The Providence Hospital of the City of Washington was
incorporated by the Act of Congress of August 7, 1864, c. 50, 13
Stat. 43, which gave to it
"full power and all the rights of opening and keeping a hospital
in the City of Washington for the care of such sick and invalid
persons as may place themselves under the treatment and care of the
said corporation."
By the Act of March 3, 1897, c. 387, 29 Stat. 665, making
appropriations for the District of Columbia, an appropriation of
$30,000 was made for two isolating buildings, to be constructed in
the discretion of the Commissioners of the District on the grounds
of two hospitals, and to be operated as a part of such hospitals.
Under that authority, the Commissioners made an agreement with the
Providence Hospital, which was a private hospital, in charge of
sisters of the Roman Catholic Church, for the construction of an
isolating building or ward on the hospital grounds, and for the
receipt therein of poor patients sent there by the Commissioners,
and for payments by the District on that account to the hospital.
Held that the agreement was one which it was within the
power of the Commissioners to make, and that it did not conflict
with the provision in Article I of the Amendments to the
Constitution that "Congress shall make no law respecting an
establishment of religion."
Page 175 U. S. 292
This is a suit in equity, brought by the appellant to enjoin the
defendant from paying any moneys to the directors of Providence
Hospital, in the City of Washington, under an agreement entered
into between the commissioners of the District of Columbia and the
directors of the hospital, by virtue of the authority of an act of
Congress, because of the alleged invalidity of the agreement for
the reasons stated in the bill of complaint. In that bill,
complainant represents that he is a citizen and taxpayer of the
United States and a resident of the District of Columbia, that the
defendant is the Treasurer of the United States, and the object of
the suit is to enjoin him from paying to or on account of
Providence Hospital, in the City of Washington, District of
Columbia, any moneys belonging to the United States, by virtue of a
contract between the surgeon general of the army and the directors
of that hospital, or by virtue of an agreement between the
commissioners of the District of Columbia and such directors, under
the authority of an appropriation contained in the sundry civil
appropriation bill for the District of Columbia, approved June 4,
1897.
Complainant further alleged in his bill:
"That the said Providence Hospital is a private eleemosynary
corporation, and that to the best of complainant's knowledge and
belief it is composed of members of a monastic order or sisterhood
of the Roman Catholic Church, and is conducted under the auspices
of said church; that the title to its property is vested in the
'Sisters of Charity of Emmitsburg, Maryland;' that it was
incorporated by a special act of Congress approved April 8, 1864,
whereby, in addition to the usual powers of bodies corporate and
politic, it was invested specially with"
"full power and all the rights of opening and keeping a hospital
in the City of Washington for the care of such sick and invalid
persons as may place themselves under the treatment and care of
said corporation."
"That in view of the sectarian character of said Providence
Hospital and the specific and limited object of its creation, the
said contract between the same and the surgeon general of the army
and also the said agreement between the same and
Page 175 U. S. 293
the commissioners of the District of Columbia are unauthorized
by law, and, moreover, involve a principle and a precedent for the
appropriation of the funds of the United States for the use and
support of religious societies, contrary to the article of the
Constitution which declares that Congress shall make no law
respecting a religious establishment, and also a precedent for
giving to religious societies a legal agency in carrying into
effect a public and civil duty which would, if once established,
speedily obliterate the essential distinction between civil and
religious functions."
"That the complainant and all other citizens and taxpayers of
the United States are injured by reason of the said contract and
the said agreement, in virtue whereof the public funds are being
used and pledged for the advancement and support of a private and
sectarian corporation, and that they will suffer irreparable damage
if the same are allowed to be carried into full effect by means of
payments made through or by the said defendant out of the Treasury
of the United States, contrary to the Constitution and declared
policy of the government."
