Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1897-12-23
AN INTERESTING SUIT.

The Case OF Delaware Lodge, I. %. o. F.,
Defendant Iieiow, Appellant, VS.. George
Ailmon. Plaintiff BsIow, Respondent
Chief Justices Charge to tho Jury.
The case of Delaware Ludge, No. /,
|. o. o. f., defendant below, appellant,
vs. George Allnion. plaintiff below,
respondent. which resulted in u victory
for the lodge upon tho trial in Superior
Court last week, involves question of
great ntorest to members Of secret
societies, This court, in its charge to
the Jury, held the law to he that a
lodge member must first exhaust the
tribunals Of his order befors going to
court. Chief Justice Lore delivered
the charge, the full text of which
follows
Gentlemen of the jury--In this action
George Allmon, the plaintiff, seoks to
recover from tho Delaware Lodge, No.
|, ]. o. q. f., the corporation de
fendant, balance oil sSl for sick beno-
fits, which he claims is due to him
under The constitution and bylaws OF
the society for the period of time from
October llth, 1885, to March 9Th. 1896.
1t 10 conceded, that the plaintitf's
right to recover depends upon the con-
stitution and bylaws Of the society.
They constitute the contract between
the parties anu govern the nHse. BY
them each party is bound. The plain
tiff can recover only, by showing COM
pliance with the provisions thereof.
Where the constitution or bylaws
of the society. provide that the right OF
member TO benefits shall be ascer-
tanned in particular mode, tnat mode
must be pursued before he can enforce
his supposed right 10 the courts; unless
by the action of the society he is pre-
vented from taking such course.
This rule is founded huih on the
authority Of we'll considered cases and
upon reason.
If a member was permitted TO refuse
or neglect TO establish his right to
benefits by tho methods provided by
the rules Of the soniety, the operations
of such societies would be thrown into
confusion, their uEefulnass impaired
and the courts would be burdened by
n multitude of suits about contentious,
which should have heen eettled else
where.
II seems that under the report of the
relief committee Of the society, tho
plaintiff had been receiving sick bene.
fits for some weeks heretofore, up TO
October lith, 1885. Ile claims that
the sum so paid amounted to thirty
dollars. The society claims it amounted
to fifty dollars. At that date, upon re.
port of tho relief committee, the pay
ment of sick dues to the plaintiff was
stopped.
Section 6 of article 3 OF the conatitu-
tion of the society provides, that should
any dispute arise between the relief
committee anu the brother as to sick
benefits, tho matter should be referred
to tho lodge for its decision. Should
the decision of the lodge be adverse 10
tho member, the constitution provinces
n further remedy by an appeal to the
Grand Lodge Of Delaware.
II is concede by the counsel for tho
plaintiff, that it was tho duty Of the
plaintiff TO pursue his remedy, in the
subordinate and grand lodges; and that
he has no standing in this court unless
hs was prevented from 30 doing by the
unlawful act or proceeding OF the
| lodge itself.
We say to you that that is the law.
The plaintiff was bound to exhaust his
remedy under the constitution and by.
laws within the lodges; and if he failed
so to 40, he cannot recover in this
action unless he was unlawfully pre-
vented from pursuing such remedy by
the lodges themselves
You will mute that this case is thus
brought within very narrow limits
that is the aoution Of this one ques.
tiun: was the plaintiff prevented from
pursuing and eShausting his remedies
within the lodges by any unlawful
action of the Delaware Lodge, which
was a subordinate lotgeY If the plain
till was unlawfully prevented, the
lodge cannot set up ita own unlawful
act rs bar TO the plaintiffs recovery.
This would be permitting a person to
take advantage Of his own wrong, which
the law would navsr suffer.
The claim is, that the matter was re-
ferred 10, heard and determined by the
lodge OK parte, and without notice to
the plaintiff, and that he thereby was
unfawfuly prevented from proceeding
in the lodge according TO the constitu-
tion and by.lawa. This heing tho excuse
Of tho plaintiff for not pursuing his
remedies in the lodges, it must be
proved ny preponderance Of the evi
deuce in this case to yonr satisfaction,
or tho plaintiff cannot recover.
] Such a reference and determination
by the lodge means something. 1t
lneans dispute, raised between ths
relief committee and the member, which
is referred to the lodge for settlement,
which matter ia heard and determined
by tho lodge. 1t is for you to say
whether any such reference OF dis.
puto was ever made to the lodge, either
by the plaintiff or by the rolief com
mittee. If there was no such reference,
hearing and determination by the
lodge, the pluintilf cannot recover. The
report of the relief committee that they
had declared the plaintiff off of the
sick benefit list and the more accept
ance or adoption of such report by the
lodge would not III law amount to such
II reference, hearing and determination.
IL the jury shall beieve from the evi
dence that the plsintiif received notice
that he had bean declared no longer
entitled to sick heuetits then 1t was
his duty TO apply to the lodge for a
hearing, and it he did not do Ho, he
cannot maintain his action.
u