Grant County herald. [volume] (Lancaster, Wis.) 1850-1968, 1883-02-15
Legal lightning.

part vi me county. III appeared, from the
testimony before the court, and from the
statements of others eognisant of the
facts in the case, that the old church on
the Mound, which had been occupied
by the congregation since 1874, had be-
come so dilapidated as make the cree
ton of new building preferable, if not
necessary. Accordingly, representa-
tons were made to the Archbishop, and
he sent his Vicar General down to the
Mound, to look into the matter, and de-
eide upon site, as, in the meantime.
two factions had arisen, one wishing to
build on the old site. and the other on a
new location, about three fourths of n
mile away. 1t is alleged, by those who
wanted to rebuild, on the old site. that
they had raised some money for rebuild
ing; but We're informed that it was not
enough, and the Bishop could not allow
them to build until they had money
enough to build a good church, without
his being called upon for aid, as he had
been in many other instances. However.
he afterwards gave his permission. The
party who favored the new site, having
raised the necessary amount, prevailed
upon the Archbishop to change his mind
IN relation to the site of the new building.
and select the spot chosen by them out
on the prairie He did 50, and a school
house was erected, and school started.
while those members of the congrega-
ton who were interested in having the
building erected there, went industri-
ously to work, and having subscriptions
enough in hand to put up fine
looking building, the church was erected
on the new site.
This did not meet the appreciation of
the party who chung to the old site.
They even went so far as to secure a
strip OF land adjoining the old site, so as
10 allow OF the erection of a large and
handsome building, the deed of which
property was sent to the Archbishop,
hoping thus to secure his consent. The
latter, however, would not revoke the
decision in favor of the new site, and.
finding nothing further was to be hoped
for in that quarter, abou. fifteen or
twenty men assembled, on the morning
of the thirteenth of last March. and be-
gan tearing down the old structure, pre-
paratory to erecting new one, on the
old site.
Father Jacobs, the priest in charge,
commanded them to desist and showed
as further proof of his authority pow
Ell of attorney given him by the Arch
bishop. The leaders refused to listen
to either entreaties OF commands and
continued their work until the last
timber was torn away, then selected
building committee and had let the
contract for the building of new
church to a firm of contractors. when
work was stopped by an injunction
granted by the court commissioner.
This injunction was dissolved by Judge
Cothren on the general ground that
anybody had a right TO erect a church
if they wanted TO. The case was appeal
ed and is now before the Supreme
count for decision.
The suit is brought by the Archbishop
for damages sustained by the tearing
down of the old church. nc claiming the
same as his property the deed of which
he holds The defense claimed that be
held the property simply as a trustee
for the congregation. On this pivotal
point: namely. in whom was the title
vested, rested the whole suit.
1t was claimed that if the Archbishop
did hold the property as his own per-
sonal property then it was taxable like
any other private property, while if he
held it simply in trust for the congle-
CATION he had no right to bring suit.
The hearing of the case occupied about
a day and n half and was brought to
a rather sudden close by an argument
on an objection raised by the plaintiff
counsel. Judge Clementson in ruling
on the question held that the property
in question belonged personally to
Archbishop iIeiss, and was at his entire
and individual disposal. That he could
sell or convey it to any one TO whom
he saw fit, the court even going so far
as to say that if the property in ques-
ton was offered for sale by the Arch
bishop be should have no hesitancy in
purchasing it should he desire the land
whatever might be the opinion of the
congregation in regard to its sale.
As the decision covered the main
ground of controversy. there was moth
ing further TO be done but to fix the
damages. An adjournment was, there
fore, taken until evening, when the
counsel stated the sum of 5000 had been
settled upon as that which the Arch
bishop was to recover, if he should ulti-
mately recover anything, as he did not
care to press it further, and the court
instructed the jury to return verdict
in accordance with the agreement, with
out leaving the box.
The case will be carried up to the Su-
premc Court, where, if the decision is
maintained, it will work a radical
change in the mode of holding church
property by the Roman Catholic denom-
nation. The reason for this, Is, that
should the title To all church property,
be vested in the Archbishop, every foot
of land, every dollars worth Of prop
ertv, is taxable. This is the view taken
by the bar, many members Of which the
reporter eonversed with. This renders
the decision one, the future course of
which will be watched with interest
In answer 10 4 question, the venera-
bic Archbishop expressed himself very
much pleased with the decision. 1t is
possible that some such result has been
anticipated, as there is law now pend
ing in the legislature to incorporate any,
or all, Catholic congregations in tie
State. on the precise ground OF desire to