New-York tribune., 1870-12-21
THE COURTS.
A TRINITY CHURCH CASE.

IMPORTANT DECISION-DENIAL OF MOTION TO
APPOINT A RECEIVER.
In the suit brought year ago by Groesbeck
against william T. Dunscomb and Morgan Il Dix Of the
Trinity Church Corporation application was made by
the plaintiff have receiver appointed to take charge
corporate property Of Trinity Church. He based
hs right to bring the action upon his being successor
the cOrporator of the corporations upon his being OF
religious tencts agreeing with those OF certain persons
whO years since wardens and vestryinen
of the corporation; upon his willingness to preach in the
parish church. and do whatsoever be necessary ana
xroper 10 his rights a cOporator and upon his
having taken sacrament in chapel Of said Church The
complaint mp that lhe defendants have departed
from the Protestant faith and baptism, charges them
~rth dvcrng the funds from the purposes OF tho
founders and alleges that salary is paid for prea hng
Siaphemies; snd that the income OF the Corporation IL
very largely Of its charter tsSO0OO per eaT
The dete udsnts interposed demurrer c3nicno&lhg, ing
FIRST that 81 appears ON the face OF the ComIIht Ihai
defect in parties defendant IN I'd" 9nlssnu OK
the corporation therein named, 10 wit: TIE rector and
inhabitants OF the City Of NewYOrk IN communion OF
the Church Of England as by law esabsneu 3econn,
shat the complainant does not state iaets suhent To
judge MeCnnn yesterday delivered opinion denying
che application FOR receiver and sustaining tho de-
opinion. which is very long and EXHAUSTIVE;
sought by this action % take away the property OF
'ant fbst the the oy Sendans named in the suit are
S Morgan Dix OF the clergy of the Trinity Church
sci TO said corporation The corporation Is not made
party ara ye, te ne into ne S,se Sad ron f s UP
Emph9ay this cannot be done without the corporation
poing heard after having been made party How
prepOsOus IL would be to two OF the directors OF
railroad company indyidually and seek, in that action
have receiver appointed 10 take charge OF all the
affairs n the road; ccSfUi are
for the removal OF the trustee without Joining the
As 70 the first ground Of the demurrer, viz that tho
defect of parties Is the omission OF the corporation The
Rector Inhabit8nts OF the City Of New-Nork in
Gnunon Of the Church OF England. by law estab-
hshedhis is the corporate OF the corporation,
Accorhg 70 the nnguage OF he complaint 80 that tls
defect appearing appearing upon its face the first ground
thai the complaint doe not stetc facts sufficient
ettute cause Of action, the allegation that the defend
was suppose, intended 20 sustain The charge Of
the diversion Of the trust estate from the design OF the
original c0rporatOrs. Now, rho Object Of the founders
Of Traty Church TO suppress vice and immortality,
very an 70 all t InSt t. 70 SaaeTe 10 to- S at ri See
for that purpose In regard 10 the allegation thas
o It's charter GOOOO per year, tie answer is simple
this "ciut cannot Tr0ride renedU. Application In
such must he made to the AttCrney-Ge1era Inc
plaintiffs allegation as 10 his right 10 bring this
action very bad pleading, because he does not at
tenp 10 show how he became acoporator or successor
% corPorator. As to lus willingness TO Iltaeh ID
Nav, mure such willingness were good cause o. com.
paut II such c0rdescensiOn ON the part Of plaintiff
could De made basis for good count upon which TO
sustain action there many OF the clergy In the
different Protestant denominations who would most vii
Church Indeed AIN afraid IL such were the ease and
TINS Court had jurisdiction the subectmotter there
apart from al this, however he does not state single
fat showing that he plaintiff had right 10 preach in
tO permit prevent him from so preaching.
Plaintiff claims that because part OF the charter de
that any person who has partakcn of the Holy
Communion within one year shall be entitled " vote
and he entered said Church stranger, ard not
OF said communion and formally partOok Of the
Communon in Trinity Chapel without any previous pro
batOn preparation and without the priest cOlsentlng
knowing who he was; that consequently, he Is
entitled to vote athe election Of officers this would be
odd doctrine indeed That stranger, member OF
entirely different religious persuasion caA Note Is
simply prepOsterous. With the prOpr1ety can
alien this country, come 70 this city register his
same, and vote at elections Tne proposition is too
SlOsuIu ioL seI4Vus VII! W,' s Z - itd
1s SIMPLY this: That any just and good
who had properly prepared himself for the
5IOy Communion. and who had been duly and properly
accepted by the rector into the church true and good
s0muncRnt could vote at the election for the officers
of said church. and have all the rights and benefits
by any tortured form OF construction mean, that any
siventur. for the purpose Of causing htgaO aud for
church and wickedy 90 through the form Of a com
Juunon and ne called member and that for the pur
pose, IS II would seem from the cGmpaHt' {" haIlsShg
3s organization Could tOny OF NlcSeuhCSs COulrlNe
heuc OF spiritual intolerance more wounsing 10 the
capabilities OF any religious people and more 10 be re-
undated by the principles OF our Tree Isu
stuaf The paiut II does say he il EpiscOpalian
meInbeT OF the Church OF England. OF ot TRINITY
Church but that lie is Protestani ifllItIah, ana
a believer IN the doctrines OF the Christian CCuniulOn
"a nstaise at the Synod OF bort, AID that he belongs
40 The Dutch Reformed Church"
ssfed that the plaintiffs notions as TO ms rlgntk
Had remedies are wild, visionary, ana absurd ana
sank viii be doing act 81 great Kindness TO Linn iu
Gs.asng the complaint altogether. AS 10 the que su0n
uf costs and allowances, tAnk my proper cOuIN' VII
Ia 20 nut defendants their remedy Uy motion foI mat
purpose ! viii Ray here, however that tuhk ias the
amount ca med 10 he involved is very large the allow
ance should he IN proportion, that those who 80 y
lw with this cOTpOruOl, or any Ohe person OF corpO
ration viii that they have at icas probable
cause o. action and II they have rot aud stu persist
IN notorrty o his kind, they wiz be compelled At least
% pUy for such litigation.