Boston Five Cents Savings Bank v. Trustees of the Methodist Religious Society

4 N.E.2d 315, 295 Mass. 480, 1936 Mass. LEXIS 852
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedOctober 28, 1936
StatusPublished

This text of 4 N.E.2d 315 (Boston Five Cents Savings Bank v. Trustees of the Methodist Religious Society) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Boston Five Cents Savings Bank v. Trustees of the Methodist Religious Society, 4 N.E.2d 315, 295 Mass. 480, 1936 Mass. LEXIS 852 (Mass. 1936).

Opinion

The contentions of the plaintiff, as set forth in its brief, were in substance as follows: That the corporation, Trustees of the Methodist Religious Society in Boston, having executed mortgage notes in the interest of the local religious society and at its request, was entitled to be exonerated by the local society with respect to liability on the notes; and that the plaintiff, as mortgagee creditor of the corporation, was entitled to the benefit of any remedy of which the corporation might avail itself if it were suing for exoneration, and therefore was entitled to reach the fund held by the trustees of the Jackson-Binney trust.

Rugg, C.J.

The object of these suits is to cause a fund held by the present trustees under a deed from William Hall Jackson to Amos Binney and others, trustees (dated March 24, 1806, hereafter called the Jackson-Binney trust), to be applied in satisfaction of two mortgage notes executed by the defendant the Trustees of the Methodist Religious Society in Boston, a Massachusetts corporation established by St. 1809, c. 70, as amended by St. 1828, c. 144. It hereafter will be called the corporation.

The parties to the suits aside from the plaintiff are (1) the corporation, (2) the persons at present constituting the trustees of the Jackson-Binney fund, who were appointed by virtue of a decree of the Supreme Judicial Court and who hold and administer that fund, (3) the Quarterly Conference of the local unincorporated religious society using the church buildings here involved, added as a defendant during the trial, and (4) the State Street Trust Company, which has been permitted to intervene for the protection of its interest in a mortgage, on a parcel of real estate [482]*482on Tremont Street owned by the corporation, securing an overdue note. Individual members of the corporation were originally joined as defendants but their demurrers were sustained and they have passed out of the case. The Attorney General filed a disclaimer.

The cases were heard together in the Superior Court. There was introduced in evidence considerable oral testimony, the records of the corporation, of the trustees of the Jackson-Binney fund and of the Quarterly Conference of the local unincorporated religious society, and the master’s reports in three cases in which this trust has been before the court, namely Crawford v. Nies, 220 Mass. 61, Crawford v. Nies, 224 Mass. 474, and Attorney General v. Armstrong, 231 Mass. 196. The trial judge found material facts as set forth in an order for decree and subsequently, on request, found additional material facts. He ordered a decree to be entered in each case dismissing the bill and dismissing also the prayers of the State Street Trust Company. Final decrees were entered accordingly, from which the plaintiff and the intervener appealed.

The facts as found by the trial judge do not appear to be in dispute. So far as relevant to the grounds of this decision, they are these: The suit in the first case is on a note of the corporation executed and delivered to the pláintiff in December, 1928, secured by a mortgage on its real estate at the corner of Newbury and Exeter streets in Boston. The suit in the second case is on a note of the corporation executed and delivered to the plaintiff in November, 1925, secured by a mortgage on its real estate at the corner of Columbus Avenue and Berkeley Street in Boston. Both notes are due and unpaid and there is default with respect to both mortgages. The trust property described in the Jackson-Binney deed of 1806 consisted of real estate on Bromfield Street in Boston, which was used as a place of worship until 1913, when it was sold and the present trust fund established. The beneficiary under that original trust deed was the unincorporated religious society worshipping in the building on Bromfield Street. That unincorporated religious society, known as the Methodist Religious Society in Boston, was [483]*483organized about 1794. It is and always has been a local church or charge of the Methodist Episcopal Church in the United States of America. Its name has not been changed. It has continued to be the beneficiary of the Jackson-Binney trust to the present. That local religious society (as it hereafter will be called) was merged with another similar society by the bishop in accordance with the discipline of the church. By later action of the bishop in conformity to church discipline, it now comprises two local branches, one worshipping in the Tremont Street church which was subject to a mortgage to the intervener, and the other in the Newbury Street church, called also the Copley church, on which the plaintiff holds the mortgage securing the note mentioned in the first suit. The other mortgage held by the plaintiff is on property on Columbus Avenue formerly used as a place of worship by a branch of the local religious society, but the building was condemned by the city authorities and torn down. The legal title to the three parcels of real estate subject to these mortgages is in the corporation. The Quarterly Conference is the sole governing board of that local religious society, subject to the annual and general conferences of the church, and consists of approximately fifty members of the local religious society selected in accordance with the church discipline. The corporation was organized because, as stated in the petition for the act of incorporation by those petitioning therefor, who were the trustees under the JacksonBinney deed, they were the proprietors of certain lands for the use of the local religious society and found it inconvenient to manage the pecuniary affairs of the trust established by that deed for the benefit of that society for want of suitable powers. After the act of incorporation the Jackson-Binney .trustees conveyed title to the property to the corporation and the corporation continued to hold title until proceedings challenging its right in the property were successfully prosecuted in 1891 in the Supreme Judicial Court. During all of this period, however, the corporation held the property in trust for the local religious society. The proceedings just referred to were brought in behalf of the local religious society, which claimed tobe the beneficiary of the trust, denied [484]*484that the corporation had any right or interest in the property, legal or equitable, and sought the appointment by the court of trustees in accordance with the Jackson-Binney deed in place of the original trustees, all of whom had died without successors being named. The final decree, entered by consent of the corporation, appointed nine trustees under the Jackson-Binney deed, ordered the corporation to convey the trust property to these trustees, and provided that the trustees appointed by the decree “hold, manage or convey said estate upon the trusts and for the purposes as set forth in” the Jackson-Binney deed. The corporation complied with the decree and conveyed the property to the so called court trustees, and from the date of that conveyance the corporation has had no interest, legal or equitable, in the real estate so conveyed or in the fund which now stands in place of the real estate. The beneficiary of the trust fund is now, as it always has been, the local religious society, and the corporation, which alone signed the plaintiff’s notes, has no interest in that property. For many years prior to April 1, 1933, the Jackson-Binney trustees appointed by the court used the accumulations- of the trust fund for the purpose of paying taxes, interest on the plaintiff’s mortgages and repairs on the properties covered by the mortgages.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Brigden v. Gill
16 Mass. 522 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1820)
Pettibone v. Toledo, Cincinnati, & St. Louis Railroad
19 N.E. 337 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1889)
Slattery v. Wason
7 L.R.A. 393 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1890)
Geer v. Horton
34 N.E. 269 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1893)
Crawford v. Nies
107 N.E. 382 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1914)
Crawford v. Nies
113 N.E. 408 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1916)
Attorney General v. Armstrong
231 Mass. 196 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1918)
Congregational Church Union of Boston & Vicinity v. Attorney General
194 N.E. 820 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1935)
Downey Co. v. 282 Beacon Street Trust
197 N.E. 643 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1935)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
4 N.E.2d 315, 295 Mass. 480, 1936 Mass. LEXIS 852, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/boston-five-cents-savings-bank-v-trustees-of-the-methodist-religious-mass-1936.