*1 the instant In defendant. company and the contract peti upon declared express an contract there was case, comply failed to by his evidence the defendant tion, and this shown reversible error There is no alleged contract. ground. court 11 because special ground assigned
Error is how testify plaintiff to permit the wife of the refused that the wit job. The evidence reveals many men were on the many known how not have job and could was never on the ness moving equipment. The job were on men or trucks testimony. excluding did not err in court Judgment JJ., concur. Carlisle, Townsend and affirmed. LEE al.
34635. CROSBY v. et July 15, 1953. Decided *3 in error. Maddox, plaintiff Gibson & Bennett, Bennett, Pedrick & contra. forth detail P. J. We have set somewhat
Gardner, petition and have verbatim the al- set forth gist petition leged document, which is the libelous written general in detail the forth somewhat before us. We have also set the court dismiss- demurrers to sustained on the decision of ed the relies Swafford Keaton, App. E. We have studied that *4 allega- the carefully compared and it with case under its facts opinion It our considered tions of fact in instant is the authority that the in that case no for the contention decision overruling the demurrers plaintiff the that the court erred in of the suit in that was an action between in instant case. The case Baptist concerning debt, in Church individuals a Primitive gist against whereas in the instant case the the action is the of Aiapaha Baptist Association of River Primitive Churches, the Association, expelling pastor following certain on of his
593
law, and rule
ecclesiastical
doctrine, discipline,
of
question
it,
see
there
As we
churches.
affecting
association of
such
custom
any
petition to show
allegations
the
nothing in the
of
the Con-
enjoy under
plaintiff is entitled
rights which the
civil
forth
crime set
is no
violated. There
State
were
stitution
by the
rights
plaintiff’s
the
a violation of
no statement of
use of the words
The
whatsoever.
manner
any
in
form or
church
interpreted, under
any
be
in
sense
the
cannot
“bastardy” and
like
of our
any
violation
having reference
petition,
whole
the
given
expression,
to the
interpretation is to
Alaw.
similar
civil
expression has
This
he has shed.”
innocent blood
“and the
true
shedding
blood. It is
the
whatsoever to
actual
reference
action
tie his cause of
plaintiff
petition
in his
seeks
that the
joining the
individually and
by suing
State,
law of the
the
into
the individual
with
Baptist Association
Alapaha River Primitive
civil law
Under our
his
of action.
sustain
cause
in an effort to
Be this
parties.
and of
of action
misjoinder of causes
it
but a
any
cause
in
to show
nothing
the
may, there is
as it
Constitu-
Our State
plaintiff
in
the
is set out.
action
favor of
2-
Ann.,
I, par.
(Code,
XII
article
provides
I,
section
§
tion
right
and inalienable
natural
“All men have the
follows:
112), as
own con-
according
dictates of his
worship God, each
to the
control or
authority should,
any case,
and no human
science,
right
conscience.”
with such
interfere
communications
petition,
Under
expulsion
made in the course of
privileged
and were
shown
affilia-
in his church
proceedings in connection with
Primitive
Association.
Alapaha
River
tions with
any
consistently
interfere
refused to
courts irnthis State have
only true as to Primitive
affairs. This
internal church
is not
true
reference
Associations, but it
also
Baptist Church
Kelly,
Smith v.
to all other denominations. See
(51 E.
(65
Thomas,
It is prevalent many in well-organized Church a and rural State, Baptist and communities in this and it is districts throughout years which has adhered to the strict Church the organized concepts Baptist of the Church as it was in America many days. generally Baptists in It is known that came colonial inability to America because of their adhere to the doctrines strictly the Church of a church England, was of the Hence, provisions State, the in Constitution of our state. the quoted above, provisions have and in which we the the Constitu- effect, the hence, tion of United States to the same and effect, provisions in every same such the Constitution of It generally State of the Union. also known that in colonial days certain elements in when the colonies faithful the England objected Church of the Baptist strictness of the Boston, in Massachusetts, Baptists Church in the order to relieve leadership this strictness of their church- the views, under Roger Williams, purchased colony, Island, Rhode and settled generally in Providence. It also known that from there these (sometimes Baptists Hardshells) Primitive known as settled along in Georgia, the coast Carolinas, Florida, largely in agricultural rural and Up day, sections. these Primi- Baptists, whom discussing, tive we are now have maintained original their belief. given We have a brief history of the Primi- Baptist Church because it tive is essential in determining the letter substance and sermons which form the basis of this If action. our courts case such as one instant should sus- ' tain the contention plaintiff, would, it to the writer’s mind, type a death blow the religious strike worship repre- as by Primitive Church, sented types to all other religious worship contemplated by provisions of our Constitution which we have quoted. above demurrers general sustaining the not err court did dismissing spe- concur Carlisle, JJ., Judgment Townsend and affirmed. cially. judgment concurring specially. concur in the I *6 J.,
Townsend, “suing here was agree not that affirmance, but do Alpaha River Primitive As individually joining the in an his cause of individual effort sustain sociation in being alleged to an association The church not action.” de party not be a partnership, corporation, or could dividual, 474; Albany 24, A.M., No. F & 73 Ga. Lodge, Barbour v. fendant. (66 E. There Estate, App. 7 Knox v. Ga. Greenfield’s any charge allegations which the defendants with are no acting not appear they make it that were alleged acts so as to circularizing writing, agreeing to, the church in or as officers of complaint is made. among membership the letter which procedure up the followed fails to rules of church set publication by appear or make it that the group this of the de proper, a function mandatory, letter was not or even reason it capacity officers, in their church fendants as for defend alleged against clear liability no individual that ants, individual, in an rather either for the commission of acts (as Keaton, an v. capacity than the case official was Swafford App. liability in ex 238, 122), for individual 98 S. E. com ceeding authority granted by them in the the church mission of such acts. 666): 679, 729 Jones, v. 80 U. S. L. ed. in Watson
As stated religious body do so with an “All who unite themselves government and bound to submit to implied consent to this they independence groups it.” The essence of that anyone dissatisfied to be able make their own decisions destroy Assuming, freedom. ab- appeal to courts would contrary, alleged by that the conduct sence regular procedure the church the defendant church officersis plaintiff, joining organization, on submitted himself —the government jurisdiction; carried acts, its form of and its officers, by duly privileged. authorized would be This is out its certainly where, property right involved and here, true alleged. no infraction of civil law say J., joins special am Carlisle, I authorized concurrence.
34395. MUSTIN BARNES. 15, July 1953. Decided