180 Mass. 321 | Mass. | 1902
This is a bill in equity brought by members of the defendant corporation, a fraternal beneficiary association, to enjoin the corporation from collecting assessments from its members at different rates, according to the age of the members, for the purpose of paying death benefits, and also to enjoin the trustees of the corporation from paying moneys to the supreme lodge for use in paying death benefits of members of lodges in other States, belonging to the same order. It comes to this court by reservation on the bill and demurrer. The contention of the plaintiffs is that upon the averments of the bill, the corporation has no legal right to collect assessments at any other than a fixed rate, the same for all members of the order without reference to their age, and that the trustees have no right to make payments to the supreme lodge for the benefit of members of affiliated lodges in other States. The plaintiffs’ bill contains this averment: “ The corporation adopted constitutions and general laws and by-laws, a copy of which as issued under date of 1892 is hereto annexed and marked A.” Assuming that at the time these general laws and by-laws were adopted the corporation had no statutory authority to make classified assessments in the manner now objected to, or to pay over moneys to the supreme lodge, it appears that statutes have since been passed, namely, St. 1899, c. 442, § 15, and St. 1901, c. 422, §§ 5, 11, 15, which give authority to such corporations to do both of these things. Under each of these statutes the question of course remains, whether in the relations of former members to the corporation, there is anything to preclude the corporation, as against them, from availing itself of the larger privileges of the new legislation. To take action for this purpose, it would be necessary for the corporation to amend the general laws or by-laws set out in the bill.
A preliminary question is whether the plaintiffs have set out in the bill that the laws and by-laws now in force do not purport to authorize the proceedings sought to be enjoined. They
We are of opinion that the bill does not negative the existence of by-laws under the recent statutes, and that the case must be considered on the assumption that the corporation may have adopted them.
The plaintiffs contend that their certificates of membership constitute a contract that cannot be affected by the recent legist lotion, or by changes in by-laws whereby they are to pay classified rates for death benefits. But these certificates are silent in regard to the rates to be paid. They give members all the rights and privileges of membership, with a right to participate in the beneficiary fund to the amount of $2,000, to be paid at death. This is on condition that the member complies “ with all the laws, rules and requirements ” of the order.
The plaintiffs contend that the Pub. Sts. c. 115, § 8, which authorizes such a corporation to “ provide in its by-laws for the payment by each member of a fixed sum ” etc, and the subsequent statutes prior to the St. 1898, c. 474, which contain
This change in the by-laws is not void as an abuse of the power to make changes, on the ground that it is calculated to defeat the purpose of the organization and destroy the rights of the members. It may be conceded that some amendments might be so foreign to the general scheme and purpose of the organization and so contradictory to its fundamental law and the contracts made under it, as not to be within the power of amendment referred to. But this is not true of an amendment which merely changes forms and methods, while the substance of the general plan and purpose of the organization is preserved. We are of opinion, therefore, that the classified assessments referred to in the bill are not shown to be unauthorized or illegal.
Similar considerations apply to the payment of money to the supreme lodge. It may be that such a payment prior to the enactment of St. 1899, c. 442, § 15, would have been ultra vires, and might have been restrained by injunction. Pub. Sts. c. 115, §§ 8, 9. Lamphere v. Grand Lodge of United Workmen, 47 Mich. 429. But by the enactment of the statute just referred to, such
Demurrer sustained.