The agreement above mentioned, between the commissioners of the
District of Columbia and the directors of Providence Hospital, is
annexed to the bill, and is as follows:
"Articles of agreement entered into this sixteenth day of
August, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and
ninety-seven, by the between the commissioners of the District of
Columbia and the directors of Providence Hospital, a body corporate
in said District, whereby it is agreed on the part of the
commissioners of the District of Columbia --"
"That they will erect on the grounds of said hospital an
isolating building or ward for the treatment of minor contagious
diseases, said building or ward to be erected without expense to
said hospital, except such as it may elect, but to be paid out of
an appropriation for that purpose contained in the District
appropriation bill approved March 3, 1897, on plans to be furnished
by the said commissioners, and approved by the health officer of
the District of Columbia, and that, when the said building or ward
is fully completed, it shall be turned
Page 175 U. S. 294
over to the officers of Providence Hospital, subject to the
following provisions:"
"First. That two-thirds of the entire capacity of said isolating
building or ward shall be reserved for the use of such poor
patients as shall be sent there by the commissioners of the
District from time to time through the proper officers. For each
such patient, said commissioners and their successors in office are
to pay at the rate of two hundred and fifty dollars ($250) per
annum for such a time as such patient may be in the hospital,
subject to annual appropriations by Congress."
"Second. That persons able to pay for treatment may make such
arrangements for entering the said building or ward as shall be
determined by those in charge thereof, and such persons will pay
the said Providence Hospital reasonable compensation for such
treatment, to be fixed by the hospital authorities, but such
persons shall have the privilege of selecting their own physicians
and nurses, and in case physicians and nurses are selected other
than those assigned by the hospital, it shall be at the expense of
the patient making the request."
"And said Providence Hospital agrees to always maintain a
neutral zone of forty (40) feet around said isolating building or
ward and grounds connected therewith to which patients of said ward
have access."
"As witness the signatures and seals of John W. Ross, John B.
Wight, and Edward Burr, Acting Commissioners of the District of
Columbia, and the corporate seal of the said The Directors of
Providence Hospital and the signature of president thereof, this
sixteenth day of August, A.D. 1897."
The contract, if any, between the directors and the surgeon
general of the army is not set forth in the bill, and the contents
or conditions thereof do not in any way appear.
The defendant demurred to the bill on the ground that the
complainant had not in and by his bill shown any right or title to
maintain the same; also upon the further ground that the
complainant had not stated such a case as entitled him to the
relief thereby prayed or any relief as against the defendant.
Page 175 U. S. 295
Complainant joined issue upon the demurrer, and at a term of the
Supreme Court of the District of Columbia, the demurrer was
overruled and the injunction granted as prayed for. 26 Wash.Law
Rep. 84. Upon appeal to the Court of Appeals of the District, the
judgment was reversed and the case remanded to the Supreme Court,
with directions to dismiss the bill. 12 App.D.C. 453. Whereupon the
complainant appealed to this Court.
MR. JUSTICE PECKHAM after stating the facts, delivered the
opinion of the Court.
Passing the various objections made to the maintenance of this
suit on account of an alleged defect of parties, and also in regard
to the character in which the complainant sues, merely that of a
citizen and taxpayer of the United States and a resident of the
District of Columbia, we come to the main question as to the
validity of the agreement between the commissioners of the District
and the directors of the hospital, founded upon the appropriation
contained in the act of Congress, the contention being that the
agreement, if carried out, would result in an appropriation by
Congress of money to a religious society, thereby violating the
constitutional provision which forbids Congress from passing any
law respecting an establishment of religion. Art. I of the
Amendments to Constitution.
The appropriation is to be found in the General Appropriation
Act for the Government of the District of Columbia, approved March
3, 1897, 29 Stat. 665, 679, c. 387. It reads:
"For two isolating buildings, to be constructed, in the
discretion of the Commissioners of the District of Columbia, on the
grounds of two hospitals, and to be operated as a part of such
hospitals, thirty thousand dollars."
Acting under the
Page 175 U. S. 296
authority of this appropriation, the commissioners entered into
the agreement in question.
