The Society for the Visitation of the Sick and Burial of the Dead v. Commonwealth ex rel. Meyer

• Decision Date: 26 March 1866
• Citation: 52 Pa. 125
• Parties: The Society for the Visitation of the Sick, & c., v. The Commonwealth ex rel. Max S. Meyer.
• Court: Pennsylvania Supreme Court

52 Pa. 125

The Society for the Visitation of the Sick, & c.,

v.

The Commonwealth ex rel. Max S. Meyer.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

March 26, 1866

1866

1. The articles, conditions and objects of an association incorporated by the Supreme Court are their charter, and have the same force and effect as if specifically granted by special Act of Assembly; the charter cannot be questioned collaterally.

2. In such charter, where the power of expulsion is conferred and a member in accordance with its requirements has signed the articles, he is bound by them, and the fitness of the objects, & c., is not a subject of judicial inquiry.

3. When such member has been regularly tried and expelled, the sentence of the society, acting judicially, cannot be inquired into collaterally, nor can the merits of his expulsion be re-examined.

4. In an association one of whose objects was to provide assistance for sick members; to feign sickness or draw relief after recovery is subversive of the fundamental objects of the association--an act which tends to its destruction, and is within the power of expulsion by the association.

5. A return to a mandamus must set forth distinctly and certainly--not argumentatively, inferentially or evasively--all the facts essential to the conviction, both as to the cause and mode of proceeding.

6. A return to a mandamus that the relator was, according to the constitution and by-laws of the association, " tried and convicted of the charges," is not sufficient without showing that the association took proofs which they deemed to be sufficient evidence.

7. A trial for an offence against the laws of such association is not an ecclesiastical trial concerning matters of conscience but an ordinary secular affair. Quæ re, how far such trials on Sunday comport with our legislation and institutions.

8. Jews are bound to observe the civil regulations made for the keeping of the Christian Sabbath.

ERROR to the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia.

This was a mandamus on the relation of Max S. Mayer, to restore him to his place as a corporator in The Society for the Visitation of the Sick and Burial of the Dead, from which he had been expelled.

The society was incorporated under the Act of April 6th 1791 Purd. 194, authorizing the creation of corporations by the Supreme Court.

The objects of the association are:--

1. Should a member be taken sick, to visit him and to grant him consolation, advice and assistance.

2. In case any member die, to have him decently buried free of charge, & c.

3. To assist the families of deceased members according to the circumstances and available means of the society.

Every member is required to sign the constitution, and it is provided in it that the society has the right to pass by-laws and to alter, amend and repeal.

By art IV., § 6, of Constitution:--Every officer or member of this society shall be liable to an impeachment and be expelled or otherwise punished, provided the charge be laid in writing before a general meeting of the society, and the same be signed by the board of managers, or at least six members of the society at large. A copy of the charges must, however, be furnished to the accused, and he must be cited to appear before a stated or special general meeting, in order to defend himself. The majority of the members present at any such meeting shall pronounce on the innocence or guilt of the accused, and in the latter case fix the punishment, but it shall require a vote of two-thirds of all members present, if the fine should amount to $25 and upwards, or the accused be sentenced to a suspension or expulsion from the rights of membership.

By art. III., § 2, of By-Laws:--Any member who feigns himself sick without being so, or who continues to draw relief after his recovery, or otherwise deceives the society by false representations, or is guilty of any criminal offence, or a gross immorality, shall be indicted for such misdemeanor, and upon conviction upon sufficient evidence, be suspended or expelled, according to the judgment of the society.

On the 9th of May 1861, Meyer presented his petition, setting forth that in 1842 he was elected a member of the association, and had faithfully performed his duties as a member; that on the 17th of July, the corporation expelled him without any sufficient cause, and now refuses to permit him to enjoy his rights of membership; and praying that he may be restored, &amp c.

A return was filed, to which there was a demurrer which was sustained and leave given to amend.

