Taylor v. Columbian University

35 App. D.C. 68, 1910 U.S. App. LEXIS 5867
CourtDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals
DecidedApril 5, 1910
DocketNo. 2098
StatusPublished

This text of 35 App. D.C. 68 (Taylor v. Columbian University) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District of Columbia Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Taylor v. Columbian University, 35 App. D.C. 68, 1910 U.S. App. LEXIS 5867 (D.C. 1910).

Opinion

Mr. Chief Justice Shepard

delivered tbe opinion of tbe Court:

This is an appeal from a decree dismissing a bill filed by appellants, Brooke T. Taylor et al., as beirs at law of tbe late Admiral Levin M. Powell, to declare void a trust created by his will, and to recover certain real estate held thereunder by tbe George Washington University, tbe legal successor of tbe Columbian University.

The fifth item of the will which creates said trust reads as follows:

[70]*70Item: Fifth, it being my wish and desire to make some contribution to the Navy of the United States of which I have been for so many years, I hope, a worthy member, and so in a measure to pay off the debt I feel I owe the honorable profession I have pursued through a long lifetime, and to that end to establish in the Columbian University in the District of Columbia, in a manner most conducive for that purpose, a means for the. education of such young men as may be willing to profit therefrom in the branches of education best fitted to prepare them for officers of the line in the Navy of the United States, or for the places of mates or captains in the marine service of the United States. I do hereby give, devise, and bequeath to the said Columbian University and its successors, all those certain pieces or parcels of ground situated and lying in said city of Washington, and known and distinguished on the plats of said city as lot lettered C and the east 5 feet from front to rear of lot D, of Samuel D. King’s subdivision of lots numbered one (1), two (2), three (3), thirty-two and thirty-three (33) in square numbered one hundred and twenty-six (126), duly recorded in the surveyor’s office of said city, beginning for the said parcels at a point on I street north, distance seventy-eight (78) feet west from the corner of I and 17th street, and running thence north, parallel with 17th street one hundred and five feet to a fifteen-foot alley; thence west with said alley thirty-five (35) feet; thence south one hundred and five (105) feet to the north line of said I street; thence east with said I street, thirty-five (35) feet to the point of beginning, together with all and singular the improvements, rights, privileges, and appurtenances to the same belonging, in trust for the purposes following, and for no other purpose whatever; that is, in trust to create an endowment to be known as the Admiral Powell endowment, and with that view to take the said property, and the same to rent from year to year, or to lease for a term of years, as to the trustees and overseers of said university shall seem best; and the rents, issues, and profits arising therefrom, after first paying out of the same the taxes, insurance, repairs, and other expenses, to devote as far as the same will go, under [71]*71such regulations as to the said trustees and overseers may seem best, to the free education of such young men that may desire to take advantage of the said endowment by way of their preparation for entrance into the Naval Academy at Annapolis, Maryland, or such as may fit them to become mates and masters in the merchant marine service of the United States; such preparation should be confined in the case of each young man so embracing the advantages of the said endowment to one year, and to include principally the studies following; that is to say, arithmetic, geometry, trigonometry, and astronomy, with the use of astronomical instruments, the construction of charts, and the application of this knowledge to hydrographical survey by latitude and longitude, and, if possible, such study as will give to such young men a knowledge of Scientific voyages- of discovery, and other matters relating to war and commerce on the high seas; and it is further my desire that this endowment shall, if possible, embrace in its benefits such apprentices as, having filled their time in the great manufactory establishments of the country, may apply for appointment from civil life in the steam engineer department, of the United States Navy; to such I would like to have a year’s education afforded under such regulations as the president and faculty of the university may think proper. And should it any time, for any reason, be impossible to carry into effect the trusts, provisions, and conditions having relation to and herein imposed upon this bequest by me made for the creation of the endowment described on the part of said Columbian University, or should it be made manifest at any time that the said trust is not being administered in accordance with my wishes and desires, and in conformity with the conditions specified, then and in such case it is my will and desire that the said endowment shall be placed in other hands, and to that end and on behalf of the contingency mentioned, I do hereby give, devise, and bequeath the said property to the John Hopkins University, of Baltimore, in the State of Maryland, and its successors, to be taken and held by the said university or the officers thereof proper for that purpose, upon the trust and for the purposes hereinbefore particularly set forth in [72]*72the bequest of said property to the Columbian University, in such a manner that the purposes of the said endowment, as by me indicated, may be fully carried into effect.”

The case has been before us on a special appeal allowed from an order overruling a demurrer to the bill. Columbian University v. Taylor, 25 App. D. C. 124. It was then held that the trust was not void for uncertainty or incapacity of execution apparent upon its face. It was also said: “If there be a right of action at all, it must fall under the ninth paragraph of the bill, which alleges that, after efforts made to carry out the intention of the testator, the incapacity of the execution of the trust has been demonstrated. • The trust created by the will is not a general charitable trust, but is expressly limited to the purposes specified,, and no other. If the trust has failed of its object by reason of the facts alleged, and thereby come to an end, a resulting trust at once arose in favor of the heirs at law of the testator, enforceable by this proceeding in equity. Hopkins v. Grimshaw, 165 U. S. 342, 353, 41 L. ed. 139, 143, 17 Sup. Ct. Rep. 401.”

The ninth paragraph of the bill referred to reads as follows:

“That said defendant, the Columbian University, issues, and. has, for more than sixteen years, issued, a catalogue, publishing its classes, the names of all its students, its instructors and officers, and the many and various schools of education it main-, tains; that this catalogue is widely circulated throughout the United States; that among other things it has, from time to time, during the' past sixteen years, advertised “the Powell scholarship;” that such advertisement was contained in the said catalogue for the scholastic years 1900 and 1901, as will more particularly appear by reference to pages 94 and 95 of said catalogue, which is hereafter filed as Exhibit No. 3, and which it is prayed may be taken and considered as a part hereof. That substantially the same advertisement had been inserted in said^ catalogue issued from time to time for the past sixteen years.
“That notwithstanding the said wide circulation of said advertisement, the said defendant, complainants are informed, be[73]*73lieve, and therefore charge, has been wholly unable to execute said trust.”

The following paragraph supplements the ninth:

X.

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

Related

Hopkins v. Grimshaw
165 U.S. 342 (Supreme Court, 1897)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
35 App. D.C. 68, 1910 U.S. App. LEXIS 5867, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/taylor-v-columbian-university-dc-1910.