240 Mass. 521 | Mass. | 1922
This is a petition to register the title to a parcel of land on Main. Street, north of the middle line of Horton’s Lane, in the town of Tisbury. The judge of the Land Court dismissed the petition without prejudice; and the case is here on exceptions to certain of his rulings and refusals to rule.
All the parties claim title under the will and codicils of George Wales Soren, late of New York City, who died November 27, 1911. Article 2 of the second codicil, which affects the title to the land in controversy, is as follows:
“Second. — Whereas, by the seventh clause of the codicil of November 25, 1902, I have given, devised and bequeathed to the Women’s Educational and Industrial Union (hereinafter in this codicil designated as W.E.I.U.) and the Young Women’s Christian Association (of Berkeley Street, Boston), (hereinafter in this codicil designated as Y.W.C.A.) in fee, in equal shares, all my land in Vineyard Haven, but subject to a life estate in said land
“As I have by my will and former codicil given to the W.E.I.U. and Y.W.C.A. certain funds on the expiration of life estates, with the design that such funds or their income or parts of either should be used by said corporations in connection with the lands here devised, for such charitable purposes as are described in this paragraph, I make the devises of land as afore
The will and codicils were duly allowed by the Surrogate’s Court of New York on May 3, 1912, and J. Wales Soren was appointed executor. They were ordered to be filed by the Probate Court of our county of Suffolk on October 3, 1912. The executor died on September 28,1914. Walter Soren was appointed administrator de bonis non by the surrogate of New York on May 26, 1915; and by the Suffolk Probate Court on July 12, 1917. Grace Soren, the life tenant of the parcel in question, died January 6, 1910, nearly two years before the testator. The funds referred to in said article 2, amounting to $10,000, were paid to the Young Women’s Christian Association on June 30, 1920; and under the will and codicils said association may receive other funds on the death of Lucy Boone Buffington without issue.
The testator, after providing for his brothers and sisters, who were his next of kin, and making many bequests to other relatives and friends, gave substantial legacies to certain charitable organizations. While the codicils indicate changes of mind on his part with reference to the charities he desired to benefit, his interest in the Young Women’s Christian Association of Boston apparently remained constant. This is emphasized by his last codicil, dated January 29, 1909, in which he revoked the gifts to the
The controlling question is, whether the title became divested by the failure of the association to deliver to the executor, within one year after the probate of the will, a written agreement to perform the requirements specified in said article two of the second codicil. It seems to us, as it did to the Land Court, that the primary intention of the testator was to have this parcel of land go to the Young Women’s Christian Association. In addition to the reason already indicated, he must have known that the association was qualified and equipped to carry on a resort fqr the rest and recreation of poor girls and women; he left to this organization not only the land and the buildings, but also the furniture and equipment; and in addition he gave them certain funds (of which $10,000 has been paid), which are to be used only for maintaining and carrying on said specified charity. The will contains no express direction that notice of the gift and its conditions should be given to the association; and it was in another State than that of his domicil, where it was not likely to learn the contents of the instrument. As matter of fact it did not have actual notice of the will and codicils until on or about February 2, 1915, or almost three years after the will was allowed in New York; and at that time there was no executor, as J. Wales Soren had died in September, 1914, and his successor had not been appointed. We cannot believe that the testator intended to vest the title in the association, with the expectation that it would be divested before the association could have an opportunity to learn of the gift and to duly accept it. Bradstreet v. Clark, 21 Pick. 389. This view is confirmed by the fact that the agreement itself, even if given, could add little or nothing to the provisions of the will, which provide for forfeiture of the estate if the association, after coming into possession of the
It was agreed by all the parties that the rule against perpetuities has no application here. Although the association did not deliver to the administrator the document accepting the devise until May 2, 1916, we concur in the conclusion of the Land Court that the conditional provision of the devise was sufficiently complied with.
What has been said disposes of the questions raised by the petitioner’s exceptions. The conclusion reached renders it unnecessary to consider the exceptions of the association.
Exceptions overruled.