Protestant Roman Catholics. Jews. The first of these was the Toleration Act (y), passed in 1688. By that and subsequent statutes (≈) the schools and places for religious worship, education, and charitable purposes of Protestant Dissenters were exempted from the operation of certain penal and disabling laws to which they had previously been liable. Roman Catholics were the next to be relieved. By the Roman Catholic Charities Act, 1832 (a), they were placed on the same footing as Protestant Dissenters. The Act provides that from and after the passing thereof his Majesty's subjects professing the Roman Catholic religion, in respect to their schools, places for religious worship, education, and charitable purposes in Great Britain, and the property held therewith, and the persons employed in or about the same, shall in respect thereof be subject to the same laws as the Protestant Dissenters are subject to in England in respect to their schools and places for religious worship, education, and charitable purposes, and not further or otherwise (b). But nothing in the Act is to repeal or alter any provision in 10 Geo. IV. c. 7 (c), respecting the suppression or prohibition of the religious orders or societies of the Church of Rome bound by monastic or religious vows (d). And it was provided that all property to be acquired or held for such purposes of religious worship and education, and charitable purposes in England and Wales, should remain subject to the provisions of 9 Geo. II. c. 36(e), and to the same laws as Protestant Dissenters were subject to in England in respect of the acquiring or holding of such property (f), and that nothing in the Act should be taken to extend the last recited Act (9 Geo. II. c. 36) to Scotland (g). Lastly, by 9 & 10 Vict. c. 59, the privileges already granted to Protestant Dissenters were extended to Jews. (y) 1 Will. & M. c. 18, repealed by 34 & 35 Vict. c. 48, except sect. 5, so much of sect. 8 as specifies the service and offices from which certain persons are exempt, and sect. 15. (z) 19 Geo. III. c. 44; 52 Geo. III. c. 155; and 53 Geo. III. c. 160, repealed by the Stat. Law Rev. Act, 1873. By the last of these Acts Unitarians were placed on the same footing as other dissenters. (a) 2 & 3 Will. IV. c. 115; and see 18 & 19 Vict. c. 86, s. 2. (b) Sect. 1. See also 18 & 19 Vict. c. 86, s. 2. (c) By 10 Geo. IV. c. 7, ss. 28--38, stringent provisions are enacted, designed, as stated in sect. 28, to effect the gradual suppression and final prohibi tion of Jesuits and other religious orders of the Church of Rome bound by monastic or religious vows. The sections provided for the registration of members of such orders then resident in the United Kingdom, and they imposed penalties on such persons coming into the kingdom without licence, or on the admission of persons as members of such orders. (d) Sect. 4. A provision similar to this is contained in sect. 7 of the Roman Catholic Charities Act, 1860, post, Part III. of this Book. (e) Now Part II. of the Mortmain and Charit. Uses Act, 1888, post. (f) Sect. 5. (9) Ibid. That Act provides (h) that "Her Majesty's subjects professing the Jewish religion in respect of their schools, places of religious worship, education, and charitable purposes, and the property held therewith, shall be subject to the same laws as her Majesty's Protestant subjects dissenting from the Church of England are subject to, and not further or otherwise." Both the Roman Catholic Charities Act, 1832 (i), and 9 & 10 2 & 3 Will. Vict. c. 59 (j), were retrospective in their operation. IV. c. 115, and 9 & 10 With regard to Protestant Dissenters, it has, since the passing Vict. c. 59, of the Toleration Act, been decided that charitable bequests in Decisions retrospective. favour of schools, chapels, and preachers of various denominations since relieving of Dissenters, such as Quakers, Baptists, and Irvingites, are Dissenters. valid (k). Similarly, a bequest to Unitarian chapels has been held good (1); for although persons denying the Trinity were expressly excluded from the protection of the Toleration Act, the clause by which they were excluded was repealed by a subsequent statute (m). Acts. trusts of Protestant Dissenters have consequently, since the Toleration Right to have Act, been entitled to have the trusts relating to their charities, charities exeincluding trusts relating to their places of worship, regulated by cuted by the Court (n). And Roman Catholics and Jews having been placed upon the same footing, have now the same rights. Court. The jurisdiction of the Charity Commissioners extends to all Jurisdiction charities in England and Wales, for the benefit of Dissenters, of Charity Roman Catholics, and Jews as much as any others (o). sioners. Since the passing of 2 & 3 Will. IV. c. 115, it has been decided Roman that a legacy to be applied to the use of a Roman Catholic Catholics. college (p), or for the use of Roman Catholic priests (q), is valid. (h) Sect. 2. (i) 2 & 3 Will. IV. c. 115; Bradshaw v. Tasker, 2 My. & K. 221; except as to suits previously commenced: Att.