An amended return was filed averring that the relator was, on the 17th day of July 1859, duly tried and convicted, and expelled by said society, at a general meeting, according to the terms of the constitution and by-laws thereof, then and theretofore in full force and effect, and particularly article IV., section 6, of the constitution, and article III., section 2, of the by-laws aforesaid.

And averring further that on the 12th day of July, A. D. 1859, the board of managers of said society at a meeting thereof, duly held, unanimously made the charge against the said relator that he had committed the offences mentioned in said by-laws of feigning himself sick without being so, and continuing to draw relief after his recovery, and directed a copy of said charges, signed by the secretary of the board on their behalf, to be served on the said relator, with a notice to him to attend a special general meeting of the society, to be held on the 14th July next, at a certain hour therein named, at the Juliana Street Synagogue, which copy and notice to attend said meeting, were personally served upon the said relator by the messenger of the said society on the 13th day of July 1859, which notice required the said relator, and notified him to appear then and there to defend himself from said charges which were then and there to be tried by said society: that a special general meeting, duly called, was accordingly held on the said 14th July, at the place aforesaid, according to said notice, all the members of the society resident were present, except six, and a full quorum: that the said relator did not appear at said meeting: that the said society, after waiting more than thirty minutes after the time fixed for the meeting, proceeded to business, and, on motion, a committee of five members was appointed to report upon the subject of said charges against said relator, to meet on the next succeeding Sunday at 8 o'clock A. M., at said synagogue, and notice of the meeting of said committee aforesaid, was immediately thereafter served personally on said relator: that the relator failed to attend before said committee, and they directed notice to be served upon the said relator, that the said charges against him would be tried by the society at their next stated general meeting, to be held at the hour, time and place therein specified, to wit, at the said synagogue on the 17th day of July 1859, at 7 1/ 2 o'clock, P. M., with a copy of said charges, which notice and copy were accordingly served personally on said 14th July 1859, upon the relator: that at the said stated general meeting held on said 17th July 1859, accordingly, a full quorum of members were present, and the society proceeded to business duly; and the said relator did not appear, but made default at said meeting, and the said relator was then and there duly, and according to the said constitution and by-laws, tried, and by the unanimous vote of the members present, each one answering separately, pronounced and convicted as guilty of said charges, and also and immediately afterwards by the unanimous vote of the members present at said meeting, declared to be expelled from the said society, and he was accordingly duly and legally expelled therefrom, and, on motion, notice thereof was thereafter duly served upon him.

The relator demurred, and assigned for cause:--

1. That no sufficient cause of disfranchisement is set forth in the return.

2. That the return does not set forth when the alleged offence was committed by the said Max S. Meyer.

3. That the alleged offence charged is vague and indefinite as to time, place and circumstances, and insufficient to justify his expulsion.

4. That it does not appear that any sufficient notice was given to the said Max S. Meyer of the charge preferred against him.

5. That the return does not set forth when or how the pretended notice of the charge preferred was served on the said Max S. Meyer, or when or how he was cited to appear and defend himself.

6. That the return does not show how or when the said special general meeting was called at which the said Max S. Meyer was expelled.

7. That the return does not show that notice of the holding of the said special general meeting was given to each member of the said society, or that the members thereof were notified of the purpose of holding the same.

8. That the return does not show that the said Max S. Meyer was afforded an opportunity of defending himself against the said charge.

9. That no witnesses were examined in support of the said charge, and the said Max S. Meyer did not admit the same to be true.

10. That the return does not aver that the said charge was proved to be true, or that any evidence of the truth thereof was adduced before the said society.

11. That the return does not set forth that the said society passed judgment upon the said Max S. Meyer that he should be expelled from the said corporation.

12. That the return avers that the said Max S. Meyer was convicted and expelled by a vote of the said society without showing that the truth of the charge was first proven, that the relator was convicted of the offence, and that after such conviction he was sentenced to...