Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1918-04-06
JUSTICE EVANS TAKES FRATER-
NIFTY TO TASK FOR SEEKING TO
BOOST OLD MEMBERS RATES.
SOCIETY SOUGHT TO PUT
OLD MEN IN ONE CLASS
Court Holds All Members Of Same
Order Must Be Classified Together
and That Discrimination Is Illegal
Fraternity Proposed to Increase
Rates $50 to $50 Per Cent.
Special 10 Times-Repu blican.

Special TO Times Republican.
Des Moines, April 6.-The, decision
of the Iowa supreme court enjoining
the grand lodge Of the A. o. U. w.
from enforcing its new rates applicable
only to the old members Of those put
in division A will stand because OF the
action yesterday overriding a pet...on
for a rehearing.
When the Iowa grand lodge of the
Workmen attempted to put into effect
a new bylaw putting the older mem
hers into class by themselves and
fixing a rate which was from $50 to $50
per cent higher than the rate these
men had been paying several of the
Des Moines members Joined together
and started suit. These members We're
John E. Tusant, John NJ. McPherrin,
and William Campbell, all of them
connected with the order for many
years. In the Polk county court before
Judge Ayres they were successful in
securing an injunction restraining the
lodge from putting these rates into
effect and the supreme court upheld
the restraining order. The high court
has now refused to reconsider the case.
Justice Evans in writing the opinion
took the management of the lodge to
task for this plan He said it was like
the story of the white man and the
Indian who went hunting together and
shot a turkey and a buZzard. When 1t
came time to divide the results Of the
hunt the white man said:
You take the buzzard and III take
the turkey or I'll take the turkey and
you take the buzzard."
The Indian quickly replied, you
never said turkey to me-"
npinio: es Court
In reviewing the history OF the case
the supreme court opinion among
other things says:
Under the decision the court holds
that the erection of classes was in
effective and that all OF the members
Of the order are members Of the same
order and the same class. The rates to
the old members were increased $50 to
$50 per cent. Division 4, in which the
older men were put, has rs members
THE 115 members are assessed at a
rate fixed BY computations Of actuaries
which win be sufficient to pay the
cartier death losses as they occur and
to build UP reserve sufficient to pay
the beneficiary OF the last man to sue
cums. BY Tits plan tho problem ot
the insolvency (Which had been al
leged) has been rendered exceedingly
simple If the older members pay the
rates OF assessment imposed so1vency
will thereby be accomplished. II they
fail to pay they must lapse and SOL
vency win be likewise accomplished.
TN other words the alleged insol-
vency of the order was gathered into
this one place and was charged up to
these older members on the theory
that they were responsible for it. But
they were allowed The generous option
of taking it OF letting It alone. 1t is
enough that the body Of the younger
membership was wholly exempted
from it's obligations. The method
adopted to bring abort this result i'm
presses US as somewhat original
In summing up the charges which the
plaintiffs make against the action Of
the grand lodge it is stated in the
opinion that the plaintiffs challenge
the power of the grand lodge to estab-
lish two so called divisions to occupy
the same 0elQ OF insurance, L!lty
challenge its power to make an
amendment so fundamental as toI
change the character of the order by
converting It from a mutual assess
ment company paying death losses
when they occur, te what in practical
effect is an old time investment com
pany; they challenge the new rate
proposed as being unreasonable and
inequitable and the proposed scaling
Of certificates as Illegal. These pro-
positions are reducibie to one ultimate
proposition concludes the supreme
court, were the acts done and pro-
posed by the order so beyond bonds
of reas onableness in a legal sense that
they should be held ineffective?"
In its conclusions the high court
does hold the acts Ineffective 1t is
possible the case win be appealed to
the United States supreme court.