The Mankato free press. [volume] (Mankato, Blue Earth County, Minn.) 1879-1924, 1912-07-26
Judge Dancer, Duluth, Takes the
Matter Under Amusement.
CLAIMS MADE BY Mr.. COLLIER
Contends That He Is Still the Imperial
Treasurer; Arguments Presented
BY Plaintiffs.

Duluth, July 24-Arguments in the
case of the Modern Samaritan fra
ternal order, wherein it is sought to
have Oliver F. Collier enjoined from
sitting as member of the imperial
council Or interfering with the meet
ings of that body, and also to COM
pei him to turn over the funds and
books of the order to c. E. Bonn
back, who was elected to succeed
Collier as imperial treasurer, occu-
pied the entire day yesterday in
Judge Dancers court and the judge
has taken the case under advise
ment. 1t is expected he will hand
down an opinion this week.
The case was brought by John
Christie, C. E. Bomback, w. A.
Hicken, C. E. Lovett, Herman j.
Achenbach, Don E. McLennan, w. H.
Salter, z. H. Austin and A. G. Nc
knight, who compose the executive
board of the order.
Refused to Be Fired Out.
1t is claimed in the petition that
Collier has not been member OF
the board since the second Tuesday
in June, and has no right to attend
meetings of the board or interfere
with its affairs, but despite that fact,
says the petition, he has insisted
on obtruding himself at the boards
meetings and although requested to
leave, refused to do so, and threat
ened to resist by physical violence
any attempt to remove him from
the July meeting. The petition re-
cites that he threatens to take like
action at the August meeting and in
fact all other meetings of the
board, and that it is impossible for
the board to transact any business
unless Collier is prevented from in
terfering. ...
Claims Made BY Collier.
On the other hand Collier claims
to still be a member of the board
and the bona fide treasurer of the
order, by reason of the fact that the
election at which his alleged success
sor was elected was illegal, and he
maintains that he is still such, even
though his term may have expired
last month, by reason of clause
in the bylaws that says an officer
is entitled to hold until his successor
is duly elected and qualified.
He claims, and the claim is ad-
mitted by the plaintiffs, that the no.
tice of the election at which his
successor was elected was not given
by the imperial scribe, as provided
by the bylaws, but by John c. Chris
tie. The plaintiffs contend that that
is immaterial, so long as notice was
actually given.
Attacks Councils Standing.
He further contends that the pres
ent action is void, as it was brought
in the name of the executive council
and a majority of them were OPP
posed to il. Whether the action was
brought by majority of the execu-
tive council depends on whether the
expulsion from the board of w. A..
Hicken, imperial scribe, and A. E.
McManus, general counsel for the
order, was improperly done. If it is
found that they were legally men,
bers of the board at the time the
present action was brought then
they are still members of the board
and that they were illegally expelled
by pretended members of the board.
without notice or sufficient cause or
any opportunity to defend them
selves, as is provided for in the by
laws and constitution of the order.
Regardless of the Merits.
So, regardless of the merits of Col
lier's case, if it is found that Nc
Manus and Hicken are still board
members, it must necessarily be ad-
United that the action in starting
the present suit against Collier was
not done by the majority of the
board, and therefore is improper and
void.
They were both expelled for COM
uniting acts which the plaintiffs
claim, rendered them subject to ex-
Continued on Page Two.