be applied to the purchase of lands, the gift is valid and the direction disregarded.28 § 1116. Statute of Charitable Uses of 43 Eliz., Ch. 4. Trusts for charitable uses were recognized in England prior to A. D. 1601. At that date was passed the Statute of Charitable Uses of 43 Eliz., ch. 4. The preamble of this act enumerates the objects considered charitable, they being twenty-one in number.29 The object of this act was not to construe and define the law of charitable uses, but was intended solely to provide a new jurisdiction and legal machinery to discover and enforce the administration of charitable trusts which had fallen into neglect, and to correct abuses arising from fraud and breaches of trust. However obscure may have been the law as to public charities prior to the statute of Elizabeth, that act is now considered the principal source of legal charities; and it has become the general rule in England that no uses can be considered charitable except such as fall within the words or the obvious intent of the statute. Thus, although 28 Sec. 7 of the act, which further provided that the High Court or the Charity Commissioners could sanction the proposed purchase of lands out of the personal property bequeathed for that purpose, if required for actual occupation for the purposes of the charity, and not as an investment. 29 The Statute of Charitable Uses, 43 Eliz., ch. 4, is regarded as authority for considering as charitable, uses for "the relief of aged and impotent and poor people; the maintenance of sick and maimed soldiers and mariners; schools of learning; free schools; scholars in universities; houses of correction; repairs of bridges, ports, havens, causeways, churches, sea-banks, and highways; the education and preferment of orphans; the marriage of poor maids; support and help of tradesmen, handicraftsmen, and persons decayed; the relief or redemption of prisoners or captives; and aid or ease of any poor inhabitants concerning the payment of fifteenths, setting out of soldiers, and other taxes." twenty-one objects were enumerated by the statute of Elizabeth, an examination of the early decisions resulted in finding forty-six specifications of pious and charitable uses recognized as within the protection of the law, in which were embraced all those enumerated in the statute.30 The statute of Elizabeth was apparently authority for testamentary appointments to corporations for charitable uses;31 but this power was abolished as to testamentary dispositions by the statute of 9 Geo. II, ch. 36.32 The statute of Elizabeth practically became a part of the common law and has been substantially re-enacted in many of our states. It was repealed by the Mortmain and Charitable Uses Act of 51 and 52 Vict., ch. 42.33 But the last-named act sets forth the preamble of the statute of Elizabeth and recites that reference is made to the charities within the purview, meaning and interpretation of the former statute, and by section 13 enacts that references to charities shall be construed as referring to charities within the meaning, purview, and interpretation of said preamble. Thus, the charities recognized in England are those within the purview of the statute of Elizabeth. In this respect no change was made by the amending act of 1891, 54 and 55 Vict., ch. 73.34 § 1117. Restrictions on Corporate Holdings of Land in the United States. The English statutes of mortmain are of no force in these United States unless they have been re-enacted. It 30 Magill V. Brown, Brightly N. P. (Pa.) 347, referred to in Ould v. Washington Hospital for Foundlings, 95 U. S. 303, 24 L. Ed. 450. 31 Flood's Case, Hob. 136. See, also, Attorney-General v. Rye, 2 Vern. 453; Attorney-General v. Burdet, 2 Vern. 755. 32 See § 1114. was at one time held in Pennsylvania that these statutes were a part of the law of that state, but this opinion was afterward controverted.35 However, in some of the states, statutes have been passed limiting the right of charitable corporations to hold lands. Congress has passed an act that no religious or charitable association in the territories of the United States may hold real estate of a greater value than fifty thousand dollars.36 By a Kentucky act, no church or society of Christians can hold the legal or equitable title to exceeding fifty acres of land. The constitution of Maryland declares all gifts, as well as devises of land or personal property, to religious sects or for religious uses, void without the sanction of the legislature given before or after the gift, except five acres for a church, parsonage or cemetery.38 Without express legislative sanction, a foreign religious corporation can not hold land in that state, but a will directing land to be sold and bequeathing the proceeds to a corporation of that kind, is valid.39 In most of the states laws have been enacted prohibiting corporations generally from acquiring or holding lands except such as are necessary for the conduct of their business. The statutes should be consulted in all cases. § 1118. Statutory Restrictions on Gifts to Charity, as to Amount and Time of Execution. Statutes have been enacted generally in these United States which have placed restrictions upon testamentary, 35 Magill V. Brown, Brightly N. P. (Pa.) 346, 350; Vidal v. Girard, 2 How. (U. S.) 128, 11 L. Ed. 205. 