Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1892-03-03
AMERlcAN FnA rrnNA1 crncnr.
The Supreme Councils Reply to the
Charges Against II.


Charges Against 1t.
lsidor Rayner, Bernard Carter and
John W. ii. Fry, counsel for the
Supreme Council of the American
Fraternal Circle, filed answers in the
circuit court, Baltimore, Tuesday week,
to the bills of complaint of George Ewalt,
Talbot w. Jenkins, Isaac NJ. Pruzan,
Leopold Rosenheim and others. The
answers were all of the same character.
They denied that they are over 10000
members of the order: that 1000 certifi-
cate holders received 5000 as partial
payment, but only 953. Regarding the
action OF the convention OF the order,
ana the change made as to the payment
Of certificates, the answer states that the
change made by the supreme council re-
ceived nearly the unanimous votes of
the delegates, not more than dozen
votes out of convention consisting of
225 members being cast in the negative.
The answer denies that the supreme
officers have promised to pay back the
amount of dues paid in at the end of
three years, as charged, the provision in
section2, article 10, as amended providing
that all persons who may have entered
the order previous to the passage Of that
amendment may, if they desire, claim
and receive, at the end Of three years
membership, the entire amount they
have paid as assessments, less any adj
vances which may have been made in
the way of sick benefits or otherwise,
when such membership shall cease.
This, the answer sets forth, is not unfair
to the plaintiffs, or to any member of
the order, nor is il unwarranted, IL
is denied that the manner of endorse
mcnt was hurried through the con
vention, while the delegates did not
fully understand or comprehend
the changes proposed, nor is it true
there was any surprise or excitement.
The answer denies that the supreme Off
GERS have given as a reason that it is on
account OF the inability of the order to
meet its obligations, and to maintain the
organization that the change in the
mode of payments was made, and it is
believed by the council that it will be
able to pay the amounts agreed to be
paid to holders of certificates at the
time when, under the constitution and
bylaws, its obligations would mature.
The bill also denies that there has been
extravagant management, or that the
affairs are not directed on sound bust
ness-like basis. 1t also denies that one
OF the chief reasons for its officers be-
lieving in the ultimate success of the
undertaking is based upon the with
drawal of many members, on account
OF the action of the Supreme Council
in adopting the amendments. The
answer further denies that persons have
been induced to pay in any money to
the order upon conditions which have
not been fulfilled. On the contrary,
persons became members with the full
knowledge that the provision of the
constitution in reference to the benefit
and relief funds could be altered at any
time by the Supreme Council, and It
denies, therefore, the right of the plain
tiffs to have the order wound up, and its
funds on hand distributed at this time.
In the Pruzan answer, it is stated that
the amount of money on deposit at the
Nicholson & Sons Bank at the time the
bank failed was about $24,000.
Taking up the bills filed asking the
court to compel the circle to specifically
perform an alleged contract, the answer
denies that specific contract existed to
pay 5000 at the end of three years, but
simply implied that 5000 might be ad-
vanced at the end OF three years, and
not that the member had a right to de-
mand such amount, or that the order
was bound to pay it. Having found,
after about four years experience, that
instead of small number of members
calling for such advance, the great ma
jority did so, the Supreme Council,
having the power so to do, made the
change, and did SO instead of calling for
about four assessments per month,
which would have been the result, it is
thought, if the original plan of payment
had been carried out. No answer is yet
filed to the bill filed by Hugo Steiner,
which demands the payment of 5000 on
all certificates maturing between Janu-
airy 10Th and February 4th-the date of
the convention-on the ground that the
order, or Supreme Council, could not
make the amendment retroactive.