As the bill alleges that Providence Hospital was incorporated by
an act of Congress approved April 8, 1864, 13 Stat. 43, c. 50, and
assumes to give some of its provisions, the act thus referred to is
substantially made a part of the bill, and it is therefore set
forth in the margin.
*
The act shows that the individuals named therein and their
successors in office were incorporated under the name of "The
Directors of Providence Hospital," with power to
Page 175 U. S. 297
receive, hold, and convey personal and real property, as
provided in its first section. By the second section, the
corporation was granted
"full power and all the rights of opening and keeping a hospital
in the City of Washington for the care of such sick and invalid
persons as may place themselves under the treatment and care of the
said corporation."
The third section gave it full power to make such bylaws, rules,
and regulations that might be necessary for the general
accomplishment of the objects of the hospital, not inconsistent
with the laws in force in the District of Columbia. Nothing is said
about religion or about the religious faith of the incorporators of
this institution in the act of incorporation. It is simply the
ordinary case of the incorporation of a hospital for the purposes
for which such an institution is generally conducted. It is claimed
that the allegation in the complainant's bill, that the said
"Providence Hospital is a private eleemosynary corporation, and
that to the best of complainant's knowledge and belief it is
composed of members of a monastic order or sisterhood of the Roman
Catholic Church, and is conducted under the auspices of said
church; that the title to its property is vested in the Sisters of
Charity of Emmitsburg, Maryland,"
renders the agreement void for the reason therein stated, which
is that Congress has no power to make "a law respecting a religious
establishment," a phrase which is not synonymous with that used in
the Constitution, which prohibits the passage of a law "respecting
an establishment of religion."
If we were to assume, for the purpose of this question only,
that under this appropriation, an agreement with a religious
corporation of the tenor of this agreement would be invalid as
resulting indirectly in the passage of an act respecting an
establishment of religion, we are unable to see that the
complainant in his bill shows that the corporation is of the kind
described, but, on the contrary, he has clearly shown that it is
not.
The above-mentioned allegations in the complainant's bill do not
change the legal character of the corporation or render it on that
account a religious or sectarian body. Assuming
Page 175 U. S. 298
that the hospital is a private eleemosynary corporation, the
fact that its members, according to the belief of the complainant,
are members of a monastic order or sisterhood of the Roman
Catholic, and the further fact that the hospital is conducted under
the auspices of said church, are wholly immaterial, as is also the
allegation regarding the title to its property. The statute
provides as to its property, and makes no provision for its being
held by anyone other than itself. The facts above stated do not in
the least change the legal character of the hospital or make a
religious corporation out of a purely secular one as constituted by
the law of its being. Whether the individuals who compose the
corporation under its charter happen to be all Roman Catholics, or
all Methodists, or Presbyterians, or Unitarians, or members of any
other religious organization, or of no organization at all, is of
not the slightest consequence with reference to the law of its
incorporation, nor can the individual beliefs upon religious
matters of the various incorporators be inquired into. Nor is it
material that the hospital may be conducted under the auspices of
the Roman Catholic Church. To be conducted under the auspices is to
be conducted under the influence or patronage of that church. The
meaning of the allegation is that the church exercises great and
perhaps controlling influence over the management of the hospital.
It must, however, be managed pursuant to the law of its being. That
the influence of any particular church may be powerful over the
members of a nonsectarian and secular corporation, incorporated for
a certain defined purpose and with clearly stated powers, is surely
not sufficient to convert such a corporation into a religious or
sectarian body. That fact does not alter the legal character of the
corporation, which is incorporated under an act of Congress, and
its powers, duties, and character are to be solely measured by the
charter under which it alone has any legal existence. There is no
allegation that its hospital work is confined to members of that
church or that in its management the hospital has been conducted so
as to violate its charter in the smallest degree. It is simply the
case of a secular corporation being managed by people
Page 175 U. S. 299
who hold to the doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church, but who
nevertheless are managing the corporation according to the law
under which it exists. The charter itself does not limit the
exercise of its corporate powers to the members of any particular
religious denomination, but, on the contrary, those powers are to
be exercised in favor of anyone seeking the ministrations of that
kind of an institution. All that can be said of the corporation
itself is that it has been incorporated by an act of Congress, and
for its legal powers and duties that act must be exclusively
referred to. As stated in the opinion of the Court of Appeals, this
corporation
"is not declared the trustee of any church or religious society.
