Pabst v. Trustees of Economical Building Ass'n

8 D.C. 385
CourtDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals
DecidedJanuary 15, 1874
DocketNo. 2680
StatusPublished

This text of 8 D.C. 385 (Pabst v. Trustees of Economical Building Ass'n) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District of Columbia Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Pabst v. Trustees of Economical Building Ass'n, 8 D.C. 385 (D.C. 1874).

Opinion

Mr. Justice Wylie

delivered the opinion of the court:

Complainant was a member, and the defendants were either officers of or trustees for “The Economical Building Association” of this District. The controversy is as to the amount due- by the complainant to the association; the latter claiming that on the 14th of February, 1872, Pabst was its debtor to the amount of $7,579.10.

In the year 1868, complainant became first a member of the association, and in the course of the following year was the owner of 120 shares, the value of which was $200 a share after all the payments should have been made up. The shares were to be paid for at the rate of one dollar on each, per month, or $120 for the 120 shares. At this rate, his shares would all have been paid for at the end of sixteen years and eight months; but the actual value of the shares at any in[399]*399termediate date depended upon the amount of payments which had previously been made on their account, and the business of the association and its future prospects.

At different periods daring the year 1869, Pabst was advanced money by the association to the amount of $10,770. This was a much larger sum than had been paid by him, at that time, on account of his shares, and, of course, a much larger sum than the shares were actually worth of themselves. But for the purpose of securing the association, he executed deeds of trust upon a valuable lot and its improvements in this city, and entered into obligations thereafter to pay to the association $140 a month, or two dollars on each share held by him, until the whole amount of $200 a share had been fully paid up, or the association brought to a close. The security given was not for the purpose of protecting a debt of an ascertained sum, but to compel the member obtain» ing the advance to meet his monthly payments. The money advanced was not a loan by the association, but a purchase of the member’s shares, leaving him without further interest in the association, except his obligation to pay for them to the uttermost farthing, by monthly installments to the end. If the association should not be able to close up its business until the full completion of the period of sixteen years and eight months, the member who was advanced on 120 shares would have paid $24,000 into the treasury, in an average period of eight years and four months.

But by means of the rapid compounding of interest by means of monthly loans, and the fund derived from fines for default of members in paying up their monthly dues, the period for closing the business of an association may be greatly abridged. For at whatever period the funds of the association will enable it to “ divide to each share of stock the sum of two hundred dollars, less thirty per centum, the association shall determiue and close.” The more prosperous, therefore, is the association, the briefer its existence. It cannot be told for what length of time a member who has an advance upon his stock may be required to pay up his monthly dues. If the profits derived from compounding interests at high rates, and short intervals, and from fines, arelarge, thisperiod will be short. If these profits are not large, it will be more remote. [400]*400If the period be short, the member advanced will have the benefit, for by the close of the association he is relieved from making his monthly payments, and so, although no longer a member of the association, he is a sharer in its profits. If the time for closing up the business be.more protracted, the member advanced loses that advantage; but under no circumstances is he required to pay beyond the nominal value of his stock.

Whether the arrangement shall turn out to be favorable to the member advanced, or otherwise, depends upon the success of the association. If it be successful, although no longer a member for some purposes, he shares in the profits; if unsuccessful, he may be a loser, but only to a limited extent.

We discover nothing, therefore, in the nature of this association which is unlawful, or in any wise necessarily more objectionable than other associations whose object is to make profit for their members. On the contrary, so far as it holds out encouragement to its members to save their earnings instead of squandering them in idleness and vice, it deserves to be supported and encouraged.

If, however, persons will join these associations in the expectation of borrowing money at pleasure, with no obligation ever to repay it, or subscribe for an amount of stock on which they are unable to meet the monthly dues, and thus subject themselves to fines at the rate of 120 per cent, per annum interest on the sums in arrear, disappointment and bankruptcy are to be expected.

There is another class, also, for whom these associations are unprofitable, namely, those who, having subscribed for shares and received advances for which they have mortgaged their homesteads, are afterward overtaken by sickness, or other inevitable calamity, depriving them of the power to meet their payments.

But for the laboring man, blessed with health, industrious, frugal, temperate, and resolute, these associations, if controlled by men like himself, are admirable institutions. Such a man, however, may win his fortune without their aid; and by joining them, takes the risk of wasting his time, and forming a connection with those who may defraud him of his. [401]*401property. So much as to the subject of building-associations iu general.

In respect to the particular matter in controversy in the present case, the facts seem to be as follows: In March, 1869, Pabst was the owner of 120 shares of stock in this company, on which he, or those of whom he purchased, had been making monthly payments. At that time he obtained advances from the association amounting to $10,770. These advances, he it remembered, were not loans. In order to secure the association for these advances, he executed two deeds of trust upon certain improved real estate in this city, both of the same form, from one of which the following is an extract:

“Whereas, heretofore, to wit, on the- day of-, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-nine, the said party hereto of the first part, by his writing obligatory of that date, acknowledged himself to be indebted to Nicholas Callan, the treasurer of said association, in the sum of twenty-two thousand dollars, and delivered the same to the said treasurer; and whereas the said writing obligatory is subject to a certain condition thereunder written to the effect that he, the said Matthias Pabst and his heirs, executors, and administrators, shall well and truly pay, or cause to be paid, to the treasurer of the association, and to his successor in office, the sum of two dollars current money per month for every share of stock which he, the said Matthias Pabst, holds in said association, commencing from the date hereof, and to be paid on the first Wednesday of each month thereafter, and also all fines and forfeits which may be imposed upon or incurred by him, by virtue of the provisions contained in the constitution, by-laws, and obligations of the said association, until the said association shall determine and close; and in order to secure the faithful performance of the condition in said writing obligatory mentioned, and stipulated to be performed by the said party hereto of the first part, he, the said party of the first part, hath agreed, to execute these presents:
“Now, this indenture witnesses,” &c.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
8 D.C. 385, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pabst-v-trustees-of-economical-building-assn-dc-1874.