Legal title to corporate property.-The legal title to the corporate property vests in the corporate body, and not in the trustees. People v. Fulton, 11 N. Y. 94; Robertson v. Bullions, 11 N. Y. 243; Gram v. The Prussia, etc., Society, 36 N. Y. 161; People v. Mayor, 63 N. Y. 291; Wyatt v. Benson, 23 Barb. 327; Burrell v. Associate Reform Church, 44 Barb. 282; Bowen v. Irish Presbyterian Church, 6 Bos. 245; Dutch Church in Garden St. v. Mott, 7 Paige, 77. (For decisions in reference to mortgage and sale, see note to § 11.)

Acquisition of property.- Under general corporation law, §§ 11 and 12, religious corporations may acquire property by grant, gift, purchase, devise or bequest, for the purposes of the corporation, not exceeding in value $3,000,000, or the annual income from which does not exceed $500,000. In view of these sections, all provisions limiting the amount of property which a religious corporation can acquire or hold have been omitted. In the acquisition of property by devise or bequest religious corporations are limited by the provisions of L. 1860, ch. 360, providing that no person having a husband, wife, child or parent shall devise or bequeath to any religious, etc., corporation more than one-half his estate, after payment of his debts. (See act of 1860, with notes, ante.) Di▷ ersion of corporate property.-The early decisions in this state did not recognize the denominational character of a religious corporation, and, except in cases of an express trust (see Field v. Field, 9 Wend. 394; Miller v. Gable, 2 Den. 492; Peo. v. Steele, 2 Barb. 397), uniformly held that the statute did not recognize the devotion of the corporate property to the support of a perpetual and unchangeable system of religious faith and doctrine, and that a majority of the corporators, without respect to their religious tenets, had the entire control of the revenues and property of the corporation. Gram v. The Prussian, etc., German Society, 36 N. Y. 161; Robertson v. Bullion, 11 N. Y. 243; Petty v. Tooker, 21 N. Y. 267; Watkins v. Wilcox, 4 Hun, 220; affim'd in 66 N. Y. 654.

But since L. 1875, ch. 79 and L. 1876, ch. 176 (substantially re-enacted in 5), which provide that trustees of a religious corporation must administer its temporalities according to the discipline, rules and usages of the denomination to which the church members belong, the idea that corporations formed under the act of 1813 have no denominational character is no longer tenable, and a court of equity may be invoked to restrain a diversion or attempted diversion of the corporate property from its denominational uses, whether made by the congregation or the trustees. First Reformed Church v. Bowden (Gen. T.), 14 Abb. N. C. 356; S. C. (Sp. T.) 10 Abb. N. C. 1; Isham v. Fullager (Sp. T.), 14 Abb. N. C. 363; Isham v. Trustees of First Presbyterian Church, etc., 63 How. Pr. 465; People ex rel. Peck v. Conley, 42 Hun, 98.

Where a diversion is attempted, the members who dissent from the use of the church property for the denominational purposes for which It was secured, must be regarded as abandoning their former rights and

privileges, and the members who adhere to the faith of the denomination to which their society is attached, may continue in the use and enjoyment of the church property. Isham v. Trustees of First Pres. Ch., 63 How. Pr. 465.

Exemption of property. For provisions in relation to the taxation and exemption of corporate property, see laws following geueral corporation law, ante.

Religious corporation can not divide property.-A legislative enactment is necessary for a religious corporation to divide its real estate and vest a portion in a part of its congregation. Reformed Church v. Schoolcraft, 65 N. Y. 134.

The property of a religious society can not be distributed among the individual members by the trustees, or the court. Wheaton v. Gates, 18 N. Y. 395.

Subscriptions.-A subscription to pay a certain sum towards the erection of a church edifice, and a further yearly sum towards the support of the minister, is binding, although the society was not legally incorporated until some time afterwards. Reformed Protestant Dutch Church v. Brown (Ct. of App., 1861), 24 How. Pr. 76.

But where a future incorporation is not contemplated, and the subscription is to be payable to a treasurer appointed by the subscribers, the subscription is not enforceable by a church corporation, created after the subscription. Presbyterian Society v. Beach, 8 Hun, 644.

A subscription for paying the mortgage debt, "in consideration of one dollar to each of them paid," it being shown that the dollar was in fact not paid, is nonen forcable, the mutual agreements of the subscribers being no consideration. Pres. Ch. in Albany v. Cooper, 112 N. Y. 517; affirming 45 Hun, 453.

