Argument of Edward Owen Parry; One of the Counsel for Heirs of Stephen Girard in the Case of the City of Philadelphia vs. Augustus Girard, et al. in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, at Harrisburg, May 22d, 1863

Argument of Edward Owen Parry; One of the Counsel for Heirs of Stephen Girard in the Case of the City of Philadelphia vs. Augustus Girard, et al. in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, at Harrisburg, May 22d, 1863

List price: US$12.88

Currently unavailable

We can notify you when this item is back in stock

Add to wishlist

AbeBooks may have this title (opens in new window).

Try AbeBooks

Description

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1863 edition. Excerpt: ...was "To the poor of the county of Beaufort, on the following express conditions." The conditions were then stated, among which was one that the lands should never be sold. The devise was held to be valid. It was clearly a condition subsequent. In Griffin vs. Graham, 1 Hawk, 96, the devise was, "I give the remainder of my estate to my trustees and executors in trust, to be managed by them to the best advantage for the purposes hereinafter mentioned." The testator then expressed jys desire that his real estate should not be sold, and his desire that a school-house should be erected, and that masters and scholars should be supported out of the rents in the manner directed in the will. The Court held that this devise was a trust for a definite charity cognizable by a Court of Equity, and that it was not a perpetuity, for the trustees had the power of alienation. These authorities go no further than to support the principle which is too well settled to be denied, that when a fee has vested or can vest for a lawful purpose, the title will not be divested by the after addition of illegal restrictions or conditions. If, therefore, the learned Judge is to be understood as intending to say "that the direction of McMicken's will, that the real estate should not be alienated, makes no perpetuity in the sense forbidden by the law, for the restriction is a condition subsequent, and the corporation being an 'object eudued with perpetuity of duration, ' could take and hold land for charitable purposes, for such a perpetuity is allowed by law and equity in cases of charitable trusts;" he is sustained by principle and authority. But if he intended to assert the doctrine that a perpetual restraint upon alienation, so "that the land can never be alienated, though all...show more

Product details

  • Paperback | 36 pages
  • 189 x 246 x 2mm | 82g
  • Rarebooksclub.com
  • Miami Fl, United States
  • English
  • black & white illustrations
  • 1236658809
  • 9781236658807