was regular, and included proper notice to the members whose names were dropped, and a proper opportunity for them to be heard, the action of the association was final, and cannot be revoked or reversed in a collateral proceeding...