The Montgomery advertiser., 1906-07-28
Receiver Appointed by
 Court. EJECT ELDAH's SUCCESSOR Granger Severely Roasted in Opinion Handed Down.
 - Deeis,en in Famous Controversy Be- tween veliva ard the One Great Prophet VIII Probably Be
 Appealed.

Chicago. July N.--Juoge Lands. or the United States District Coars eave between the adherents of John Alex ander Dowie and Wilbur Voiiva. over the property at Zion City.
 The court holds that Zion City and its industries do not belong to Dowie ---fhat. while the contributors or tn9 fund did not express formal deeiar- ation of trust, q trust was created. ana Dowie had no right to treat the prop- erty as his own.
 The court refused to appoint Alexan- der Granger receiver for the reason that Granger made a vow recognizing DoWie as .'Ynessenger of the covenant the prophet foretoId by Moses and Elijah the restorer." to which vow ail fam fly ties and obligations and all citations to human governments shall De held subordinate. ss .
 The court said he was not obliged to repose confidence in man so con stituted that. living in this republic he would eerenely VOW his readiness at all times to abandon hts family and De- tray his country.
 The court ordered an election on the third Tuesday of September of gem eral cverseer. all members or the GnULGM E8Ht021A k<&tf%t s-eNSp t~--e- female. to have ono vote He announce ed that suitable provisions would De made for Dowie, on account of his ser vices as trustee.
 Following is the decision:
 DeeshIsn of Judge Landis.
 It appears that Dowie, native of Scotland. who had received a theolog- tcaI education. came from Australia to the Pacific Coast in 1888 and remained there for a number of years. engaged il. church work; from there he came to Chicago and in 1899 undertook the Zion Cisy enterprise Tn execution of scheme conceived by him many years before; that he purchased q vast tract of land, a part of which was sub d. vided and laid out in perk and resi- dence property. provision being made for manufacturing sites; that the rrantees of building lots erected houses Accommodating coco or S,voO people; that DoNle constructed sehoct houses ana colIeHe buildings at a coat or sew nraI hundred thousand doliArs aud Q tabernaele seating LOCO people. and that a lace factory. soap works ana other industrial enterprises were ss- tablished to give employment te tne fnhabitants of Zion City, who were practically all members of the church. The financing of this scheme was ac- complished in part by moneys received from purchasers of lots under 1O0-yeaf lenses. but a large part of the capital was money contributed to Dowie by tersons outside of zion City.
 Dowie's testimony respecting the or igin of the property and his reiations to it.is then quoted as follows;
 Do As He Pleased.
 .sI acquired this property by the gen. Arossty of good people throughout the world I have looked on the estate as a rasiflk largely of my good sense un- der God; I believe the property to De couapletely mine, to do with it as please. I consider, however, that the way got the property Dinos me onsrc, nrso' iuteIy, when have ceased 10 control fo put in trust in perpetuity Tor tne Christian Catholic Apostolic Church with the exception of two and nali per cent, which I think is fair for my self and family"
 After calling attention to tne IacI that sillasmuch at oVliva's conveyanceI fo Granger were in plain violation ot inc spirit of Dowie's power of attorney ko yoliva, which the court holds, both Vniiva and Granger we'll knew, the court said:
 "As between Dowie and vciiva and Granger. these instruments were mere waste paper"
 The court than traced Dowie's church career beginning in Australia down to his work in Zion City. and found that Dowie had foi many years been in re- cefpt of a large revenue which he de- voted to church and charity purposes rreRated in soma cases $25Os s000; that povvta has not sought to anass a pri- vata fortune; hut that he engaged In senular occupation in aid of the propa- wation of his religious doctrines.
 The court thcn says:
 1a-| ~rl waRo nt aouity that where parson accepts money in property to be used by him for the advancement of some lawful anternrfse, such money or property ronstitutes a trust estate.
 Were Offerings For Dowie.
 'sThe inquiry then Is. did these of. ferIngs come to Dowie for his private rurse' or did the contributors intend that the funds should be devot@d tc ehsritabIA or religious uses. If for snv other purpose than the purely per -onai benefit of Dewie. the estate Is . trust. If the relation of the parties Il aaA of confidence. or if he who receives the money is in a position of Influence aver him who gives the money. as, fo' srstsnee If the person receiving thu -nonAy Is an advocate of religious faith and by word and attitude and environ. went induces conviction Tn the mind. oV large numbers of people. that. as ar s,.strunoentaIity of divine authority, ht cen and does relieve physical ills and ss eiethed with power to exert Influence nthe spiritual welfare of men anf s,,oroen who thereupon give him oi tbeir lands and goods, surely a motive of such gift ought not long remain ( Soubt in the minds of rational men.
 1rbe fact that such contribution: come to him in the form of cheeks and currency through the mail ana aTnress, the contributor emitting to re cnSre the execution of formal de, cfaration of trust. does not tend to al. s,ast inc transactions of the real char scter It is just as if the contributor asttInr in q church pew the funds or the collection plate passed to him by \ deacon. Surely in such case the eour would not decree that the person nigh nut the money in his pocket on tho al. feTed score of non agreement to thu contrary.
 No Private Owuershlp.
 'Ht would be difficult to. conceive O. anything more inherently inconsisten fhsn powie's claim of private owner shIp and his admission of trust obliga, ffon for the spiritual welfare of gen erations unbovn He says it is his owr nroperty. and yet he coSslders that be Snusa of the way he gseS it he Is abso