The QUEEN v. GRANT and others. 1849. July 5th. 4 & 5 Will. 4, reciting the A RULE had been obtained calling upon George The statute Grant and others to show cause why a certain order, c. 40, s. 7, brought into this Court by certiorari, and made by stat. 10 Geo. 4, justices in and for the West Riding of the county of c. 56 (Friendly Societies' Act), York, dated the 11th January, 1847, whereby the gives justices president, stewards and members of a certain friendly cases jurisdiction in cases where arsociety, called the Leeds Philanthropic Society, duly pointed pursubitrators apestablished and holden at Leeds in the said riding, ant to the latter under the stat. 10 Geo. 4, c. 56, were adjudged and neglected or reordered forthwith to reinstate Philemon Jaques in the said society, and readmit him to all the benefit arising therefrom accordingly, should not be quashed for insufficiency. The order adjudicated, that Philemon Jaques, of Wakefield, in the West Riding, shoemaker, for eighteen months and upwards, before the making of the said complaint, had been and was admitted a member of the Leeds Philanthropic Society, duly established and holden at Leeds in the said riding, under a certain act of parliament (10 Geo. 4, c. 56); that the rules of the said society had been duly enrolled, by which said rules it is provided, that all matters in dispute, between the said society and any person claiming to be a member, shall statute have fused to make an award. An order made by justices of the West riding adjudicated, that one P. J. having been ex- was referred to they neglected and refused to make any award; and it then went on to said P. J. be readjudge, that the instated as a member of the said society. It appeared by the affidavits that the said society was formed at Leeds, and that the meetings were held and the business transacted there; but members need not reside within the borough of Leeds, and the rules of the society were enrolled with the clerk of the peace for the West Riding. By rule 26, matters in dispute are to be referred to arbitrators, who are required to hear evidence on both sides, and their decision is to be final and binding on all parties. It also appeared that an award had been made, but that the arbitrators, when the case was before them, refused to hear the evidence which the said P. J. alleged he was then prepared to produce. The order being brought into this Court by certiorari:-1. Held, that the adjudication in the order, that the arbitrators had neglected and refused to make an award, was not conclusive of that fact, inasmuch as it is an adjudication upon one of the preliminaries necessary for constituting the justices a lawful tribunal for this matter, and not an adjudication of a fact which arose in the course of an inquiry in which it was previously shown they had jurisdiction:-2. Held, that, the arbitrators having refused to hear evidence on one side, the award was not final and binding on the parties, according to the rules of the society, and within the terms and intention of the 10 Geo. 4, c. 56; and the order, therefore, stated the legal effect of such award :-3. Held, that the justices for the West Riding had jurisdiction to make the order. 1849. The QUEEN บ. GRANT and others. be referred to arbitration; that the said Philemon Jaques, by reason of a diseased spine, was rendered incapable of working, and received 9s. a week from the funds of the society up to the 24th October last; that on the 2nd of November the society illegally expelled the said Jaques from all benefit and advantage from the said society; that on the 3rd November, on the application of the said Philemon Jaques to the said society, the said matter in dispute was referred to three arbitrators, appointed in that behalf pursuant to the said rules, and the provisions of the statute in such case made and provided, who should hear evidence on both sides, and finally decide the said matter in difference; that though the said arbitrators had often, before the making of the said complaint, been called upon by the said Philemon Jaques to hear evidence on both sides touching the said matter in dispute, and to make their award therein, they, the said arbitrators, have, until and at the time of the making of the said complaint, and thence continually hitherto, wholly neglected and refused so to do, and still neglect and refuse so to do; that the said Philemon Jaques then made his complaint to a justice of the West Riding, and that the case was heard in the presence of the said Philemon Jaques and George Grant; wherefore we, the said justices, have now here proceeded to hear and determine, and have heard and determined upon lawful evidence, upon oath taken before us on the said hearing the matter of the said complaint, according to the true purport and meaning of the said rules, orders and regulations of the said society, and according to the directions of the said statutes in such case made and provided; and we, the said justices, do hereby, on the hearing aforesaid, adjudge and determine that all and singular the premises and allegations are true; and therefore we do order and adjudge, by virtue of the statute in such case made and provided, that the said Philemon Jaques be forthwith reinstated in the said society, and readmitted into all the benefits and advantages thereof; and we do order and require you, the president, stewards and members of the said society, forthwith to reinstate the said Philemon Jaques, and readmit him into all the benefits arising therefrom accordingly. Given under our hands and seals, at the court house in Wakefield, in the riding aforesaid, the 11th January, A.D. 1847. J. HOLDSWORTH (L.S.) 1849. The QUEEN