In a further letter, Dr. Foss stated he would apologize, should he be wrong, but asked the committee to meet in order to receive his explanations. On April 27, the committee decided to suspend plaintiffs membership, for six months, commencing April 27. This decision was posted in the club in large letters.
For the plaintiff, M. Premet argued that in the present case, nothing could allow the club committee to state that plaintiff had been guilty of disorderly conduct. Furthermore, by giving to its decision a "noisy publicity", not specified in the rules, the committee had acted wrongly. "No one", declared M. Premet, "can reproach a member for his criticisms the quality of a beefsteak!"
M. de Goth argued that the rules of the club gave full power to the committee to decide any question with regard to a member's conduct, By becoming a member, an individual was obliged to adhere to the rules, and undertook to abide-by any decision of the committee. The decision of the committee, in this case, was strictly appropriate.
Judgment was given for plaintiff, the penalty was declared null and void, and the posting of the decision on the notice board of the club was
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.