198 P. 1039 | Cal. | 1921
The executors of the will and the residuary legatees appeal from a decree distributing and ordering paid a bequest of two thousand dollars made by the will of the decedent to the respondent, an incorporated society, known as "Los Angeles County Pioneer Society." *65
The will was executed less than thirty days prior to the death of the testator. If the respondent is a "charitable or benevolent" corporation, the bequest is void under the provisions of section 1313 of the Civil Code, declaring that "No estate, real or personal, shall be bequeathed or devised to any charitable or benevolent society or corporation, or to any person or persons in trust for charitable uses, except the same be done by will duly executed at least thirty days before the decease of the testator." If this point is good, the other points made by appellant need not be considered.
The articles of incorporation of the respondent state the purposes for which it was formed, as follows:
"That the purpose for which this corporation is formed is to cultivate social intercourse and friendship among its members, to collect and preserve data touching the early history of Los Angeles county and state of California, to collect and preserve articles, specimens and material things illustrative or demonstrative of the customs, modes and habits of the aforesaid times in said state; to perpetuate the memory of those who, by their labors and heroism, contributed to make the history of said county and state; and in furtherance of said purpose to receive, purchase, sell, hold, convey, lease, rent and maintain all kinds of property, both real and personal, to build club houses, and to do any and all acts necessary and convenient for the promotion of said purpose; and to exist as a social corporation under the provisions of the laws of the state of California, covering such corporations, and not for pecuniary profit."
The corporation has no capital stock and it is stated in the bill of exceptions that the paragraph above quoted is the only part of its articles material to be considered upon the issues presented in the case.
[1] We are of the opinion that the respondent is a charitable and benevolent corporation. If its only object were to cultivate social intercourse and friendship among its members, it would be for the benefit of the members alone and it would not come within that class. But it is apparent from a reading of the part of the articles above quoted that this was but a minor part of its purposes. [2] A charitable corporation is one organized for the purpose, among other things, of promoting the welfare of mankind *66
at large, or of a community, or of some class forming a part of it indefinite as to numbers and individuals. It is impossible to enumerate specifically all purposes which characterize such corporations as charitable. "The difficulty is inherent in the subject matter itself. With the progress of civilization new needs are developed, new vices spring up, new forms of human activity manifest themselves, any or all of which, for their advancement or suppression, may become the proper objects of an eleemosynary trust." (People v. Cogswell,
It may be urged that the articles contain no provision whereby any person not a member thereof may receive any benefit from the carrying out of its corporate purposes. This may be true to the cultivation of social intercourse and friendship among its members, although as there is no limit as to the number of members, or as to conditions of admission, the membership may embrace a large and indefinite portion of the public. But a reading of the article on the subject shows that the carrying out of the purposes defined will in the main benefit the general public as much as the members.
[3] In view of the foregoing authorities and upon general principles it seems clear that the respondent corporation was a charitable and benevolent corporation within the meaning of section 1313 of the Civil Code, and the bequest having been made within thirty days prior to the death of the testator, it is void under the provisions of that section.
The order is reversed.
Lennon, J., Wilbur, J., Olney, J., Sloane, J., Lawlor, J., and Angellotti, C. J., concurred. *68