36 U. S. Rev. Stats., § 1890. § 3. 37 Ky. Gen. Stats., (1873) ch. 13, 38 Md. Declaration of Rights, § 38. 39 Church-Extension of M. E. Church v. Smith, 56 Md. 362. gifts to charity, such as requiring such gifts to be made at least a specified time prior to the testator's death, and limiting the amounts thereof to a certain proportion of his estate. Thus, if a testator leave a wife, child or descendants of a child, he may not dispose by will for charitable uses of more than one-half of his estate, as in New York;10 or more than one-third, as in California, Georgia and Kentucky.41 In Louisiana, if the testator leave one legitimate child, he can not dispose of more than twothirds of his estate; if he leaves two, he is limited to onehalf; and if three or more, then to one-third. So, also, if having no children, he leaves a father or mother, or both, the devisable portion is restricted to two-thirds.42 Where such restrictions are imposed, it is generally required that the testator execute his will within a specified time prior to his death, otherwise any gift for charitable uses will be held void. The time specified generally is between thirty and ninety days, although it is as extended as one year. These matters are of statutory regulation, varying with the jurisdictions, and the law of the particular state in question must be consulted in each case. 43 40 Decedents' Estates Law, (Consol. L. 1909) § 17. One who has no "husband, wife, child or parent" is not within the statute and is not prohibited thereby from devising or bequeathing all of his or her estate to charity. Matter of Dunlap, 86 Misc. Rep. 372, 148 N. Y. Supp. 431. The statute does not apply where the nearest of kin to the testator is a first cousin.-Matter of Danklefesen, 171 App. Div. 339, 157 N. Y. Supp. 119. Mont. 41 Cal. Civ. Code, § 1313; Ga. Civ. Code, (1910) § 3851; Rev. Code 1907, §§ 4761, 4762. 42 See Louisiana Code. 43 Cal. Civ. Code, § 1313; Ga. Civ. Code, (1910) § 3851. N. Y.-§§ 18, 19, Decedents' Estates Law, (Consol. Laws N. Y. 1909, ch. 13). Pa.-§ 11, Pa. Act of April 11, 1855. One year in Ohio under Rev. Stats., 5915. Where a will containing a charitable bequest is executed within a less time before the testator's death than is fixed by law, the statute renders the gift invalid, but the other provisions of the will stand. If the amount of the gift to charity exceeds the percentage of the estate which may be so disposed of, generally only the excess is void, the remaining dispositions of the will standing. The void excess, arising from either cause, passes to the residuary legatee, heir or next of kin, according to law.45 § 1119. The Same Subject: Purpose of Statutes. The purpose of the statutes limiting the amount of his estate which a testator may give to charity, and requiring his will to be executed a prescribed time prior to his demise, is to prevent the testator from disregarding the just claims of those who would be the natural recipients of his bounty, and whose expectations might be defeated through some sudden pious or philanthropic im 44 Estate of Budd, 166 Cal. 286, 135 Pac. 1131, where a bequest to the city of Stockton for a public library was held void because the will was executed in less than 30 days before testator's death. The language of the statute "is too explicit to be capable of being misunderstood. It clearly shows that the policy of the legislature was to invalidate all devises and bequests by any person to an institution or corporation formed under the act or subject to its provisions, whose will was made and executed less than two months before his death, without reference to the circumstance of his having a wife, child, or parent."- II Com. on Wills-48 Matter of Smith, 85 Misc. Rep. 636, 149 N. Y. Supp. 24. Sections 18 and 19 of the Decedents' Estates Law (Consol. Laws N. Y. 1909, ch. 13), making bequests for certain purposes void unless the will was executed at least two months before the testator's death, make void only such bequests to corporations created by the state of New York, and do not apply to foreign corporations.-Pottstown Hospital v. New York Life Ins. & Trust Co., 208 Fed. 196. 45 O'Donnell v. Murphy, 17 Cal. App. 628, 120 Pac. 1076; Estate of Peabody, 154 Cal. 173, 97 Pac. 184. |