78 Iowa 747 | Iowa | 1888
I. After this cause was remanded to the court below upon the former appeal, the plaintiffs filed an amendment to their petition, which, among other things, alleges that the Ancient Order of United Workmen, the association involved in this case, “is a secret, oath-bound and voluntary fraternal society, organized only and solely for social, benevolent and fraternal purposes,” and that the Grand Lodge of the order in Iowa was an institution of the same character, organized solely to aid the association in carrying out its social, benevolent and fraternal purposes. Other allegations of the amendment relate to the form of the organization, the proceedings and other matters connected therewith, which need not be here recited. The amendment, considered in connection with the statements of the pleadings and of the constitution of the order made a part of
II. If the petition shows thaf the order is in fact a life insurance company, an aid society, or an association for the insurance of lives on the assessment plan, being chartered and organized under the laws of another state, it cannot be allowed to do business here unless it has complied with the statutes of this state as to its capital, the investment thereof, and other requirements. If the order be purely a benevolent, social or fraternal institution, these statutes are not applicable. If it be an insurance company, — that is, an institution which undertakes to pay a sum of money upon the death of the assured, or at another fixed time, in consideration of premiums, assessments, or payments made in any other way, it must comply with the requirements of our statutes before it can do business or exercise any authority or power in the state. We understand that this position is not questioned by plaintiff ’s counsel.
III. The only inquiry we need make is this one : Is the Ancient Order of United Workmen, which is attempting to exercise authority here, and is incorporated under the law of a sister state,an institution for life or other assurance ? Counsel for plaintiffs insist that the amendment to the petition, which, avers in effect that the order was organized solely for social, benevolent and fraternal purposes, is to be taken as settling the question, upon the demurrer, involving the objects and character of the order, and that we must regard the order as possessing the character alleged in the amendment. But the amendment is to be read with the petition and the constitution of the order, which discloses its objects, purposes and practices. If the constitution or other parts of the petition are in conflict with the amendment, they are not superseded by the amendment, which is to be regarded simply as allegations of conclusions based upon the petition. The petition, with the.constitution, shows the true character of the order. The amendment,. — the mere allegation of the pleader’s