-Gen. v. Todd, 1 Keen, 803. See Att.-Gen. v. Drummond, 1 Dr. & W. at pp. 379, 380. (j) Re Michel's Trusts, 28 Beav. 39. (k) Att.-Gen. v. Hickman, 2 Eq. Ca. Abr. 193, pl. 14; Waller v. Childs, Amb. 524; Att.-Gen. v. Cock, 2 Ves. sen. 273; Att.-Gen. v. Pearson, 3 Mer. 353; Att.Gen. v. Shore, 11 Sim. 592, 616; Att.Gen. v. Lawes, 8 Hare, 32; West v. Shuttleworth, 2 My. & K. 684. Lord Tenterden's opinion contra in Doe v. Hawthorn, 2 B. & Al. at p. 103, appears clearly wrong. See also ante, p. 10. (1) Shrewsbury v. Hornby, 5 Hare, 406; Re Barnett, 29 L. J. Ch. 871. (m) 53 Geo. III. c. 160, repealed by the Stat. Law Rev. Act, 1873. (n) Att.-Gen. v. Pearson, 3 Mer. at pp. 396, 397; Att.-Gen v. Cock, 2 Ves. Sen. 273; Att.-Gen. v. Fowler, 15 Ves. (0) See the definition of charity in (P) Walsh v. Gladstone, 1 Ph. 290. Jews. Re Michel's Purposes still held superstitious. In Ireland it has been held that a bequest of an annuity to the monks of a particular place, to provide clothing for the poor children attending their schools, and of another annuity to a parish priest to provide for the expense of an organ and organist of a Roman Catholic chapel, is good (0). Since the passing of 9 & 10 Vict. c. 59, the same has been the case with regard to Jews. Thus a bequest by a Jew for educational purposes, and for prayers to be recited on the anniversary of his death, has been held valid. A testator bequeathed an annuity to the parnosim, or wardens of a congregation for the time being, to be paid by them to three qualified persons to learn in their Beth Hammadrass, or college, two hours daily for ever, and on every anniversary of his death to say the prayer called in Hebrew Candish (p). It was stated that the term to "learn in the Beth Hammadrass, or college, for two hours daily," signified to study either the Bible or the Talmud; and that the "Candish" was a short Hebrew prayer in the praise of God, and expressive of resignation to his will; that both were acts of piety, and that the prayer was generally said by the sons of the deceased during the year of mourning and on the anniversary of the death, but if there were none, it was either said by the relatives or by some other person. Romilly, M. R., held the bequest to be valid. "Here," said his Honour, "nothing is said as to praying for the soul of any one. [There is] no reference to praying for souls of the founders, and I do not know that there would be anything superstitious in a bequest by members of the Church of England to wardens to select a scholar to learn the Greek Testament two hours daily, and on a certain day to repeat the Lord's Prayer, although the day selected may be the anniversary or birthday of the founder. There is nothing here to show that this was to be done under the notion that the soul of the founder would derive any benefit from it." The relieving Acts above mentioned do not, however, repeal the whole law of superstitious uses. They expressly make valid trusts for schools, places for religious worship and education; they relate also to charitable purposes generally. Under these words trusts for purposes which, although of a charitable nature, would formerly have been considered superstitious-as for instance, trusts for the promotion and advancement of the Roman Catholic or Jewish religion, or for the general benefit of dissenting sects-are un (0) Carbery v. Cox, 3 Ir. Ch. R. 231. (p) Re Michel's Trust, 28 Beav. 39. questionably valid. But trusts for purposes which do not come within those words and are superstitious, are not within the protection of the Acts and are still invalid. Bequests for prayers for the soul of the testator are still void as Prayers for superstitious (2). testator's soul. In West v. Shuttleworth (r), a testatrix directed sums to be paid West v. to certain Roman Catholic priests and chapels, that she might have Shuttleworth. the benefit of their prayers and masses; and she gave