Where a subscription is made toward erecting a church edifice on condition that the aggregate subscriptions should not be less than a certain sum, and there is no evidence that the subscriber requested the church corporation to build a new edifice, or that it promised it would, and that there was any endeavor to obtain subscribers by the subscriber's wish or direction, the subscription is void, being merely an executor's gift supported by no consideration. Thirty-third St. Baptist Church v. Cornell, 117 N. Y. C01.

Uses and trusts.-A grant to individuals for use of an unincorporated church is valid, and the estate vests in the church upon its incorporation. Reformed Dutch Ch. v. Veeder, 4 Wend. 494; Church of Redemption v. Grace Church, GS N. Y. 570; Trustees, etc, v. Bly, 73 N. Y. 323; Voorhees v. Pres. Ch., etc., 17 Barb. 103; Baptist Ch in Hartford v. Witherell, 3 Paige, 296.

While the statute of Elizabeth relative to charitable uses was never in force in New York (Reformed Ch. in Garden St. v. Mott, 7 Paige, 77), a religious corporation may hold property upon trust for any specific

use within its corporate purposes and objects. Tucker v. Rector, etc., 3 Sand. 242; Williams v. Williams, 8 N. Y. 525.

Trustees can not take a trust for the use of the members of the church as distinguished from the members of the corporation, or for a portion of the corporators to the exclusion of the others. Robertson v. Bullions, 11 N. Y. 243; Gram v. The Prussia, etc., German Soc., 36 N. Y. 161.

It was held in Robertson v. Bullions, 11 N. Y. 243, that trustees can not receive a trust limited to the support of a particular faith or a particular class of doctrines. This decision was before the denominational character of the church was recognized by the statute. It would seem that since ch. 79 of L. 1875 (re-enacted in § 5), prohibiting the trustees from diverting the property from the denomination to which the church belongs, a different rule would prevail. (See decisions (ante.) in relation to diversion.)

Where a conveyance in trust for religious purposes is made in general terms, it can not be inferred from the grantor that it was intended to limit the use to the support of the particular doctrine in which he believed. Robertson v. Bullions, 11 N. Y. 243.

Where real estate is conveyed to trustees in trust for the use of a church or congregation, as a place of worship, which church or congregation is afterwards incorporated, the court after a great lapse of time, will presume a conveyance from the original trustees, or their heirs, to the corporation. Reformed Ch. in Garden St. v. Mott, 7 Paige, 77.

Prior to their incorporation, trustees of a religious society may hold property for the society as a beneficiary. Goddard v. Pomeroy, 36 Barb. 546.

Unincorporated religious societies have no power to take by devise. White v. Howard, 46 N. Y. 144.

Where a trust does not appear in a deed, it may be shown by parol. Church of Redemption v. Grace Church, 68 N. Y. 570.

A trust created for the use of a particular denomination or for a particular purpose can not be diverted. Petty v. Tooker, 21 N. Y. 267; Krusgern v. Lutheran Churches, etc., 1 Sand. ch. 439; Muller v. Gable, 2 Den. 492; Field v. Field, 9 Wend. 394; People v. Steele, 2 Barb. 397. (See decisions in reference to diversion, ante.)

It was held in Burrel v. Associate Reformed Church, 44 Barb. 282, that if the trust deed contains no conditions, the uniting of the society with another denomination will not amount to a diversion; but since L 1875, ch. 79 (re-enacted in § 5), it would seem that a different rule prevails. (See decisions as to diversion, ante.)

So also in Watkins v. Wilcox, 66 N. Y. 654, it was held that the act of 1813 did not require trustees to hold the temporalities for the benefit

of believers in any particular faith. But see decisions relating to diversion, ante.

In Woodworth v. Payne (1878), 74 N. Y. 196, a conveyance was made to trustees of a church "for church purposes," with reservation that if the seats in any church on the premises should be "rented or sold " the premises should revert. Held, that a sale of the premises to an individual, with the same reservation in the deed, was not a diversion.

An absolute conveyance of land to a religious corporation creates no trust beyond the duty imposed by law upon the corporation of using its property for the purposes contemplated in its creation. A corporation may, with judicial consent, sell and convey a good title. Matter of First Presbyterian Society of Buffalo, 106 N. Y. 241.