Its property is to be acquired in its own name and for its own
purposes; that property and its business are to be managed in its
own way, subject to no visitation, supervision, or control by any
ecclesiastical authority whatever, but only to that of the
government which created it. In respect, then, of its creation,
organization, management, and ownership of property, it is an
ordinary private corporation whose rights are determinable by the
law of the land, and the religious opinions of whose members are
not subjects of inquiry."
It is not contended that Congress has no power in the District
to appropriate money for the purpose expressed in the
appropriation, and it is not doubted that it has power to authorize
the commissioners of the District of Columbia to enter into a
contract with the trustees of an incorporated hospital for the
purposes mentioned in the agreement in this case, and the only
objection set up is the alleged "sectarian character of the
hospital and the specific and limited object of its creation."
The other allegations in complainant's bill are simply
statements of his opinion in regard to the results necessarily
flowing from the appropriation in question when connected with the
agreement mentioned.
The act of Congress, however, shows there is nothing sectarian
in the corporation, and "the specific and limited object of its
creation" is the opening and keeping a hospital in the City of
Washington for the care of such sick and invalid persons as
Page 175 U. S. 300
may place themselves under the treatment and care of the
corporation. To make the agreement was within the discretion of the
commissioners, and was a fair exercise thereof.
The right reserved in the third section of the charter to amend,
alter, or repeal the act leaves full power in Congress to remedy
any abuse of the charter privileges.
Without adverting to any other objections to the maintenance of
this suit, it is plain that complainant wholly fails to set forth a
cause of action, and the bill was properly dismissed by the Court
of Appeals, and its decree will therefore be
Affirmed.
*
"
An Act to Incorporate Providence Hospital of the"
"
City of Washington, District of Columbia"
"
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled, That Lucy
Gwynn, Teresa Angela Costello, Sarah McDonald, Mary E. Spalding,
and Mary Calloll, and their successors in office, are hereby made,
declared, and constituted a corporation and body politic, in law
and in fact under the name and style of the directors of Providence
Hospital, and by that name they shall be and are hereby made
capable in law to sue and be sued, to plead and be impleaded, in
any court within the County of Washington, in the District of
Columbia; to have and use a common seal, and to alter or amend the
same at pleasure; to have, purchase, receive, possess, and enjoy
any estate in lands, tenements, annuities, goods, chattels, monies,
or effects, and to grant, devise, or dispose of the same in such
manner as they may deem most for the interest of the hospital:
Provided, That the real estate held by said corporation
shall not exceed in value the sum of one hundred and fifty thousand
dollars."
"SEC. 2.
And be it further enacted, That the said
corporation and body politic shall have full power to appoint from
their own body a president and such other officers as they may deem
necessary for the purposes of their creation, and in case of the
death, resignation, or refusal to serve, of any of their number,
the remaining members shall elect and appoint other persons in lieu
of those whose places may have been vacated, and the said
corporation shall have full power and all the rights of opening and
keeping a hospital in the City of Washington for the care of such
sick and invalid persons as may place themselves under the
treatment and care of the said corporation."
"SEC. 3.
And be it further enacted, That the said
corporation shall also have and enjoy full power and authority to
make such bylaws, rules, and regulations as may be necessary for
the general accomplishment of the objects of said hospital:
Provided, That they be not inconsistent with the laws in
force in the District of Columbia:
And provided, further,
That this act shall be liable to be amended, altered, or repealed
at the pleasure of Congress."
