Pine Bluff daily graphic., 1914-06-24
Supreme Court Upholds Oath of Members of Many
 Religious Orders.
MONKS KINSMEN LOSE
Decision Made in Case of Father AU. guStin Wirth, St. Bencdictine i;0nk, Whose Relatives Sought to Ac-
 quire Property of S5,0O6.

Washington. June 23-Doubt east on the validity of vows to poverty Ill many Catholic orders was remove Monday by the United States supreme court reversing the decision of tue Eighth United States circuit coN"t of appeals.
 Justice Holmes said the lower cGuE' had erred by not distinguishing b%- tween religious and civil natures oi vows.
 The case arose in the settlement oi the estate of Father Augustlh Wirth, in charge of church at Springfield, Minn., at the time 1f A's death.
 Relatives Claim Estate.
 Father Augnstin Wirth, a member of the Order of St. Benedict of Nc" Jersey-a Roman Catholic mohastlc oi oider-died at Springfield, Minr, oh December p, 1901. He was a BaVa' ria who came to this country Fl lsoe and became priest and member oi the order in Pennsylvania. He re- mained in the order until his dealE' although in 1897 he was transferred to Springfield, Minn., where he per formed the duties of a secular priest as pastor of tine German Catnollc church there. When he died, ms heirs at law, a brother, nephew ana a niece, claimed his estate, amount" ing to about 5000. This sum was obtained by the priest from hls WILL ings and from Investments.
 The order immediately claimed thls estate. taking part of it and lnstltut ing suit for the remainder. The snl' was filed in the federal circuit court Tho Vow of Poverty. Copies of the VOW of the order, pro Guced in evidence, showed that the priest had promised to give to the c1der all the property he then had or expected to acquire, and ill retulh the order pledged itself ot care fo1 Eim during his lifetime. During the term of his membership In monas- tery in Kansas, it developed that tn; abbot gave him permission to Wri1f certain books and receive the income from them. There appeared to navs been no stipulation as to what was te be done with this money, other thaf tEat the priest was tt receive it anc keep it. No demand was made upol hin. during his lifetime that he turl | it over to the common fund.- of lht | ol der On the other hand, it develop ed that after 1897 he received no as sistance from the order, although i was not claimed by him or anyone else that this acted as waiver O. the orders claims upon him.
 Earned Money With Books. bo .,bbo+ +oStifiod +bot thpca VOWf could be set asdie only by an officia dispensation by the Pope and that nc other prelate of the church had au thority to dispense them.a hteres was added to the case by the fact tha the VOWS taken by the priest an' forming the kernel of this legal prob fem were originated by St. Benedlc of Nursia, monk of renown wht liye ed in the sixth century.
 The federal court of appeals helt that the VOW plainly was an evidence 1 oi civil contract, but that it boun. members to a state of physical ant mental sevitude for life" which tho courts could not countenance. Be ! sides, said the court, every American citizen has the, inherent right to hol( property and no court or judicial de cision can deny this right. Having the right to hold property, the righ also deyolves of disposing of it ac cOrding tc law. Therefore, such ; contract as this was not legally en fo,ceable
 In addition the court held, it Wal ; pertinent to remark that the abbo never objected to the priests receiv