Haacke v. Knights of Liberty Social & Literary Club

Fowler, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. The appellant was the treasurer of the appellee, which is a social and literary club of Baltimore City, incorporated under the general incorporation laws of this State. As such treasurer he received from time to time, on Sundays and week days, money belonging to the club. He made a statement in writing of the moneys so received by him, and also of the amount expended by him, showing a balance in his hands due the club of something less than two hundred dollars.

He refused, however, to pay this balance, claiming that he was responsib ⁴³⁷ le for certain rent due by the association. Subsequently he promised to pay the amount so admitted to be due, but failed to do so, and the appellee sued him in assumpsit on the common counts. A judgment was recovered for the amount claimed to be due, and the question presented arises upon exceptions taken by the defendant to the rejection'of the prayers offered by him, and the granting of those of the plaintiff. The propositions announced in the defendant’s prayers are that, if the money in question was the result of work done or sales made on Sunday, in violation of our Sunday law, or if such work or business was illegal and ultra vires, or if the charter of the appellee was fraudulently obtained, or the' election of its officers was illegal, then under none of these circumstances can the appellant recover.

The instructions granted at the instance of the plaintiff were to the effect that, if the defendant on any other day than Sunday promised to pay the money in question to the plaintiff, it was immaterial whether the defendant obtained possession of the money on Sunday or other days, or whether it was the result of work done or sales made on Sunday. Assuming that the funds of the club came into the hands of the officer, the appellant, contrary to law, and as the result of business done in violation of the Sunday law and of the charter of the appellee, we do not think the defendant should be allowed to escape liability in this case, upon any such pretexts. What the rights of the State may be in proceedings taken by it to forfeit the charter, or how far the appellee may be proceeded against for the alleged flagrant violations of law, are questions which cannot now be properly considered. The appellant was a member of the appellee club, and, according to the theory on which his prayers are based, he participated in the violations of law and the ⁴³⁸ infringements of the charter he now relies on as a justification for refusing to pay it money which he admits was in fact 'the property of the appellee.

Neither the alleged fraud of the appellee in obtaining its charter, Pattison vs. Albany Build. and Loan Association, 63 Ga., 313 , the illegal election of its officers, Mech. Nat. Bank of Newark vs. Burnet Mfg. Co., 32 N. J. Eq., 236, nor the alleged violations of its charter by the appellee, Uni ted