Lane v. Eaton

38 L.R.A. 669, 71 N.W. 1031, 69 Minn. 141, 1897 Minn. LEXIS 234
CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota
DecidedJune 29, 1897
DocketNos. 10,577, 10,578—(185, 186)
StatusPublished
Cited by21 cases

This text of 38 L.R.A. 669 (Lane v. Eaton) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Lane v. Eaton, 38 L.R.A. 669, 71 N.W. 1031, 69 Minn. 141, 1897 Minn. LEXIS 234 (Mich. 1897).

Opinions

CANTT, J.

This action was brought by the executors for the construction of the will of George Eaton, deceased.

I. The will contains the following provision:

“I give, devise, and bequeath one other equal share or third part, to be first selected and set apart by my executors or the survivor of them, to John W. Lane and John C. Quinby, or the survivor of them, in trust, to keep the same carefully invested, and to receive the rents, profits, and income thereof, and to pay and apply the same, together with the principal sum, or third part, to and for the use of the branch of the Salvation Army, so called, located in the said city of St. Paul; said principal and interest accruing thereon to be permanently invested in the purchase of a lot and the erection thereon of a place of worship where said Salvation Army may hold its meetings; said share or third part and the interest thereon never to be used or invested outside of said city, but is given solely for the purpose heretofore mentioned. If said branch of the Salvation Army in said city is or should become legally organized so it may take and hold the title to property, then I direct the said trustees, or the survivor of them, to transfer said third part or share, and all the rents, income, and profit of the same, together with any other property which may come to them under any of the provisions of this will, to said organization as soon after the settlement of my estate as practicable.”

On the trial it appeared from the evidence that the Salvation Army is an unincorporated religious society having its headquarters in London, England. The officers of the organization have military titles. The head officer in England is called “general”; the subordinate officer who is head of the organization in the United States is called “commander”; a “major” has charge of a division of the country, and a “captain” has charge of a local post or “barracks.” While these officers have military titles, they perform duties similar [143]*143to those of the officers in other religious denominations. Thus a commander corresponds to a bishop, a major to a presiding elder, and a captain to a minister or pastor. The barracks is the church. The property of the society in a country is held in the name of the commander in that country, and he is appointed by the general in England. The government of the society seems to be very much centralized, but not more so, perhaps, than in the case of some other religious societies or sects.

The court below held this devise void. Nearly all of the testator’s property consisted of land, and as, by the terms of the will, the part of this land so devised was to be sold, and the proceeds reinvested in other land, the bequest, notwithstanding this double conversion, continued to be real' estate. 3 Pomeroy, Eq. Jur. § 1178. Then the bequest is void, unless valid as a bequest of real estate.

Section 4274, c. 43, G. S. 1894, provides that uses and trusts are abolished, except as authorized by that chapter. It is well settléd in the states from which we derived this statute that it has abolished the great body of the English law of charitable uses and trusts and the doctrine of cy-prés as administered in England. See 2 Pomeroy, Eq. Jur. §§ 1018-1029. Under this statute the beneficiary of the trust must be certain, or capable of being rendered certain. Therefore no unincorporated, voluntary association, whose membership is fluctuating and uncertain, can be thergestui que trust. Downing v. Marshall, 23 N. Y. 366; Methodist Church v. Clark, 41 Mich. 730, 3 N. W. 207; Ruth v. Oberbrunner, 40 Wis. 238. See, also, 2 Pomeroy, Eq. Jur. § 1029, and cases cited in Holland v. Alcock, 108 N. Y. 312, 16 N. E. 305. See, also, German v. Scholler, 10 Minn. 260 (331).

But there is another statute'which is in pari materia with chapter 43, and which must be construed with it in disposing of the question here presented. Title 4, c. 84, G. S. 1894, provides for organizing unincorporated churches into corporations. Section 3022 of this title provides:

“It shall be lawful for all persons of full age, belonging to any church, congregation or religious society not already incorporated, to assemble at the church or meeting-house, or other place where they statedly attend for divine worship, and, by a plurality vote, [144]*144elect any number of discreet persons of their church, congregation or society, not less than three nor more than nine in number, as trustees to take charge of the estate and property belonging thereto, and transact all affairs relative to the temporalities thereof.”

