The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-08-05
THE SUPREME TRIBUNAL
ANNUAL SESSION OF THE HIGHEST
COURT IN THE IL. OF II. LODGE.
A Number of Prominent knights Are
ing the 1898 Encampment.

The Supreme Tribunal, knights of
Pythias, began its session at the Denison
House yesterday afternoon by calling the
DOCKET and setting down for hearing seven
cases, which Will probably keep 1t busy I'M
I'll some time next week. This body is the
supreme court of the order and its proceed
ure Is modelled closely upon that Of the Su-
preme Court of the United States. 1t has
appellate jurisdiction over all cases deter
mined by the grand tribunals or the grand
chancelIors and original jurisdiction in
cases arising under the legislation of the
supreme Lodge. Most of the domains have
established grand tribunals, but some of
them still adhere to the original practice of
making the grand chancellor the judicial
as Well as the chief executive officer of the
domain. The cases before the Supreme Tri-
Dunal are docketed precisely as they are in
a federal court, pleas are made by attor-
neys and the rules of practice are the same.
me tribunal is composed of five men, all
OF whom are present. as follows: George +.
Seay, chief tribune, Dallas, Tex; Edward
A. Graham, Montgomery, Ala; B. r.
Chase, Lewiston, Me; John H. Alexander,
Leesburg, Va, and Z. H.. Clark, Cheyenne,
Wyo. The meeting always attracts a num-
Der of prominent men of the order and
OS5 III 0tlSllAdAICG are supreme
Chancellor Philip T. CoIgrove, of Lansing,
Mich; r. G. L. White, supreme keeper of
records and seals, and William d. Kennedy,
Of Chicago, editor of the Tribune and re-
corder of the Supreme Tribunal.
The case Of most widespread interest
among those to be heard is that Of Henry
Wellenboss, of Louisville, against r. c. L.
White, s. K. r. and S., which will be heard
on demurrer this morning. 1t grows out
of the celebrated dispute over the use Of
the ritual in the German language. 1t will
be remembered that in 1893, after the Su-
preme Lodge had enacted the law forbid
DIM the use OF the ritual in the German
language, a number Of the German lodges
held a convention in this city and seeded
from the order, forming an Independent
oody. AT this convention W~ellenboss was
a moving spirit and was made chairman of
the executive committee. lie was a men,
Der of the Supreme Lodge by virtue OF be-
ing a past grand chancellor. After the
meeting hers charges were fled against
WeLenooss and Supreme Chancellor Black
ourn appointed howard Douglass, of Gin
cinnati, as special commissioner to take
eVlueIce. M. douglass summoned Wellen-
boss TO appear, but instead he filed an an
SWer. AT the next session Of the Supreme
Lodge Chancellor Blackburn recommended
that the name of Mr.. W~ellenbOss be strick-
en- from the roster of the Supreme Lodge.
This was referred to a committee, which
reported favorably upon the
ton and the Supreme Lodge instructed the
keeper of records and seals to take his
name from the roster of the Supreme
Lodge. Mr.. White did so and now Mr.. We'll
enbOSS asks the Supreme Tribunal for a
writ OF mandate against White requiring
him TO restore his name to the roster. Past
supreme Chancellor Walter Ritchey, of
Lima, O., attorney for MI. White, yester-
day, filed a demurrer, challenging Mr..
WeIenboss's standing in court and further
setting up the fact that Mr.. White acted
in a purely administrative capacity and
cannot himself restore the name TO the
rolls. The argument this morning will come
up on this demurrer.
Another interesting point Of fraternity
law VIII come up IN the case of T.. j.
Clark against Gus Norberg, grand chan
cellor Of Nebraska. The Supreme Lodge en-
acted a statute providing that d member
might obtain from the supreme chancellor
or d grand chancellor a receipt and order
for the semi-annual pass word, instead OF
getting 1t IN the way set out by the ritual.
Norberg refused such an application from
Clark and the latter appealed from his de-
cision on the ground that the statute is
unconstitutional, lnasmuch as the cOnStitu-
ton declares the ritual paramount. An
other Of the statutes will be tested in the
case of George Samuels against the Live
Oak Lodge, Of California. This law in pro-
viding Tor transfers of membership in such
a way that the member should not lose his
membership in one lodge until accepted by
another, contains a clause to the effect that
he shall be charged d fee OF 81 by his new
lodge. The entrance fee to Live Oak Lodge
is 81 and It's contention is that the Supreme
Lodge cannot interfere with its Constitu-
tional right to fix it's entrance fee.
The case OF George Ward ct al. against
the Grand Lodge of Rhode Island is one
in which there are a whole trunk full of
documents. 1t grows out of the action had
at the lodge at Narragansett. AT one meet
ing the lodge adopted a resolution to move
and obtained a dlSpenSation from Grand
Chancellor Walter Scott for this purpose.
Ward ct al. claim that at the next meet
ing, attended by a big majority of the
members, it was decided not to move and
the dispensation was ignored. The two fac
tiOnS conducted business as a Lodge IN their
different locations and the grand chancellor
held that his diSpenSation had accomplished
the removal and Ward and his friends were
conducting a clandestine lodge. The case
went into the local courts and Ward ct al,
We're enjoined from using any of the
moneys of the lodge. While the injunction
was pending the bank failed and the money
was lost. The case comes up on appeal from
the Grand Tribunal of Rhode Island, which
sustained the grand chancellor.
Another case involves the right to use
money for the burial of the wife of a mem
Der. 1t is that of H.. c. Kanski, grand
chancellor of New York, against Alonzo
of New York. This tribunal declared that
the wording of the statute restricting the
purposes for which the funds of
subordinate lodges can be used
precludes the use of such funds for
the burial of the wife Of a member The
statute in question declares that these
funds shall be used only for ''fraternal and
question Of what is meant by this wording.
Two appeals involving disputed benefit
funds are those of Laurel Lodge, No. "A,
against James l.. Hendricks, appealed from
the Indiana tribunal and California Lodge,
No. /, against Isaac Springer.