v. GRANT and others. It appeared from the affidavits on which the rule was obtained, that, at a club meeting held on the 2nd November, 1846, Philemon Jaques was expelled the society; that the disputes were referred to three arbitrators duly appointed; that at a meeting of the arbitrators, held on the 20th of November, the reference was entered upon; that evidence on the part of the society was given in the presence of the said Philemon Jaques, who, when called upon for his defence, said, that the evidence which had been given on the part of the society was true, but that he had several witnesses to speak to his character and alleged illness. In an affidavit made by Philemon Jaques he stated, that what he said was, that he had witnesses ready to call to the merits of the matters in dispute. The witnesses were not heard, and the arbitrators then made their award, which was as follows: "We, the major part of the arbitrators duly appointed by the Philanthropic Society, established at Leeds, in the county of York, do hereby award and order, that Philemon Jaques be expelled from the said society. Dated the 30th day of November, 1846. "W. M. "W. F. "J. D." 1849. The QUEEN บ. GRANT and others. The affidavits also stated, that the society was established, and all the meetings thereof were held, at and in the borough of Leeds, and not elsewhere; and that the expulsion, arbitration and dispute took place in the borough of Leeds; that the borough of Leeds has and then had a separate Court of Quarter Sessions; and that the justices for the borough had exclusively exercised the jurisdiction of the justices of the peace in and for the borough, as fully as by the law the justices assigned to keep the peace in and for the said riding in which the borough of Leeds is situate can or ought to do for the West Riding. Jaques, in his affidavit in opposition to the rule, stated, that the rules, orders and regulations of the society were enrolled under the stat. 10 Geo. 4, c. 56, at the quarter sessions for the West Riding, held October, 1831, and afterwards filed at the office of the clerk of the peace at Wakefield; and that persons not resident in the borough of Leeds might be members of the society. Rule 26 of the society provided, that all matters in dispute between this society or any person acting under it, and any individual member, or person claiming on account of any member, shall be referred to arbitration, pursuant to the stat. 10 Geo. 4, c. 56, s. 27. And such arbitrators shall hear evidence on both sides, and their decision shall be binding on all parties, and shall be final. It was contended, on the part of the society, 1, that the matter in dispute arose in Leeds, and that the justices of the West Riding had no jurisdiction; 2, that the justices had no jurisdiction to make the order, under the stat. 4 & 5 Will. 4, c. 40, s. 7, because the arbitrators had not refused to make an award, but had made an award which, by the rules of the society, was binding and conclusive between the parties (a). (a) The misconduct imputed to Philemon Jaques was that of working during the term he was receiving relief from the society, R. Hall showed cause (a). The stat. 4 & 5 Will. 4, c. 40, s. 7 (b), gives the justices jurisdiction to make an order respecting disputes among members of friendly societies, in cases where arbitrators, appointed under the stat. 10 Geo. 4, c. 56, s. 27, have neglected or refused to make an award. They are, therefore, constituted the judges of the question, whether there has or has not been any award made. They have heard the evidence on both sides, and find in their order that the arbitrators did neglect and refuse to make an award; and such finding must, on the authority of Regina v. Bolton (c), and the cases there cited, be held to be conclusive of that fact. But it appears by the affidavits that in point of contrary to rule 12, which provides, that no member shall be allowed to do any kind of work during the time he receives the benefit specified in this rule, except receiving or paying money, giving verbal orders to servants or other persons, or signing his name to a receipt or other writing. (a) November 18th, 1848, before Lord Denman, C. J., Coleridge, Wightman and Erle, Js. (b) 4 & 5 Will. 4, c. 40, s. 7. "And whereas in and by the said recited act (10 Geo. 4, c. 56) provision is directed to be made by the rules of every society, whether reference of any matter in dispute shall be made to jus tices or to arbitrators: and whereas it is expedient that further provision should be made in case the reference is to arbitrators, be it therefore enacted, that when the rules of any society provide for a reference to arbitrators of any matter in dispute, and it shall appear to any justice of the peace, on the complaint on oath of a member of any such society, or of any person claiming on account of such member, that application has been made to such society, or the steward or other officer thereof, for the purpose of having any dispute so settled by arbitration, and that such application has not within forty days been complied with, or that the arbitrators have neglected or refused to make any award, it shall and may be lawful for such justice to summon the trustee, treasurer, steward or other officer of the society, or any one of them against whom the complaint is made, and for any two justices to hear and determine the matter in dispute, in the same manner as if the rules of the said society had directed that any matter in dispute as aforesaid should be decided by justices of the peace, any thing in the said recited act contained to the contrary notwithstanding." (c) 1 Q. B. R. 66. N. S. C. 1849. The QUEEN บ. GRANT and others |