The next four sections provide the manner of giving notice of the time and place of election, the manner of conducting the election, and the manner of executing and recording the certificate of election, which, when executed and recorded, shall incorporate the congregation or society. Section 3027 then provides:

“Such trustees may have a common seal, and alter the same at pleasure; they may take into their possession and custody all the temporalities of such church, congregation or society, whether the same consists of real or personal estate, and' have been given, granted or devised directly or indirectly to such church, congregation or society, or to any other person for their use.”

Section 3048 further provides:

“Whenever any church or religious society now organized, or which may hereafter be organized, as a church or congregation, but not incorporated in pursuance of law, shall comply with the provisions of this title, and thereby become a body corporate, all the estate, real and personal, which has been lawfully conveyed to the said church or religious society, or to the trustees or vestry thereof in trust for the use of such church or society, whether by devise, gift, grant, purchase or otherwise, and not lawfully disposed of, shall thereupon -vest in said corporation as fully and amply as if the said church had been legally incorporated from the date of its religious organization; provided, that the name or title publicly assumed or borne by such church or society from the date of its organization as such, and none other, shall be the title by which it shall forever be known in law and as a body politic and corporate.”

If the St. Paul branch of the Salvation Army sees fit to and does incorporate within a reasonable time, why will these sections not-apply so as to vest the devise aforesaid in the corporation? We see no reason why. It was so held under a statute similar in its provisions to section 3027 aforesaid. See Reformed Church v. Veeder, 4 Wend. 494, and Methodist Church v. Clark, supra.

We are of the opinion that the devise is void only on condition that the said branch of the Salvation Army fails to incorporate within a reasonable time, which, however, will not extend beyond the time of the hearing of the application for the decree of distribu[145]*145tion. It therefore follows that the court below erred in declaring the devise absolutely void.

In arriving at this result, we have not overlooked section 3.040, which reads as follows:

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

Related

Consolidated School District No. 102 v. Walter
66 N.W.2d 881 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1954)
Schaeffer v. Newberry
50 N.W.2d 477 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1951)
State v. Lahiff
45 N.W.2d 807 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1951)
Sumsion v. Streator-Smith, Inc.
132 P.2d 680 (Utah Supreme Court, 1943)
Lundquist v. First Evangelical Lutheran Church
259 N.W. 9 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1935)
In Re Estate of Lundquist
259 N.W. 9 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1935)
Wells v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue
63 F.2d 425 (Eighth Circuit, 1933)
Hendrickson v. Benson
238 N.W. 130 (South Dakota Supreme Court, 1931)
In Re Havesgaard's Estate
238 N.W. 130 (South Dakota Supreme Court, 1931)
Mabel First Lutheran Church v. Cadwallader
215 N.W. 845 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1927)
In Re Application of Chapman
211 N.W. 325 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1926)
Congdon v. Congdon
200 N.W. 76 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1924)
Johnson v. Helmer
196 P. 385 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1921)
Starr v. Morningside College
186 Iowa 790 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1919)
Young Men's Christian Ass'n v. Horn
139 N.W. 805 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1913)
Snowden v. Crown Cork & Seal Co.
80 A. 510 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1911)
Watkins v. Bigelow
100 N.W. 1104 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1904)
City of Owatonna v. Rosebrock
92 N.W. 1122 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1903)
Shanahan v. Kelly
92 N.W. 948 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1903)
Haynes v. Carr
49 A. 638 (Supreme Court of New Hampshire, 1900)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
38 L.R.A. 669, 71 N.W. 1031, 69 Minn. 141, 1897 Minn. LEXIS 234, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lane-v-eaton-minn-1897.