The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1892-11-14
CANNOT Be INSURED.
A Supreme Court Decision
Which Bears Hard on
Bartenders.
ORDER OF CHOSEN FRIENDS IN IT.
James Hollands Verdict Won in
Judge Werts' Court Set Aside
False Pretenses.
Special to The Jersey city Ne,os.

CYL Ia ~ q ~ ~
Judge Werts in an interesting case. The
Order of Chosen Friends has a relief fund,
from which benefits are paid in case of
disability resulting from age. sickness or
accident, in case of death and for the
relief of sick and distressed members. Any
manufacturer Of gunpowder and other
explosives. retail liquor dealer or barten-
der is excluded from beneficial mem
bership.
James Holland, of Jersey City, was adj
mitted to beneficial membership on De-
cember 9, 1889, I'M died within q month.
OF o. January 5. 1890. The order resisted
payment of the benefit. $1,000. on the
ground that he was a bartender, and the
and won the case in Judge Werts, court.
Now Judge Depue sets the Judgment
aside. In his opinion he says:
1.-The deceased made his application for
a relief tune certificate in December,
1889. The application vas made upon Il
printed form furnished by the Supreme
Council, annexed to which was, IN ap-
proved form, the applicants statement
to the medical examiner This state
ment contained certain questions and the
applicants answer thereto, and at the
foot of the statement the following SEN
tence occurs:-'Tne foregoing are war
ranted TO be full and true answers to the
questions proposed Both the appltca-
ton and the statement of the medical
examiner were signed by the deceased.
On these papers and a personal examine
ton by the medical examiner the certii-
cate was issued. The application was
dated December 5, 1889; the certificate
was issued December 8. 1889; the de-
ceased died January 5, 1890. At the time
1 Of mic 6onfh hn yro o NJ I'M h0F IF the
citation and not under suspension.
UNDER FALSE -PRETENsEs.
1.-THE defense at the trial was that the
| certificateo of beneficial mem Dership was
obtained fr~audulently, by means of false
and fraudulent representations. In his
application the deceased represented
that his occupation was that of a printer.
and that his business was pressman; that
he was employed by P. Lorillard in Jer-
sey City, and had been SO employed for
nine years. La his statement to the medi-
cal examiner he answered in the negative
the question, Are you engaged in the
sale or manufacture of wine, beer or dis
titled liquors?' The proof at the trial
was that the deceased was employed in
the printing department of the works of
2. Lorillard for a period of time down to
December, 1881; that in July, 1888, he was
employed in another department. of the
same works. and left that employment in
q QuC, lOOt, dDQ tudU NC udO nOL D0Su 1 IL
Lorillard's employ after that date. 1t was
also proved that after December, 1884.
down to his last Illness and within u few
days of his death, his employment was
that of a bartender. He was so employed
in December. 1889. when he made applica-
tion for mem bership In the society.
1.-The statement made by the deceased
in his application and in his answers TO
the questions in the statement to the
medical examiner with respect to his oc.
cupation was false. and if he truly repre-
scented his occupation, he would, by force
of the relief fund laws, have been ex-
cluded from beneficial membership.
Whether the statements in the applica-
ton and the answers to the questions pro-
posed by the medical examiner be re-
garded as a warranty or simply as repre-
sensations, they were in a material re-
spect willfully false aud fraudulent, and
in either event they avoided the contract.
(McVey vs.. Order OF United WorkmenG,
"a Vroom 17-2O.)
DECEASED MIGHT HAVE BEEN SUSPENDED.
The deceased might have been stricken
from the roll of beneficiary members and
his relief fund certificate cancelled under
the provisions of section 6 article 2 of the
constitution, for the false representation
in his application and in the medical ex-
animation. He might also, after a trial,
have been suspended by the subordinate
council of which he was a member
for the untrue representations by
which he obtained his membership,
and his suspension would have avoided
his relief fund certificate, unless he was
reinstated as provided for in the general
laws of the order and the relief fund
laws. But these remedies were merely
cumulative. The obligation sued on is q
contract, on which a suit at law will lie,
and the prosecution and defence of such
a suit are alike regulated by the rules OIL
practice and procedure. and the same
legal principles which prevail In actions
upon other legal obligations.
ITO meet the defence made in this
case. the plaintiffs counsel commended
that the benefit certificate was incontesti.
BILE in the hands OF the beneficiary named
in itAunless the member had been sus
pended during his lifetime and his
death occurred during his suspen-
sion. This contention was rested
upon a stipulation in the de
ceased's application for beneficial mem.
bership, which folio VS. his agreement tt
pay dues and asses ments, and is In these
words. viz: i further agree that any un.
true or fraudulent statement made, OIL
any concealment of facts by me in this
application, or my suspension or expul.
sion from or voluntarily severing my
connection with the order, shall forfeit
my rights TO all benefits and privilege:
therein; and it shall not be lawful, in
Case OIL my Ueatn during SuCh suspension,
for any of benetciaries, heirs or their OF
my representatives, to receive any benehl
whatever from the Supreme or any grand
or subordinate Council of Chosen
Friends; and in case of expulsion
or voluntary withdrawal, from the
order l hereby %renounce, for myself
my heirs and representatives, all the
benefits granted by said ORDER Wright
v. Mutual b. ASS. 118 N. Y. 237, wa:
cited to sustain this position. In thai
case the certificate Of membership con.
tanned a provision that If any misrepre.
s%entatfon or fraudulent or untrue answer
or statement has been made, or if any
fact which should have been stated TO the
association be suppressed. the agreement
OF assurance should be void The applf.
cant also warranted the truth of his
statements ir his application. :.
A QUESTION OF TIME.
but the certificates issued contained
the provision that mo question as to the
validity of an application or certificate OF
membership shall be raised unless such
question be raised within the first two
years from and after the dAts of such Ger.
tiicate OF membership and during the
life of the member therein named. The
member died Within two years, and