Executors of Taylor v. Trustees of Bryn Mawr College

34 N.J. Eq. 101
CourtNew Jersey Court of Chancery
DecidedMay 15, 1881
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 34 N.J. Eq. 101 (Executors of Taylor v. Trustees of Bryn Mawr College) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New Jersey Court of Chancery primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Executors of Taylor v. Trustees of Bryn Mawr College, 34 N.J. Eq. 101 (N.J. Ct. App. 1881).

Opinion

The Chancellor.

This is a suit brought by the executors of Joseph W. Taylor, ■deceased, late of Burlington county, for construction of the residuary clause of his will, and consequent directions as to the ■disjjosition of the residue of his estate. The testator, by that ■clause, gives all the residue to eleven persons, whom he names (by the codicil he adds two more, whom he also designates), or the survivors of them, in trust, as soon as a corporation shall be •established under the laws of Pennsylvania, for a college or institution of learning, having for its object the advanced education [102]*102of females, as thereinafter set forth, to be under the care and management of the trustees or others that they may from time to time appoint to fill vacancies in their number, and authorizes and directs that his executors, after having paid ór made provision for all the legacies and bequests thereinbefore given and made, convey, assign and transfer all the residue of his estate to the corporation absolutely, without further responsibility on their part. He then provides that the trustees of the corporation may proceed to expend a portion of the principal in purchase of suitable ground, to be chosen with care by them, and the erection thereon of substantial, sightly and suitable buildings of the most approved construction, for the comfort, advanced education and care of young women or girls of the higher and more refined classes of society, and gives them directions where to locate- the site, unless it should have been obtained previously. The trustees are to have power, from time to time, to fill vacancies in their number (keeping it as fixed by him), the new trustees to be members of the society of Orthodox Friends, of which he himself was a member; and he expresses his desire that in the selection and appointment of trustees great care shall be taken to-choose competent Friends of high moral and religious character, possessing enlarged and enlightened and cultivated minds, as far as practicable. He gives the trustees power to sell and convey any or all of the real estate “ devised as above,” or any that may be purchased by them, from time to time, for the trust, without liability on the part of the purchasers for the application of the purchase-money. He then provides that the trustees having charge and control of said corporation ” are, after coming into possession of the residue, to retain sufficient to pay for the ground and needful buildings, furniture &c. &o., for the-institution, and are to invest the remainder for an endowment fund, the income from which they are to apply to the necessary expenses ,and support of the college or institution for all time to come; and he empowers them, if it be found necessary, in their discretion, to spend part of the principal for that purpose, expressing his desire, however, that they infringe upon the principal as little as possible; By the codicil, he revokes the power [103]*103to trench upon the principal. He gives directions to the trustees as to the character of investments to be made by them of the endowment fund, and provides that they are to have power to hold at discretion any securities that may pass into their hands from his estate. Pie gives directions as to the admission of students, providing that, other things being equal, preference is to be given to members of the Society of Friends, and requiring that students who may not be members of that society must conform to the customs and rules of the institution, and be willing to be educated in the same manner as students who are of that society. He adds various expressions of his wishes in regard to the mode of education; some of a mandatory and others of a precatory character. By the codicil, he appoints, as before mentioned, two additional trustees to the eleven named in the will, and designates the thirteen as trustees of his residuary estate and of the college. He also appoints one of them, Francis T. King, president of the board. The will is dated on the 19th day of February, 1877, and the codicil on the 25th of October following. The testator died in January, 1880. Before his death he purchased the site for the buildings and began to erect them, and lie was proceeding with the work when he died. The site selected was at Bryn Mawr, in Pennsylvania. The executors have filed their final account. The residuary estate is very large, about $750,000.

The persons named in the will and codicil as trustees, in May, 1880, became incorporated under the general law of Pennsylvania by the name of The Trustees of Bryn Mawr College,” and they now apply to the executors for the transfer to them of the residuary estate. All of the trustees except one reside out of this state. Of the non-residents, one resides in New York, one in Maryland, one in Rhode Island, and the rest in Pennsylvania. The executors, in view of the large amount of the residuary estate, the fact that, if the claim of the corporation be conceded, the estate will pass out of the jurisdiction of the courts of this state, the doubt which has been suggested as to whether the corporation is entitled to receive anything from them, and their unwillingness to determine for themselves, even with the aid of [104]*104counsel, whether the corporation, if entitled to receive the residue from them, is a lawful corporation, and such as was intended by the testator, come into this court for advice.

The trust under consideration is clearly a charitable one, within the statute of 43 Elizabeth, c. 4• That act includes in its specification of charitable uses not only free schools but “schools for learning,” without the qualification that the instruction therein shall be gratuitous. The law of this state does not differ from the common law of England on the subject, which has grown up in a series of decisions founded in part on that statute. Thomson’s Exrs. v. Norris, 5 C. E. Gr. 489. And the trust is, therefore, a charitable one, according to our law. Van Wagenen v. Baldwin, 3 Hal. Ch. 211; Mason’s Exrs. v. Trustees &c., 12 C. E. Gr. 53; Stevens v. Shippen, 1 Stew. Eq. 533; De Camp v. Dobbins, 2 Stew. Eq. 36; S. C. on appeal, 4 Stew. Eq. 671. And it is a charitable one according to the law of Pennsylvania. Price v. Maxwell, 28 Penna. St. 23. It was said in that case, that though the statute of 1¡3 Elizabeth, c. 4, is not strictly in force in that state on account of the inapplicability of its regulations as to modes of proceeding, its conservative provisions have been in force by common usage and constitutional recognition; and not only they, but the more extensive range of charitable uses which chancery supported before and beyond that statute. See, also, Pickering v. Shotwell, 10 Pa. St. 23.

Nor does the fact that the charity is a foreign one constitute a valid objection to the gift. This court will not administer a foreign charity, but it will direct money devoted to such use (provided the charity is not repugnant to our laws or policy, and is in accordance with the laws of such state) to be paid to the proper parties, leaving it to the courts of the state within which the charity is to be established to see to its due administration. Hill on Trustees 468; Story Eq. Jur. § 1184; Tudor’s Law of Char. Trusts 259; Boyle on Char. 184; Perry on Trusts § 741. In Attorney-General v. Sturge, 19 Beav. 597, a testatrix who had established a school at Genoa, by her will directed that $ 1,000 be paid to Mr. Irvine, the consular chaplain there, for its support. Mr.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Martin v. Haycock
55 A.2d 60 (New Jersey Court of Chancery, 1947)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
34 N.J. Eq. 101, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/executors-of-taylor-v-trustees-of-bryn-mawr-college-njch-1881.