Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1894-05-11
Liability in Assessment Orders.
An Interesting and Important Decision
by the Missouri supreme Court.

An Interesting and Important Decision
nv the Missouri supreme Court.
1t is generally supposed that in mutual
benefit organizations liability for assess
ments ceases with the forfeiture OF mem
bership. but recent decision of the SUI
preme court Of Missouri holds to the con
trary. This decision which was rendered
by Special Judge Alexander Martin was
given in the insurance case of the superu-
tendent, receiver of the Masonic Mutual
Benefit society of Missouri versus Barney.
former member of the association
shortly before the receiver took charge the
directors levied assessments against the
defendant amounting to Sl4O.oO TO pay
accumulated death losses. and these he Zee
fused to pay on the plea that boy the terms
of ms certificate he had the option of for
teiting ms rights under it by declining DO
pay assessments. and that such forfeiture
left the association without any right to-
collect them Suit was brought before
Justice OF the peace and Judgment render
ed against the defendant The case was
then appealed to the circuit court. ludg-
ment given for the plaintiff. and again app
pealei hv the defendant to the supreme
court which confirmed the decision of the
lower tribunal The Judge ruling s iu-
terestlng in the fact that 1T traces lu uuder-
standaDle language the connection of the
modern 1raterna beneficiary organization
with the friendly benefit societies OF Eng
land. and convlncIngIy shows that mem
Der of a mutual benefit society enters into
contract with al. the other members
which cannot be terminated at his own Woe
rf..r H
the closing sentences of the opinion. m
which Judge Martin says
"Ihe declaration that the certificate. at-
ter forfeiture. shall boz null and void, r,-
Iates To- It's future. not to Its past effect.
Now ], appeared from admitted facts thai
the appellant was in full possession of all
the rights OF membership az the date of
these assessments. and that Doe continued
10 hold them up TO the instant Of forfeit
ure 10y his failure TO pay such assessment
II he'had died after the assessments aCaIu-.
MIN and before ms failure TO pay them his
children would have been entitled TO tine
promised benefits of the certificate. Hay-
ing during all that time had the benefits
of the certificate upon consideration that
he could pay his assessment. ne is not III d
position to withhold the consideration by
refusing to keep his obligation / am not
/ prepared TO prove the startling proposition
that the appellant should have the priv
/ Iege OF paying or withholding at his pleas
ure the consideration promised Tor carry
inc a risk after the risk had been carried
/ / do not consider this contract uullatera.
In the sense OF relieving the assured from
liability for insurance carried and COnsid-
/ Grafton earned No uuiiateral contract
has ever been permitted to accomplish
such an unjust result.
This decision is OF tar-IeachIug import
auce. InasmuCh as il affects the staudiu-
OF every member OF every traJernal beneh-
5 cIary organization III the country. Instead
OF dropping out when the assessments fall
too frequently. as has been supposed TO bee
a member right, 10 would appear that
when a man Joins one of these orders be
+ enters upon contract which can only be-
aDrogated by him with the consent of the
d