Juniata sentinel and Republican. [volume] (Mifflintown, Juniata County, Pa.) 1873-1955, 1880-12-22

each giving a separate reflection, would
people of Lost Greek were never in possess
sion of the Miffiintown church edifice, ex-
cept constructively as corporators, through
| tue corporation trustees, and they are so
yet. The mere fact that some of the trus-
tees may be acting with the newly y-organ-
, izsd church at Miffiintown affects nothing
1t is only an individual act-they still bold
I the title in trust for the original corporators
and the use of the original grant, and could
be legally compelled to join in alteration
directed by the corporators, or to do aught
else necessary and appcrtaining to the well
fare of the congregations within the scope
of their powers. Though in 1899, 18th
January, when joint congregational meet
/ ing resolved that the trustees build a new
church at Lost Greek and appropriate $500
/ for the purpose-the trustees at their meet
ing, 23d January, 1889, solemnly, in viola
tion 10 the joint congregational action, de-
clared themselves to be decidedly of the
/ opinion that such action was not binding on
| them, but admitted that the same was en-
titled to mature deliberation as a recon-
mendation coming from their constituents,
and theE acted in accordance with the in
! structions of the congregational meeting.
Vide Corp. Min. Book, PIP. $50, ls2, 1888.
! There is nothing in the fundamental law
of the church requiring trustees 20 be mem
bers of the church, though the charter re-
quires them to be members of the church,
and congregation, and this requirement can
be complied with now as readily as before
division.
Ii is the fact that before division Miffiin-
town controlled three-ffths aud Lost Creek
two-fifths of the amount of the joint pas
tors salary, each enjoining the partial min
Istration in the ratio of its contribution, and
presumably, the joint PASTORS salary was
I paid out of the revenues Of the corporate
| property, pew rents, and so forth, which
beyond doubt was entitled:.to go into the
/ hands of the trustees, and be by them ap-
H pFOUTltltu W uStS VI tAAC LUX AtApAA'
/ in consonance with the purposes Of the
/ grant. Yet in this regard the history of
/ the case shows the charter had become OBJ
/ solete or fallen into a condition of deswe-
tude, if indeed the powers were ever exer-
cised, for We find the trustees of the cor
( poration before division to have had but
I ,uo traasurars Iap,aS Enox Isn- and " IL
/ liam Patterson, 1898, and they received the
/ Glebe money and land revenues, but not
/ pew rents, money for pastors salary, jdni-
! tors wages, church expenses. 1t docs not
| appear that the trustees ever ''fxed" the
salary of the minister, but it does appear
I that such salary was fixed by the congrega-
tions. That these revenues did not pass
through the hands Of the congregations, of
( trustees, or their tressurers, was a mere
matter of practice having its formation IN
/ convenience that was at any time rev Ocable.
/ II is further the fact that since division on
/ the 18th June, 1875, no corporate funds
/ arising from the Mitilintown church or its
congregation have been appropriated to the
/ paying of the salary of mininter for Lost
/ Creek But this fact OF none of the ser
vices derived from the Miffiin church being
/ applied TO the use OF Lost Creek, if she be
entitled to any portion of them, is not the
result of the ecclesiastical division in the
direct sense, but the result OF the neglect
Of the Corporation trustees. The mere &C.
I clesiastical division did not per Sc in any
sises manner or form affect the revenues or
have anything to do with corporate proper
/ ty. Vide Kamsey's Appeal, Norris. II
corporate funds We're miSapplied or with
held from those legally entitled 10 receive
them, the action Of the ecclesiastical judi
cdtures is not the rroximate cause OF direc-
/ tors Of the corporation, invested, as to the
/ temporal Affairs OF the ecclesiastical societies
OF MiGlin and Lost Greek. with the charter
/ powers, and their neglect or improper ac-
( tion cannot be charSeabie 20 the ecclesiasti-
cal division as the impelling cause.
Therefore the Master is OF the opinion
/ that the ecclesiastical division has not vio-
lated charter rights of the Presbyterian
Congregation Of Cedar Spring, comprising
I the Congregation OF Nifiiiu and Lost Creek,
/ as alleged in ) of Plaintiffs Bill, as ali
the functional powers of that civil corpora
ton may be as fully exercised now as before
the division.
The Master must not be understood as
expressing any opinion as to whether or not
corporate funds have been improperly ap-
Piled, or Lost Creek deprived of any por-
tion of her full share thereof since division
he simply states that if Lost Greek is
wronged or rrejudiced in its civil or corpO-
rate rights, it is the fault of the trustees,
and is not occaSioned by the division BY the
| Presbytery of Huntingdon. The other
question is not before the Master, under
shis bill and answer, there is no prayer for
relief against supint ness or improper action
by mandaTas or injunction. The bill is
against the defendants, and the general
prayer .sfor such further and other relief as
the necessities of the case may require, :"
does not cover the case. The bill prays for
specific relief by five separate paragraphs.
The four frst relate to such matrers as lie
exclusively, under the facts Of this case,
within the jurisdiction of ,se ecclesiastical
courts, and without that of the civil courts.
The prayer of the fifth paragraph is " that
it may be further adjHdged and decreed
that the said congregation at Mifilintown
has forfeited all right and title to any part
of the corporate real estate, and that the
said real estate of the said corporation sit
uate in the Borough of Mifiintown, and all
the real estate owned by said corporation
shall be decreed to belong to, and be man.
aged and controlled by said Lost Greek con-
gregation -
Under the facts as found by the Master,
and his construction of .hc rules of law and