Workmen's Circle Educ. Ctr. of Springfield, Inc. v. Bd. of Assessors of City of Springfield

• Decision Date: 28 October 1943
• Citation: 51 N.E.2d 313,314 Mass. 616
• Parties: WORKMEN'S CIRCLE EDUCATIONAL CENTER OF SPRINGFIELD, Inc., v. BOARD OF ASSESSORS OF CITY OF SPRINGFIELD.
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

314 Mass. 616

51 N.E.2d 313

WORKMEN'S CIRCLE EDUCATIONAL CENTER OF SPRINGFIELD, Inc.,

v.BOARD OF ASSESSORS OF CITY OF SPRINGFIELD.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Hampden.

Oct. 28, 1943.

Petition by Workmen's Circle Educational Center of Springfield, Inc., against the Board of Assessors of the City of Springfield to abate a tax upon plaintiff's realty. From a decision of the Appellate Tax Board denying the petition, petitioner appeals.

Petition dismissed in accordance with opinion.

Before FIELD, C. J., and DONAHUE, DOLAN, and RONAN, JJ.

N. M. Harvey, or Springfield, for taxpayer.

C. D. Sloan, Asst. City Sol., of Springfield, for assessors.

RONAN, Justice.

This is an appeal from a decision of the Appellate Tax Board denying a petition to abate a tax upon certain real estate, which the appellant contended was exempt from the tax by virtue of G.L.(Ter.Ed.) c. 59, § 5, Third.

We summarize the facts found by the board. The appellant was incorporated in 1933 for benevolent, literary and educational purposes. No one was eligible to membership unless he was a member in good standing in either the Socialist Party or the local branch of the Workmen's Circle, a national association having about nine hundred branches in the United States and Canada, which was primarily a political and labor organization whose members were required to vote a ‘workers' ticket’ at public elections. Although the requirement of membership in the Socialist Party was eliminated in 1937, and the original corporate purpose of the appellant were somewhat changed, its membership remained substantially the same. The appellant is administered by a board of directors, each of whom must be a member in good standing for five years in the Socialist Party or in the Workmen's Circle. The appellant owns a dwelling house which has been remodelled so as to contain three classrooms and a hall capable of seating one hundred twenty-five persons. Its classes are composed of about fifty-six children, who attend after their sessions in the public schools. They are taught Jewish history and literature and the ‘history of labor and progressive movements in the world.’ Classes for children under eight years of age are held Sunday mornings. No charge is made for tuition. During the seven years preceding January 1, 1942, seventy-eight forums have been held and twenty-eight lectures delivered on various subjects, including Jewish literature, economic and political problems, unionism, sociamism, bolshevism, fascism and labor problems. These forums and lectures are free to the public. There was no evidence showing the particular object the appellant sought to achieve by the forums and lectures. The board was unable to find whether their purpose was to create public sentiment and secure converts to the same political philosophy to which the members of the appellant had subscribed or whether they were conducted merely to inform the public of existing world labor problems and progressive movements. The activities of the appellant were mainly political in character. The appellant was sustained by membership dues, a subsidy from the national organization of the Workmen's Circle and contributions from the local branches of the circle, and by donations from parents of the school children and friends. The board found upon all the evidence that the appellant had failed to sustain the burden of proving that its real estate was exempt from taxation.

The real estate owned and occupied by a literary, benevolent, charitable or scientific institution for the purpose for which it was incorporated is exempt from taxation if none of its income or profits is distributed among its stockholders or members and none is used for other than literary, educational, benevolent, charitable, scientific or religious purposes. G.L.(Ter.Ed.) c. 59, § 5, Third. The corporate purposes, the constitution and by-laws, the methods of administration, the nature of the actual work performed, the character of the services rendered, the indefiniteness of the beneficiaries, and the use and occupation of their property have been frequently considered in our decisions in determining and defining the institutions that come within this statutory exemption. The law is too well settled to require a detailed recital of the principles which have already been stated in our previous decisions. South Lancaster Academy v. Lancaster, 242 Mass. 553, 136 N.E. 626;Molly Varnum Chapter, D. A. R. v. Lowell, 204 Mass. 487, 90 N.E. 893, 26 L.R.A.,N.S., 707; Parkhurst v. Treasurer and Receiver General, 228 Mass. 196, 117 N.E. 39;Springfield Young Men's Christian Association v. Assessors of Springfield, 284 Mass. 1, 5, 187 N.E. 104;Boston Symphony Orchestra, Inc., v. Assessors of Boston, 294 Mass. 248, 1 N.E.2d 6;Assessors of Boston v. Garland School of Home Making, 296 Mass. 378, 6 N.E.2d 374. A corporation whose primary object, activities and accomplishments are not charitable in the broad sense of that term as it has always been understood, at least since Jackson v. Phillips, 14 Allen 539, cannot come within the description of an institution exempted by this third clause of said section 5 from the payment of taxes, and the fact that many charitable functions are performed by the institution is not enough to entitle it to the exemption if the dominant use of its property is not charitable. New England Theosophical Corp. v. Assessors of Boston, 172 Mass. 60, 51 N.E. 456,42 L.R.A. 281;Phi Beta Epsilon Corp. v. Boston, 182 Mass. 457, 65 N.E. 824;Boston Lodge, Order of Elks v. Boston, 217 Mass. 176, 104 N.E. 453;Assessors of Boston v. Boston Pilots' Relief Society, 311 Mass. 232, 40 N.E.2d 889;Hairenik Association, Inc., v. Boston, 313 Mass. 274, 47 N.E.2d 9.

The principal use made of the property of the appellant was a question of fact for the determination of the board. Salem Lyceum v. Salem, 154 Mass. 15, 27 N.E. 672;Newton Centre Woman's Club, Inc., v. Newton, 258 Mass. 326, 154 N.E. 846. Even if the maintenance of classes for children without charge was a charitable and educational function, yet this was not found by the board to be the principal object for which the taxed premises were employed by the appellant. This was only one of the branches of work in which the appellant was engaged and, considering the entire enterprise, the board found that its activities were ‘mainly political in character.’ If this finding is not shown to be vitiated by error of law, it is decisive of the case. The occupancy of premises primarily and substantially for meetings and assemblies for fostering and inculcating the principles and theories of a particular political party, for the purpose of securing converts to that political philosophy to which the members subscribed and thus increasing the strength and influence of the party, is not the use of premises in furtherance of any object that can rightly be held to come within the established concept of a public charity. Am.Law Inst. Restatement; Trusts, § 374; Scott on Trusts, § 374.6. Doubtless, the enlightenment of the general public in the history, development, administration and science of government is a subject that merits the...