The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1896-12-03

chase of additional real estate for SEM
mary purposes. Even the payment of
travelling expenses. incurred by the
board of trustees was met from the
treasury Of the conference, and in 1880
that body determined by resolution to
create a permanent fund of $4,000 to
provide for the payment of the sal
aries of the professors OF the seminary
In 1889 step was inaugurated which
eliminated in 1890 in the union of the
conference, and the Augustana Synod
and the -MiSSourian brotherhood,
into what is known as the United Nor
wegian Lutheran church. The confer
ence, at its first meeting in 1890 and
just prior to it's being merged into the
United church, adopted the following
resolution:
THE board of trustees of the Semi
nary is authorized to amend the arti-
cles of Incorporation SO that the board
instead of being elected at and by the
annual meeting Of the conference, is
to be elected at and by the annual
meeting of the United Norwegian Luth-
eran church..
The United church became an incor-
porated body in 1891
The articles of union upon which the
United church was formed, as above
stated, provided among other things,
for the transference "of all school prop
erty both real estate and endowment"
belonging to the conference. Unques-
ticnably this contemplated the Augs-
burg seminary, for l find in the said
articles the following provision:
THAT a theological school be estab-
lished and maintained
This theological school shall be the
Augsburg seminary Of Minneapolis"
From expressions used in various re-
&c n 70 H.
trustees Of the seminary to the United
church, no other conclusion can be
reached than that the autkSTs of such
reports assumed that the seminary was
the agent of the church in carrying out
the purposes of it's organization.
The evidence with which I am pre-
sented, documentary and otherwise i'm
presses me strongly with the belief that
from 1872 to 1892 the uniform relation
between the seminary and the associ-
alton or church, is consonant only with
the view that the former was the off
spring of the latter, conceived, fostered
and supported by it, and this view was,
l am convinced, shared during that
period by both the trustees Of the semi
nary and the members of the associ-
alton and its successor, the United
church.
Two questions remain to be consider
ed:
What is the present legal status of
the seminary with reference to the
United church?
Is the controversy one requiring or
justifying the intervention of the state?
g 1t is urged that Augsburg seminary
was as first organized, merely a de
2 facto corporation. Certainly the arti-
cles were not strictly in conformity
with the requirements Of the statute
under which the corporation assumed
"a (1arrra rafr I,
act was passed for the purpose of heal
ing the defects characterizing the orig1-
nal articles. If the original incorpora-
ton was invalid it may we'll be doubt
ed whether under the constitution of
this state the legislature could by the
act in question create private corpo-
ration as it in legal effect assumed to
do.
But the question is Of little moment
as l view it, as de jure corporation
resulted from the enactment of several
general curative laws from 1881 to 1891
inclusive.
AS l understand the facts, the mem
bers OF the board of trustees of the
seminary were for long period both
prior and subsequent to the date of the
valid Incorporation, chosen by the con-
ference. This was dore and acuuiesced
in under the belief of all parties that
members of the conference Were pro
hac Vice members of the seminary cor
poratiCn. This was, however. a mis-
conception of the legal character of the
corporation. Whatever it's duty to the
conference or the ownership in equity
of the property it had acquired, the
corporate entity existed independently
OF the conference.
1t is doubtless true, however, that the
corporation became the agent or trus-
tee of the conference or church for the
administration Of trust funds and their
employment in the education of theo-
logical students of the Lutheran
church. The only provision in the ar
ticles to which my attention has been
directed, which supports the contention
that the seminary trustees were to be
elected by the conference or the united
church is the special curative act or
1877, which, under a title SUGGESTING
only the 'radfying and confirming the
election Of trustees of the seminary
contains an amendatory provision that
the trustees shall be elected by the con-
ference. But the amendment is MANI
testify in violation of art T. sec 81 Of
the constitution AS a corporation
then, the seminary stands upon its own
feet and contains within itself the re-
Quisite legal machinery for effectua-
ting the purposes of it's being In short
the united church has no voice what
ever In. the election of trustees.
With all Difference to the views OF
| counsel, | am unable to perceive how
any other view is at all tenable under
the facts with which l have been pre-
scented.
From the view above taken as to the
legal status of the seminary the re-
manning question is easily disposed or
L am requested upon the complaint
of Nils c. Brun and others to permit
the name Of the state to be used in
an action against Sven Oftedal and
others. assuming to act as the trustees
of the seminary, for the purpose of eX-
Guiding them from the offices of trus-
tees and to fine them for usurping the
said offices.
COmplainants claim to be the trIls-
tees of the institution by reason of
their election thereto by the members
of the united church in June, 1896. For.
reasons already stated, I am unable to
accord with the view that complain
ants have any right by reason of the
| said election, nor am I satisfied thai
the facts would justify the attorney
general in proceeding upon his own
relation.
Furthermore, am convinced that
applicants enjoy the right of another
adequate remedy, and that reason
alone might be relied upon by me in de-
Ginning to permit the use of the name
of the state.
For the reasons above stated, the
| use of the name of the state is refused
SuDreIne Court Call To-day