Massenbury v. Grand Lodge P. & A. M. Of The State Of Ga.

• Decision Date: 01 June 1888
• Citation: 81 Ga. 212,7 S.E. 636
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court
• Parties: Massenbury et al. v. Grand Lodge P. & A. M. of the State of Georgia.

7 S.E. 636

(81 Ga. 212)

Massenbury et al.

v.Grand Lodge P. & A. M. of the State of Georgia.

Supreme Court of Georgia.

June 1, 1888.

1. Taxation—Exemption—Lodge Building Used in Part for Profit.

Conceding that the Grand Lodge of Georgia is an institution of purely public charity, within the meaning of the constitution, its temple or lodge building, when used for corporate profit or income, is not exempt from taxation.

2. Same—Apportionment of Value.

The most that the corporation can claim is that the comparative value of the part used for income, and the part not so used, may be distinguished in making its tax returns, and that the latter part, by due apportionment of value, shall be spared from taxation.

(Syllabus by the Court.)

Error from superior court, Bibb county; Gustin, Judge.

Clifford Anderson, Atty. Gen., for plaintiffs in error. John S. Davidson, Bacon & Rutherford, for defendants in error.

Bleckley, C. J. Certain official Masons and their associate members, present and future, were incorporated in 1796 by the name of the "Grand Lodge of Georgia, " to the end that charitable institutions might be promoted and a society that had existed time immemorial might be secured in their rights and privileges; the declared principle of the order being charity and universal benevolence. The charter gave the corporation "full power andauthority to take, hold, and enjoy real and personal property, * * * and also to receive and apply bequests or donations as may be made to and for the uses and purposes intended by the said institution." Mar. & C. Dig. 147. Nothing appears in the charter upon the subject of taxation. By section 798 of the Code of 1873, "any house belonging to any charitable institution, " and also all stocks owned by charitable institutions for the legitimate purposes of such, were exempted from taxation. While this section was in force the case of Mayor v. Lodge, 53 Ga. 93, arose and was decided, the court holding that Solomon's Lodge, also a Masonic corporation, was a charitable institution, and that a house belonging to it—any house—was exempt. This decision was made in 1874. In 1877 the present constitution of the state was adopted. It strictly limits (Code of 1882, §§ 5181, 5182, 5184) the former discretionary power of the legislature to classify property as exempt and non-exempt. Sec. 5181. "All taxation shall be uniform upon the same class of subjects, and ad valorem, on all property subject to be taxed within the territorial limits of the authority levying the tax, and shall be levied and collected under general laws." Sec. 5182. "The general assembly may, by law, exempt from taxation all public property, places of religious woiship or burial; all institutions of purely public charity; all buildings erected for and used as a college, incorporated academy, or other seminary of learning; the real and'personal estate of any public library, and that of any other literary association, used by or connected with such library; all books and philosophical apparatus, and all paintings and statuary of any company or association, kept in a public hall, and not held as merchandise or for purposes of sale or gain: provided, the property so exempted be not used for purposes of private or corporate profit or income." Sec. 5184. "All laws exempting property from taxation, other than the property herein enumerated, shall be void." In 1878, (Code of 1882, § 798,) the general assembly exercised, in its full extent, the power conferred upon it to grant exemption; in so doing, after the words, "The following described property shall be exempt from taxation, to-wit, " using the exact language of the constitution, "All institutions of purely public charity" being among the terms of description or enumeration. In Trustees v. Bolder, 79 Ga. ante, 633, (last term,) this court construed the exemption as applied to a devise of real estate in trust to appropriate the annual product to the erection of a poor-house and the support of its inmates, holding that exemption depends upon the use made of the property, not of the income, and that the devised realty was not exempt. The present case differs from that in several particulars. In that the charity was not Masonic; here it is; in that the institution, as a physical entity, was prospective only; here it is in actual, corporeal existence; there the property taxed was never to be used directly and immediately for the charitable object, but only the product or income derived from it was to be devoted to that object; here the property taxed is the temple or lodge building of the charitable order or society, —the domicile, habitation, seat, and external symbol of the organization, —the upper story of the building being occupied and used as its "lodge, " and the lower story rented out as stores, producing an income which is applied exclusively to charitable purposes, and from which the incorporated society derives no private profit.

1. Abiding by the construction put upon the constitution and the act of 1878 in Trustees v. Bolder, the question is whether the differences in the facts which we have just indicated are of such a nature as to hinder the principle of that case from applying to this. Though masonic charity is widely extensive and highly beneficent, it is certainly not more "purely public" than an alms-house. Indeed, it has been matter of grave judicial discussion whether masonic institutions, or others which confine their benefits to members of the given association, are institutions of purely, or even of public, charity at all. Swift v. Easton, 78 Pa. St. 362; Donohugh's Appeal, 86 Pa. St. 306; Asylum v. School-Dist., 90 Pa. St. 21; Institute v. Delaware Co., 94 Pa. St. 163; Col- lege v. Mercer Co., 101 Pa. St.530; Gerke v. Purcell, 25 Ohio St. 229; Humphries v. Little Sisters, 29 Ohio St. 201; Associations. Pelton, 36 Ohio St. 258; Bangor v. Lodge, 73 Me. 428. There-is no occasion now to declare for the one side or the other of this nice question, but we may and do concede the purely public character of the charity which the Grand Lodge of Georgia administers, since its legislative charter recognizes it as an organ of charity and universal benevolence. The difference between an existing and a mere prospective or possible institution is certainly important, and would serve to distinguish the present from the former case in many respects, but not with regard to the discrimination between corpus and income, which the decision in that case recognizes. It is also an important difference that the property taxed in that...