, 1873-07-23

VI 1AsA@kAoht IL 6AlllD CIlGGt 1a lilo lAil-
gaagc In Angoll and AmoB on Corp, soo 7O5.,
Municipal Corp, 500 1856, noto. and Boo. o89.
Though thia language 10 applied by,
o x5'F' sno prssps so aas"'lSn rnss Of ooas
the State OK rol. Graham Y. Tho Chamber OF
G, Gommorco Of tho City Of milwaukee, Gao Wis,
72(s tho Supreme Court OF WISCONSIN said
pnleion. Whothor it Ii called suspension or OK
pulaion, 1t disqunlitlos him oitor temporarily or
permanently" 30. III tho caao Of the petitioner,
lls dlafranchisoment Ia absolute for tllo tno bo-
ing. He Is for the prcaont us fully deprived of
his rghta rs If he had boon actually formally ex-
pelled and Ii he has been Illegally suspended he
is entitled to redress at tho hands Of tho oo,,rtB
as certainly M lle would DO Ind Ills connection
with tho Board boon forever Hundered by Its
vote.
=. THE POWER or EXPULSION CONSIDERED.
It was nrguod upon tho part OF tho petitioner
that tho question involved in this case was q
Judicial question which by our Constitution WAS
Brine could not DO suspended either by tho Board
OF Trade or e.Doard OF Directors. shall not
DISCUSS tho question ut lcngth what Is judicial
function undor tho meaning OF tho Constitution.
ply with bis contract with Oulbertson, Blair i
Co., do not regard aa involving question OF
Judicial power, within the meaning Of that in
atrument. It was snid In Daggs' case that "if
tAt Go%PoIAtloA uhF0 power. ny CuHELeT Cr pre-
aoription. to romove him q mombor) for . rroa,,
sonablo caueo, that will bo per logon tezrp."
n tho caao at bar, tho chartor givos to tho
Board Of Trade tho right "to oxpol sucl,
case az q s' ranSyo %sy ssS &c., H. Court R 1 lG
Tho modern opinion has boon that o power Of
q motion is Incident to tho corporation" and
Lord !. Mansfield, 10 Rea y. Richardson, said +:
" Wo all think that modern opinion Is right. It
Is necessary to the good order and good govoin-
ment Of corporate bodies that there should DO
such power, ns much aa tho power to mike by.
laws" Lord Coke says: "Thero il a taoit con-
dition amended to tho purchase, which, if he
broaks, he may 10 diafranchiscd." Having cited
tho throo classoa Of caaos for which corporation
may DO disfranchiaod, Lord Mansfield aB to tho
second class sayB: 'Dut whoro tho officer is
merely against bis duty as corporator, unless
tho power is incidont franchises or ofiicos might
no means to carry tho law into execution" As
for all those ononsca which mako tho momber
infamous and unfit to discharge my public Office
Or duty. 1t has uniformly boon hold that tho Of
cd bofore he can bo diBfranol1iaed. Angoll aud
An1es on Corp. Sec. 412.
WHERE THE BOARD MAY TRY AND E1rEL.
But as that clasB Of olrenoB which involve d
ssn he G sg ng So os pa 10 i n ia SD s
10 had oifondod Tho question to 10
tried is whether he has brokon conditions
annexed to tho franchise and such trial by
tho corporation Is itself tral per lcgem terrae.
Tho Constitution nevor intondod to vest tho
power to try such questions in tho courts OF
Justice. To do SO would overthrow the ndjudi-
cations Of tho last 160 years. Tho pot1ionor, not
dored him Infamous Il tried at all, could only bo
tried for his breach OF duty as q corpoTator, md
then only By the corporation pr which he WAS
membor. Tho facts in reference to their trial,
as set forth in tho anBwor Of respondent, do not
fjiffar rRforin11p &hc1n ftartnaa1 In
petition, and need not be again rehearsed.
nospondeut claims in his answer TINT tho
petitioner was properly and legally trsd, con-
yioted, and ausponded by the Board Of Directors.
Iectors had nny power to try him, and insists in
argument that, il any power exists anywhere
but IN tho courts, it oxists in the wholo body of
tho corporation; In other words, that as tic
tho corporation, they could not delegate TINT
power to smaller number Of TINT body, the
Board Of Directors. Tho charter Of tho Board
Of Trade gives to it the right to make rules and
contrary to the laws Of tho land. In giving to
the Board Of Trado the right to o1pol, the char
ter adda the words =" in manner to DO prescribed
BY the rules, regulations, and bylaws thereof"
BY Section ., Of lsulo s. tho Doard Of Trade has
authorized tho Doard of Directors to suspend
mombers who, aftor examination. Ind beon
found to have failod to comply promptly with
tho terms Of any business contract. written or
verbal.
POWER or TIE BOARD or DIRECTORS TO suspESp.
Tho question as to tho right upon tho part Of
tho Board Of Trado to delegate this power Of
susponsion ia one not FREQ from difficulty. In
Auly and Amea Oh Corp, SEQ. 432 (pago 451), it
nent, unless it has boon expressly conhded to Q
particular porson Or class, Is to be exercised by
tho person OF class in whom the right appointing
Or admitting ia bestowed. To the Banao effect Is
Kent is1 ca Z @ %eS'f ponn On o a rsS E S 9
Lyme. Dillon Oh Municipal Corporation
sec., 180, page 217. But how must it be expross-
y oonfidod to Lessor body7 By the charter or
o50): "Dut . select body Of n' tho cor cor
portion may possess tho power. not only whom
given by tho ohartor, but IN consequence Of .
at large may delegate their powers to aeloot
body as tho representative Of the whole COM
munity.'". Wilcock says (pago 247). !" THO power
Of anotion does not pass by grant Of tho pow
pressly roposed in tho select body by the chnr-
ter. It was not directly determined, but 1t was
assumed by Lord Mansfield, that it may bo
transferred to select body by!a bylaw IN tho
aamo mannor as the right Of eloction." Auly l.
Ames on Corp, SEQ. 42, pago 452
On the other hand, tho caso Of the State vs.
Milwaukee Chamber Of Commerce, decided TINT
tho power Of motion granted to tic body Of the
CuIpOEAttOQ COulA u0k Uc u646EaLGu uQlC98 tho
power to delegate Was expressly given by tho
ohartor. Tho Court, in TINT case, said tlat it
had not boon direotly determined in my case
that tho power might bo transferred to aeloct
body by tho whole corporation. But the LAM
guage of Kent is directly III favor OF such lole-
CATION Of power, and ho cites tho case Of Rex.
Y. Spencer, whore Mansfield says: Whom tho
power Of making bylaws is in the body at large
they may delegate their rights to select body,
who become tho representatives Of the whole
community" Dillon, in his work on munci-
pality corporations, page 217 sootion $50. note l.
says that Lord Mansfield seemed to DO Of opin-
ion THAT it was competent to transfer tho powor
Of amotion from the whole body to select
body BY an ordinance or bylaw, but that tho
question soemH not to have been directly deter-
mined.
THE PAGE CASE CONSIDERED.
II thoro wero no direct adjudication tho opin-
ions OF TWO auch lawyers aH Lord Mansfield and
Chancellor Kent would bo entitled to attentiye
consideration. In this uncertainty Of the law 1t
becomes important to examine the case Of Tho
People OK. rel. Page Y, Chicago Doard Of Trnda