State ex rel. Graham v. Miller

66 Iowa 26
CourtSupreme Court of Iowa
DecidedApril 22, 1885
StatusPublished
Cited by16 cases

This text of 66 Iowa 26 (State ex rel. Graham v. Miller) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Iowa primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State ex rel. Graham v. Miller, 66 Iowa 26 (iowa 1885).

Opinion

Servers, J.

This cause has been elaborately argued in print, and orally at bai\ Every conceivable phase of the case has been fully discussed by the able counsel representing the respective parties. The arguments of counsel and the voluminous record have been examined and fully considered, and therefrom we reach the conclusion that the material question to be determined is whether the Ancient [28]*28Order of United Workmen is or should be classed as a fraternal organization, as the plaintiffs contend it is, or whether it is a mutual life insurance company, as the defendants contend. This, as we understand, briefly stated, is the material contention of the parties. We do not understand that there is serious dispute as to the law which must govern the decision to be made, when the character of the organization is determined. It is therefore essential that a full statement should be made of the organization and objects of the order. We find from the record that during 1873, or prior thereto, there were in the states of Pennsylvania, Ohio and Kentucky organized grand and subordinate lodges of the order. Representatives chosen for that purpose from the said grand lodges organized in that year a supreme lodge, by adopting what'was designated as the constitution of the supreme lodge of the Ancient Order of United Workmen. The objects of such organization are declared in a preamble or preface to the constitution to be as follows: “Pretermitting all reference to nationality, political opinions, or denominational distinctions or preferences, but believing in the existence of a God, the creator and preserver of the universe, and recognizing- as a fundamental principle that usefulness to ourselves and others is a duty which should be the constant aim and care of all, the following are submitted as the’ aims and purposes of the Ancient Order of United Workmen: [1) To embrace and give equal protection to all classes and kinds of labor, mental and physical; to strive earnestly to iinprove the moral, intellectual and social condition of its members; to endeavor by wholesome precepts, fraternal admonitions, and substantial aid, to inspire a due appreciation of the stern realities and responsibilities of life. (2) To create a fund for the benefit of its members during sickness or other disability, and in case of death to pay a stipulated sum to such person or persons as may be designated by each member, thus enabling him to guaranty his family against want. (3) The adoption of such secret work and means of recognition as will [29]*29insure the protection of its members wherever the order may exist. . (1) To hold lectures, read essays, discuss new inventions and improvements, encourage research in art, science and literature, and, when practicable, maintain a library for the improvement of the members.”

The constitution is lengthy, and contains specific provisions for the government of the order, of which the supreme lodge, as its name indicates, is the supreme authority and head, to which appeals might be taken, and whose decision in relation to any matter legitmately before it is final and conclusive. The material provisions of this constitution will be sufficiently referred to hereafter. In general, it may be now said that under its provisions subordinate lodges might be formed in any state where no grand lodge was in existence, and that such subordinate lodges were under the exclusive jurisdiction of the supreme lodge, and that, when the membership of such subordinate lodges reached a specified number, then a grand lodge might be formed which had j urisdiction over the subordinate lodges in such state, but the supreme lodge had jurisdiction of and the power to control the grand lodge in accordance with the constitution of the supreme lodge and rules of the order. The first meeting of the chosen representatives for the organization of the supreme lodge was held in February, 1873, and, wffien organized, it or its officers became a corporation under a statute of Kentucky, which authorized the incorporation of the “ grand lodge of the A. O. U. W. of Kentucky, and the supreme lodge.” Said statute, among other things, provided that “ a supreme lodge may be established by this grand lodge, in conjunction with other grand- lodges, and when so established the officers thereof and their successors in perpetuity shall become a body politic and corporate, under the name and style of the £ Supreme Lodge of the Ancient Order of United Workmen of the United States;’ and on accepting this charter shall be entitled to all the rights, privileges and immunities therein contained, with the power to establish other grand lodges [30]*30within the United States, with like powers, privileges and immunities, but subordinate to said supreme lodge.” After the organization of the supreme lodge, subordinate lodges under its jurisdiction were organized in the state of Iowa, and thereafter the grand lodge was formed, the amended constitution of which provides that it “ shall have full power and privilege of a grand lodge acting in accordance with the privileges granted it by the supreme lodge” of this jurisdiction.

The articles of incorporation of said grand lodge provide that its powers are subject to “such laws, rules and regulations as are now and shall hereafter be prescribed by the sujireme lodge of the A. O. U. W. of the United States.”

In so far as they have any bearing in this case, the provisions of the constitution of the supreme lodge and the grand lodge are the same, and the preamble to the former declares that one of the objects of the organization is “to create a fund for the benefit of its members during sickness or other disability, and in case of death to pay a stipulated sum to such person or persons as may be designated by eaeh member.” This fund, payable on the death of a member, is known as the beneficiary fund, and is created by the payment- by the members of specified sums of money as dues, and on the death of a member assessments are made on the members for certain sums of money to pay the death loss of $2,000. When there is a grand lodge in any state, it is obligated to pay, and is charged with the duty of collecting and disbursing, such money. The grand lodge of Iowa had so obligated itself, and was charged with such duty at the time the differences between it and the supreme lodge occurred, as will be presently stated. At a meeting of the supreme lodge, held in Boston in 1880, an amendment to the provisions of the constitution in relation to the beneficiary fund was adopted, and afterwards, at a meeting of said lodge, held in Detroit, in 1882, the provisions so adopted were amended. By the amendments to the constitution so adopted, what is [31]*31designated as a relief fund was created for the relief of overburdened jurisdictions, and thereby the members of the order were required to contribute money for the payment of death losses in other states, and the grand lodge of Iowa was so charged with the duty of collecting the money of its members and remitting the same to the supreme lodge. A relief board was created by the supreme lodge, who, under the authority vested in them, issued “Relief Call No. 1,” and thereby the grand lodge of Iowa was required to collect of each member under its jurisdiction a named sum for the payment of death losses in the state of Indiana. This the grand lodge declined to do, and thereupon, as the plaintiffs claim, the “charter of said grand lodge of Iowa” was suspended, and afterwards a provisional grand lodge was formed under the authority of the supreme lodge.

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

Related

Connell v. Iowa State Traveling Men's Ass'n
116 N.W. 820 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1908)
McGuire v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad
108 N.W. 902 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1906)
Royal Highlanders v. State
108 N.W. 183 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1906)
Toomey v. Supreme Lodge Knights of Pythias
48 S.W. 936 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1898)
People ex rel. Meads v. McDonough
8 A.D. 591 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1896)
National Union v. Marlow
74 F. 775 (Eighth Circuit, 1896)
Grand Lodge of the Ancient Order of United Workmen v. Graham
31 L.R.A. 133 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1896)
Grimes v. Northwestern Legion of Honor
97 Iowa 315 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1895)
People ex rel. Meads v. Alpha Lodge, No. 1
13 Misc. 677 (New York Supreme Court, 1895)
Daniher v. Grand Lodge Ancient Order of United Workmen
37 P. 245 (Utah Supreme Court, 1894)
Block v. Valley Mutual Insurance
52 Ark. 201 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1889)
State ex rel. Graham v. Nichols
41 N.W. 4 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1888)
Bock v. Ancient Order of United Workmen
39 N.W. 709 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1888)
Miner v. Michigan Mutual Benefit Ass'n
29 N.W. 852 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1886)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
66 Iowa 26, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-graham-v-miller-iowa-1885.