64 Pa. 95 | Pa. | 1870
The opinion of the court was delivered,
— It is no valid objection to a grant or devise to a charitable use that it creates a perpetuity, or renders the estate granted or devised for the purpose inalienable. “ This, it is observed,” says Mr. Lewis, “is the characteristic of alienations to charitable uses; it is in the very nature of such dispositions, to withdraw the subject of them from every kind of circulation, since a contrary course defeats their manifest object, viz.: sustentation of the charitable or religious institutions, or the carrying out in continuity of the benevolent purposes and designs, in favor of which they are made. Any disposition incompatible with this chief end is a breach of duty on the part of the person or body intrusted with the office of giving it effect. Land thus dedicated to the service of charity and religion, is therefore practically inalienable :” Lewis on Perpetuities 689. Nothing, indeed, is denounced by the law as a perpetuity, unless it restrain the vesting of an estate or interest beyond the period of a life or lives in being, and twenty-one years and nine months thereafter: City of Philadelphia v. Girard’s Heirs, 9 Wright 9. An estate cannot, indeed, be created with a condition repugnant to the nature of it, as that tenant in fee shall not alien or tenant in tail suffer a common recovery. But if the estate be vested it is not in the view of the law a perpetuity, although the purpose for which it is granted be such that it cannot be devoted to any other use. Grants to corporations
The devises contained in the will of Dr. George S. Hamill, were beyond all question valid charities. He seems to have been actuated by no narrow and sectarian views, but in the spirit of the Good Samaritan to have been desirous of disposing of a portion of his worldly goods to the needy and suffering of every name. Though the objects were vague and indefinite, there were, in every instance, competent trustees named to exercise the discretion necessary in the distribution of his bounty. Those given to the poor of different churches were evidently in ease of the churches themselves, and it is well settled, that whenever a charity is given to a subordinate object in connection with a church, or other charitable or religious institution, the trust vests in the society itself in ease of which it is granted. In McGirr v. Aaron, 1 Penna. 49, a devise for the maintenance of a Roman Catholic priest, who should succeed the testator in a particular church, and to his successors for ever, though it would have been void by itself, as a devise to a sole corporation unknown to the law, was held to be good, because in ease of the congregation and for its benefit, and that the congregation was entitled to take the profits in the first instance, but subject to the right of the incumbent for the time being to have them applied to his support. This principle was reaffirmed by this court in The Domestic and Foreign Missionary Society’s Appeal, 6 Casey 425. “ Similar adjudications,” said Mr. Justice Strong, “ have often been made, where the object literally designated has been incapable of taking directly and the legacy has been in relief of a superior,” and several authorities are there cited. But the testator in this instance has precluded
Decree affirmed and appeal dismissed, the costs of the case and reasonable counsel fees to be paid out of the arrears in the hands of the appellant, as provided by the agreement of the parties in the court below.