State v. Grand Lodge of N.J. Knights of Pythias

• Decision Date: 16 June 1891
• Citation: 53 N.J.L. 536,22 A. 63
• Parties: STATE (ZELIFF, Prosecutor) v. GRAND LODGE OF NEW JERSEY KNIGHTS OF PYTHIAS. SAME v. HENRY CLAY LODGE NO. 45, KNIGHTS OF PYTHIAS.
• Court: New Jersey Supreme Court

22 A. 63

53 N.J.L. 536

STATE (ZELIFF, Prosecutor)

v. GRAND LODGE OF NEW JERSEY KNIGHTS OF PYTHIAS.

SAME

v. HENRY CLAY LODGE NO. 45, KNIGHTS OF PYTHIAS.

Supreme Court of New Jersey.

June 16, 1891.

(Syllabus by the Court.)

On application for mandamus.

Argued at February term, 1891, before Depue, Van Syckel, and Scudder, JJ.

Hayes & Lambert, for relator.

Voorbees & Cotter, for defendants.

VAN SYCKEL, J. The Grand Lodge of New Jersey Knights of Pythias is a corporation organized under the laws of New Jersey. The Henry Clay Lodge No. 45, Knights of Pythias, is an unincorporated company and a voluntary association, consisting of more than seven persons, organized for social, charitable, and benevolent purposes, organized under a charter granted to it by the said grand lodge. The grand lodge has appellate jurisdiction over the subordinate lodges, and an appeal lies from the grand lodge to the Supreme Lodge of the Knights of Pythias, which is a corporation organized under the laws of the District of Columbia. The regular weekly benefits paid by Henry Clay Lodge to sick members in good standing are six dollars per week. In the month of June, 1889, the relator was a member in good standing. During that month the relator was charged with entering into a conspiracy with certain other members of the association to blackball, without cause, all applicants for admission, and thereby prevent an increase of the membership. In execution of this corrupt agreement, it was alleged that the relator did subsequently black-ball an applicant for membership without any just, reason. The result of the trial before the Henry Clay Lodge was that the relator was found guilty, and suspended from the lodge for the term of 99 years. The relator thereupon appealed to the grand lodge, which dismissed his appeal, and affirmed the action of the subordinate lodge. The relator then applied to this court for a writ of mandamus to the Henry Clay Lodge and to the grand lodge to reinstate him in his said membership. That mandamus is the appropriate remedy to effect the restoration of a member of a private corporation who has been irregularly removed from membership is res adjudicata in this court. Sibley v. Carteret Club, 40 N. J. Law, 295. In determining whether courts will take jurisdiction, a distinction must be observed between cases in which the association subjects its member to discipline for immoral conduct or for violation of the rules of the order, and those instances in which the member appeals to the courts to secure property rights or to enforce money demands. In regard to matters of discipline, the courts will not interfere against the decision of the members of a club professing to act under its rules, unless it can be shown, either that the rules are contrary to natural justice, or that what has been done is contrary to the rules, or that there has been mala tides or malice in arriving at the decision, or refusal to give the member a hearing. Such is the rule declared in Dawkins v. Antrobus, 17 Ch. Div. 615, affirming the decision of Jessel, M. R. The weight of authority in this country is to a like effect. Bac. Ben. Soc. §§ 105, 106, and cases cited; Livingston v. Trinity Church, 45 N. J. Law, 230. In the case before us the prosecutor rests his right to relief upon the allegation that the proceedings against him are irregular and illegal, when...