Wallace v. Trustees of General Assembly of United Presbyterian Church
| Decision Date | 06 January 1902 |
| Docket Number | 99 |
| Citation | 201 Pa. 292,50 A. 762 |
| Parties | Wallace v. Trustees of the General Assembly of the United Presbyterian Church et al., Appellants |
| Court | Pennsylvania Supreme Court |
Argued November 1, 1901
Appeal, No. 99, Oct. T., 1901, by defendants, from order of C.P. No. 1, Allegheny Co., June T., 1898, No. 581, on bill in equity in case of J. R. Wallace v. The Trustees of the General Assembly of the United Presbyterian Church of North America, and R. G. Ferguson, Moderator; William J. Reid First Clerk, and A. G. Wallace, Second Clerk of the General Assembly of the United Presbyterian Church of North America. Affirmed.
Bill in equity to declare void the action of the defendant in sustaining the action of the Lake Presbytery in dismissing plaintiff as pastor of the Jamestown Congregation.
The case came first before Lake Presbytery on the complaint, or petition, of certain members of the congregation of the Jamestown church. The action of the presbytery was adverse to plaintiff, and he filed a complaint and thus removed the cause to the synod, which, after hearing, reversed the action of the presbytery. The presbytery then took an appeal to the general assembly, which took up the case, and reversed the action of the synod and sustained the action of the presbytery.
The court in an opinion by STOWE, P.J., found as a fact that there were irregularities in the proceedings before the general assembly which rendered the decision of the latter null and void. The nature of these irregularities are stated in the opinion of the Supreme Court.
The court entered the following decree.
And now, June 10, 1901, this cause came on to be heard at this term, and was argued by counsel and therefore, upon consideration thereof, it is ordered, adjudged and decreed that the action of the general assembly of the United Presbyterian Church, of North America, in reversing the action of the First Synod of the West, and sustaining the action of Lake Presbytery, in removing Jos. R. Wallace, the plaintiff, from the pastorate of the Jamestown United Presbyterian Church, be declared null and void. And that he be restored to the position of pastor of said church, with all the rights and benefits pertaining thereto, as fully and with the same effect as if the action of the First Synod of the West had not been reversed.
Error assigned was the decree of the court.
The decree of the court below is based altogether on the questions raised by these two assignments we have discussed in the view we take of the sujects the decree of the court below is sustained, and the other assignments become of no consequence. The decree is affirmed and the appeal dismissed at costs of appellant.
R. E. Stewart and Boyd Crumrine, for appellants.
William A. Sipe, with him Frank R. Agnew, for appellee.
Before McCOLLUM, C.J., MITCHELL, DEAN, FELL, BROWN, MESTREZAT and POTTER, JJ.
In 1892, Lake Presbytery of which the Jamestown, Mercer County Congregation is a member dissolved the pastoral relation between the latter and its pastor Rev. J. R. Wallace, this appellee. On complaint of the pastor of injustice in this proceeding, it was reviewed by the synod, a higher ecclesiastical court; the synod reversed the action of the presbytery. The presbytery then appealed to the general assembly, the church court of last resort, which court in 1893 reversed the action of the synod. The plaintiff then filed his bill in the common pleas averring, that he had been removed from his pastorate without just cause, and that the proceedings in the church courts by which he had been removed were not in accordance with the law of the church. The trustees of the general assembly were made defendants and filed special answer, in substance a demurrer, denying, that they were answerable for the acts complained of. This special plea or demurrer was sustained by the court below and the plaintiff appealed to this court; we reversed the decree (see 194 Pa. 178,) and directed the defendants to answer plaintiff's bill. The eighth paragraph of the bill avers, that the action of Lake Presbytery had no foundation in fact or in the law of the church. The ninth, that under the law of the church and the forms adopted for its general government the presbytery was without authority to appeal from the judgment of the synod, and therefore, that the action of the general assembly in entertaining the hearing and sustaining the appeal was without authority and void. There was a responsive denial by the general assembly.
There was a full hearing of the parties by the learned judge of the court below. He declined in his findings of fact and conclusions of law to enter into the merits of the case as developed in the hearing before Lake Presbytery, because the presbytery clearly had jurisdiction of the subject of the controversy and there were no such irregularities in the proceedings as would warrant interference by the civil courts, even though they might not concur in the judgment on the merits. But the judgment of the presbytery was appealed from by the plaintiff to the synod, which reversed the presbytery. Of course this restored the plaintiff to his...
To continue reading
Request your trial