Page:The New International Encyclopædia 1st ed. v. 04.djvu/581

* CHARITABLE TRUSTS. 501 CHARITIES. The charitable trust is distiIlgui^lled from the private trust, which includes all other trusts, iu that ( 1 ) it always exists for charity or pulilic benelicence ; (2) its bcneticiaries are indclinite and undetermined; and (3) it may and usually does create a perpetuity. I. An enumeration of the charitable objects, for which such trusts may be created and uj)- hcld, is found in the statute of Elizabeth. Those objects may be grouped, as ajipears by the delini- tion given, under four general heads, as follows: (1) (Jifts lor stiiitlu chcDiuxunary objects, i.e. for charity in its narrow, popular sense, such as gifts for the poor, for sick, disabled, or demented persons, and for hospitals, homes, and asylums. (2) Gifts for educational purposes, as for schools and colleges, to build or equip libraries, and to endow scholarships, fellowsliips, and the like. (3) Gift;^ for the purposes of rvliffion, such as those for the building or repairing of churches, for missions, and for spreading the Gospel. (4) Gifts for lightening the expenses of goieinment, such as bequests for the erection of public build- ings, d.Lcks, whar-es, canals, etc. II. Jndc/initeness in the beneficiaries, either as to the class to be benefited, or as to the indi- viduals in a determined class who will be the objects of the bounty, is the predominant distin- guishing feature of charitable uses or trusts. If the beneficiaries be definitely specified, no matter how charitable the object of the gift, it con- stitutes a private trust and is valid without the aid of the statute, and must be construed and governed accordingly. Thus, a trust for the sup- port and comfort of designated persons in a cer- tain hospital would be private, while a trust for all those who should be cared for by such an institution would be public, or charitable. This feature of trusts for charity, coupled with the liberal spirit in which courts construe such gifts, has led to the method of executing them, called CI/ pres (as near as'). By this doctrine is meant, that when such gifts cannot be applied according to the precise intention of the donor, pltbough the general purpose of the trust is proper, they will be employed for the purpose in a manner as near as possible {eg pres) to that which was designated. It assumed two. forms in England. In one form it was employed by the Chanct llor in the exercise of a ])rcrogative. execu- tive power, delegated to him vinder the sign manual of the Crown, and was carried to the ex- tent of applying a trust for charities to some charitable purpose, even when the particular objects for which it was intended were illegal and void. In its other form, it was exercised by the Chancellor in the perfr)nnance of his judicial functions, and was applied only to such charitable trusts as were legal and valid in their inception, but which, because of some change in law or circumstances, could not be carried out in exactly the manner indicated by the donor. In this latter fonu, but not in the former, the ci/ pres doctrine is recognized and ajjplied in some, though not in all, of the American States, where trusts for charity are allowed. For example, a bequest made before the fall of slavery in the United States, to trustees, to be api)Iied to vari- ous methods of creating a sentiment agirinst negro slavery in America, was apidied, after the close of the Civil War. by the -Massachusetts courts, to the. ierican Frcedmen's I'nion Com- mission; and in Missouri, trustees having been directed by will to establish forever a charitable home upon land devised to them, and a portion of the land having lieen cut oil from the residue by ;i iiev.- street and remlered useless for the building, that jiortion was ordered by the court to be sohl and the proceeds applied to the pay- ment of the debts of the same institution. III. . trust necessarily suspends, during its contiiuumce, the power of free and unrestrained alienation of property. It is, therefore, re- stricted by the common-law princijile and preva- lent statutory provisions, which forbid such sus- pension except for a limited lime measured by the lives of one or more individuals. A suspen- sion beyond such a period is known as a perpetu- ity (q.v.) and is invalid. But property donated to trustees for charitable purposes nuty remain in the hands of such trustees for all time, not- withstanding the fact that the absolute power of alienation is thus indefinitely suspended. Similarly a provision for accumulation ((|.v.), void under the same rule in cas(i of a private trust, does not impair a charitable trust. Gifts for charitable uses are of considerable antiquity. They were known and fostered by the Christian emperors of Rome as 'pious uses,' and it was in this form and under this description that the doctrine ])assed from the civil law into the law of England, where, as has been said above, pious or charitable uses were enforced to some extent bv the Chancellor long before the statutes of 39 and 43 Elizabeth. In England the system of charitable trusts and the method of administering them is now based upon a series of modern statutes of the most enlightened character, known as the Charitable Trusts Acts, passed in 18,=)3, 18.5.5, 1800, 18t)!). and 1888, and, lastly, upon the Mortmain and Chari- table Uses Act," passed in ISill. In the United States the statutes of Elizabeth have not gen- erally been enacted, but in most of the States the principle embodied in those acts and en- forced by the English Court of Chancery has been judicially recognized as a part of the body of legal principles brought over from the mother country, and many trusts not strictly within the English statute are here held to be valid by analogv", Xew York, long a conspicuous excep- tion, has recently by statute made possible the creation of trusts for cluiritable purjwses, but there are still several .States in which no dis- tinction is made between charitable trusts and trusts for private purposes. BiULiOGKAPiiY. The literature of the subject is extensive, .mong the most important works dealing exclusively with it are Shelford. Treatise on the Law of Mortmain, and Charitable Uses and Trusts (London, 183{)) : Tudor. Latp of- Charities and Mortmain (London, 18!)0). Con- sult, also, the general treatises on trust and equity jurisdiction, as Perry, Treatise on the Law of Trusts and Trustees (o'th ed., Boston, 1899), and I'omeroy. Treatise on Equity Jurisprudence, etc. (San Francisco, 1892). See Mortmaix ; Tlil ST. CHARITIES. Tn Greek mythology, the three goddesses of grace and charm, called Gra- tiLC by the Rpmans. They were the offspring of Zeus, and were named Euphrosyne (joy), Thalia (bloom), and .Aglaia (brilliance). Their honie was on Olympus, with the Muses. Their oldest shrine was at Orchomenus in Ba>otia. where their festival, the Charitesia, was celebrated. In sculp-