the residue of her property to trustees, upon trust to pay £10 each to the ministers of certain Roman Catholic chapels, for the benefit of their prayers for the repose of her soul and that of her deceased husband, and to appropriate the remainder as they might judge best to promote the Catholic Christian religion among the poor and ignorant inhabitants of certain villages. It was held that the gifts to priests and chapels for prayers and masses were void, as being superstitious, but that the gift of the residue was valid. In Heath v. Chapman (s), funds were transferred to trustees upon Heath v. trust for certain Roman Catholic chapels, for saying masses and Chapman. requiems for the souls of the donor and others, and for the souls of "the poor dead," and for other pious uses; and it was held that the gifts for requiems and masses for the dead were superstitious and void; and that the pious uses could not, as religious uses, be separated from the others, and failed also. ceremonies for So, also, bequests for the performance of religious ceremonies to Religious the testatrix's late husband and herself have been held void (t). testator. In Ireland bequests for masses for the testator's soul are valid (u). Valid in And it has been recently decided that a bequest for masses is a "pious use" within sect. 16 of the Charitable Donations and Bequests (Ireland) Act (x). Ireland. doctrine of It seems probable that a gift such as that which was held void Promoting in De Themmines v. De Bonneval (y), viz., a gift for the publication papal supreof a treatise inculcating the doctrine of papal supremacy, would macy. still be invalid. A bequest for the education and maintenance of priests of the Bequest for Hodgens, ibid. 17; Brennan v. Brennan, (x) 7 & 8 Vict. c. 97; Boyle v. Boyle, (y) 5 Russ. 288; ante, p. 19. monastic bodies. Colonies. Cy-près application of order of St. Dominick, and a bequest for the redemption of the rent of a Roman Catholic Church in Ireland held in trust by certain Dominican monks, has been held invalid as contrary to the policy of 10 Geo. IV. c. 7 (3). And it makes no difference whether the monastic body settled in the country after or before the passing of this Act (a). Although the statutes relating to superstitious uses may not be imported into our colonies, gifts therein to such uses in perpetuity, not being charitable, are invalid (b). The rule has been that where a general charitable intention is charitable gift shown, a bequest which fails on the ground of superstition is applied cy-près to valid charitable objects (c), and that such application must be made by the Crown under the sign manual (d). being also superstitious. No cy-près application where no charitable intention shown. Under present law no charitable gifts This would not, however, be the case unless the bequest, besides being superstitious, were also charitable, for unless a charitable intention is shown, there can be no cy-près application (e). Thus, a bequest to Roman Catholic chapels and priests, that the testatrix might "have the benefit of their prayers and masses,' which was void as superstitious, was held not to be applicable by the sign manual; for the intention was "not to benefit the priests or support the chapels, but to secure a supposed benefit to the testatrix herself" (f). And inasmuch as in the present state of the law no gifts for charitable purposes can be void on the ground of superstition (g), superstitious. the necessity for the cy-près application of a gift which fails for superstition cannot arise. Roman A provision for the cy-près application of superstitious bequests in Charities Act, certain cases is made by the Roman Catholic Charities Act, Catholic By that Act it is provided that gifts of real or personal estate upon any lawful charitable trust for the exclusive benefit of Roman Catholics shall not be invalidated by reason of the same being also subject to a superstitious trust. The Court or the Charity Commissioners may in such a case apportion the parts subject to the valid and the illegal trusts respectively; the part apportioned to the law (2) Sims v. Quinlan, 17 Ir. Ch. R. 43; Liston v. Keegan, 9 L. R. Ir. 531; Murphy v. Cheevers, 17 L. R. Ir. 205; and see, also, Walsh v. Walsh, Ir. R. 4 Eq. 396; Kehoe v. Wilson, 7 L. R. Ir. 10; and De Garcin v. Lawson, 4 Ves. 433, n. For the provisions of 10 Geo. IV. c. 7, see ante, p. 20, n. (c). (a) Liston v. Keegan, supra. (b) Yeap Cheah Neo v. Ong Cheng Neo, L. R. 6 P. C. at p. 396. |