Rights and liabilities of pew owners.- A pew owner has only a limited and usufructuary interest in the pew, which entitles him to the use of the pew during divine service. He has no interest in the church edifice as such. Freligh v. Platt, 5 Cow. 494; Baptist Church of Hartford v. Witherell, 3 Paige, 296; Wheaton v. Gates, 18 N. Y. 395; Matter of Reformed Church in Saugerties, 16 Barb. 237; Voorhees v. Presby terian Church of Amsterdam, 8 Barb. 135; S. C. 17 Barb. 103; Cooper v. First Pres. Ch., etc., 32 Barb. 222; The Society, etc., of the Puritans, 3 Daly, 1; White v. Trustees, etc., 3 Lans. 477.

The pew owner has no claim for compensation when the church is taken down from necessity, or arising from the condition of the building or other imperative exigencies. Went v. Methodist Protestant Church, 80 Hun, 266.

If overruling consideration existed rendering it expedient to sell the church edifice, the interest of the pewholders would be destroyed. Wheaton v. Yates, 18 N. Y. £35.

If a church edifice becomes useless by dilapidation, or destroyed by fire or casualty, or has to be rebuilt, the right of the pew holder is gone. Voorhees v. Presbyterian Church of Amsterdam, 17 Barb. 103; Abernethy v. The Society, etc., of the Puritans, 3 Daly, 1; White v. Trustees, etc., 3 Lans. 477; Wheaton v. Gates, 18 N. Y. 395.

The trustees may alter the internal arrangement of the church, and if in the exercise of such right the church is destroyed from necessity, a pew holder must be content with a just and adequate compensation. Ccoper v. First Presbyterian Church, etc., 32 Barb. 222.

The trustees may remodel the church edifice and remove the pews, and for this the pew holder can not maintain an action; but if the pew is destroyed for convenience only, or maliciously, the owner has a remedy. Voorhees v. Presbyterian Church in Amsterdam, 8 Barb. 135. If a church is sold, the trustees should tender to a pew holder a pew in the new edifice corresponding in location to the old pew, and if they fail to do so he can be indemnified. Mayer v. The Temple Beth El (N. Y. Com. Pleas, Sp. T.), 52 St. Rep. 638.

The trustees have the management of the temporal affairs of the church, and may regulate and order the renting of pews, or the removal and changing thereof. Solomon v. Congregation, etc. (Com. Pleas, Sp. T.), 49 How. Pr. 263.

The trustees may by regulations in respect to renting and occupation of pews exclude persons holding obnoxious opinions from attendance upon worship. Petty v. Tooker, 21 N. Y. 267.

The trustees of a free church may determine where a person shall sit, and after requesting a person to leave the seat he is occupying, may forcibly remove him. Sheldon v. Vail, 28 Hun, 354.

Trustees have not the power to make an absolute sale of a pew in perpetuity, without any reservation of rent. Voorhees v. Presbyterian Church, etc., 8 Barb. 135.

Interest in a pew, created by a lease in perpetuity, is an interest in realty, and the lessee takes the property as realty with all its incidents. St. Paul's Church v. Ford, 34 Barb. 16.

The contract for a pew beyond one year is void unless reduced to writing, as the interest is one in real estate. First Baptist Church of Ithaca v. Bigelow, 16 Wend. 28.

An order of the court for the sale of a pew is not necessary. Freligh v. Platt, 5 Cow. 494.

An action may be maintained by a pew owner against one who disturbs him in the possession. Shaw v. Beveridge, 3 Hill, 26; Baptist Church in Hartford v. Witherell, 3 Paige, 296.

Persons renting a pew hold as tenants in common. St. Paul's Church V. Ford, 34 Barb. 16.

A wife has dower right in a pew owned by her husband. Bronson v. St. Peter's Church, 7 N. Y. Leg. Obs. 361.

A contract of renting must be shown, before action against pew owner for rent can be maintained. Trustees v. Quackenbush, 10 John. 217; St. Paul's Ch. v. Ford, 34 Barb. 16.

Pews are exempt from taxation, see p. 52, and from levy and sale on execution. Code Civ. Pro. 1390.]

§ 5. General powers and duties of trustees of religious corporations.-The trustees of every religious corporation shall have the custody and control of all the temporalities and property belonging to the corporation and of the revenues therefrom, and shall administer the same in accordance with the discipline, rules and usages of the religious denomination or ecclesiastical governing body, if any, with which the corporation is connected, and with the provisions of law relating thereto, for the support and maintenance of the corporation or of some relig.