(125 N.E.) rents so received for the purposes of the lodge | facts certified to this court that the dominant did not constitute using the building exclu- object of appellant is to spread the gospel of sively for purely charitable purposes, within Jesus Christ by the spoken and written word, the meaning of the statute. To the same and under this object this is directly promoteffect are the holdings in the following cases ed by the distribution of its religious and cited by appellee. Stahl v. Kansas Education- moral books and Sunday school supplies. It al Ass'n, 54 Kan. 542, 38 Pac. 796; City of New follows, therefore, that the object of selling Orleans v. St. Patrick's Hall Ass'n, 28 La. books and supplies is not to make money, but Ann. 512; Ridgeley Lodge v. Redus, 78 Miss. is to promote the religious, charitable, and 352, 29 South. 163: Parker v. Quinn, 23 Utah, beneficent purposes of appellant by dissemi332, 64 Pac. 961; Trustees of the Academy of nating the teachings of its books and periodiRichmond County v. Bohler, 80 Ga. 159, 7 S. cals. The purpose of the society is accomE. 633; Young Men's Christian Ass'n v. Doug-plished by the effect on the minds and lives of las County, 60 Neb. 642, 83 N. W. 924, 52 L. the children and adults who read and study R. A. 123. its books and periodicals. The work of appelWe are also referred by appellee to two de- pollant is to send its workers and missioncisions of this court. In Monticello Seminary aries into those parts of our land where v. Board of Review, 249 Ill. 481, 94 N. E. 938, religious teaching among the young has been we held that interest from bonds and notes neglected, and there to take the young into owned by educational institutions were not Sunday schools for moral and religious inexempt, even should such interest be used for struction and provide for them wholesome the maintenance of the school. We there held literature. Many of these books are suitable that the property itself must be directly used for the use of adults, and the society seeks to for school purposes before it is entitled to be supply needs of individuals and families by exempted. In First Methodist Episcopal gift where that is necessary, but by a sale Church v. City of Chicago, 26 Ill. 482, the whenever a sale is practicable. The price church owned a building in Chicago, the received, whatever it may be, makes a gift to third floor of which it used for church pur- needy persons possible to the amount so reposes but the first and second floors were rent-ceived beyond what the society could othered for commercial purposes. The rents co wise give. It is not the use to be made of the received were used for paying off the indebt-profits but the nature of the business done edness of the church. The purpose of the that is to be considered in deciding the queschurch to promote religion and morality was tion of liability to taxation. We have already not advanced directly by leasing a portion of its building for profit, and so we held that pointed out the purposes for which this socithe part of the building rented for commercial ety was organized and the fourfold nature of its business. Sales of publications made by purposes was liable to taxation. In support of its claim for exemption appellant directs our attention to a number of cases of this and other states. In Main Baptist Missionary Convention v. City of Portland, 65 Me. 92, the corporate purposes of the convention were the promulgation and diffusion of Christian knowledge and intelligence through its agency as an institution of domestic missions. It was held that since missionary societies have been repeatedly held to be charitable institutions, the Baptist Mis The only case cited by appellee directly in this society, whether at a profit, at actual cost, or half cost are in aid of the gratuitous dispoint is American Sunday School Union v. City of Philadelphia, supra. This is a Penn-tribution of the same publications among sylvania case, and the Constitution of Penn- those who are unable to buy them. sylvania limits exemption from taxation to "institutions of purely public charity." Our Constitution does not so limit the power of our Legislature in granting exemptions. In addition to selling its own publications the union also sold such secular books as Webster's Dictionary. These points sufficiently distinguish the Pennsylvania case, so that it cannot be said to be exactly in point with the case under consideration. In all the other cases above referred to, money was realized by the religious or charitable institutions sionary Convention came within that class, from purely commercial sources. In none of the cases was any object of the religious or charitable institution promoted by the act done for which the money was received. It must therefore be determined whether the primary purpose of the retail book business of the appellant is charitable, or whether the primary purpose is the making of a profit and the secondary purpose is the devoting of these profits to charitable purposes. First Congregational Church v. Board of Review, 254 Ill. 220, 98 N. E. 275. and its property was therefore exempt from taxation. In Commonwealth v. Young Men's Christian Ass'n, 116 Ky. 711, 76 S. W. 522, 105 Am. St. Rep. 234, the corporate purpose of the association was to seek out young men, endeavor to bring them under moral and religious influences, secure their attendance at some place of worship, introduce them to members and privileges of the association, secure them proper boarding places and employment, and to surround them with Chris[7, 8] It seems clear from the statement of tian influences. The court, in holding that the association came within the constitutional that any surplus remaining after the sale of term of a purely public charity, said: these publications was to be used for the benefit of traveling, supernumerary, superannuat"Aside from that part of the religious work done by the appellees, which may be denominated, and worn-out preachers, their wives, ed devotional, they undertake to bring within widows, and children. Its annual business the religious, moral, and intellectual influences amounted to $336,800, about 1/156 part of of the institution all young men-and, for that which was derived from the printing of secumatter, old men, too-for their betterment, im-lar books. All the proceeds were applied to provement, and protection from evil influences the purposes named. The court held that the and consequences. It is not so much the giving dissemination of the gospel and the advanceof alms, or in aid of the mendicant; the en- ment of Christianity were charitable purposes. deavor is to reach the boys and young men before they need alms, and before they are reIn Commonwealth v. Lynchburg, 115 Va. duced to beggary, and, by training their minds, 745, 80 S. E. 589, 50 L. R. A. (N. S.) 197, a and teaching them how to use and preserve Young Men's Christian Association was held their bodies, and how to live useful and honest to be exempt from taxation, regardless of the lives, to save them from the lower grades of fact that it charged for billiards, for bowling, misfortune so familiar in the utter helplessness for rooms, and for annual dues, the court of abject poverty and disease and want. This saying: is accomplished by the institutions keeping open attractive quarters, where libraries of useful books, current magazines, and newspapers, innocent games of amusement, a gymnasium for the exercise and development of the body, and night schools, affording additional opportunities to such as have not had sufficient advantages and education, are all accessible to whomsoever will avail himself of them, without regard to creed or nationality. Lists of decent boarding houses are kept, to which strangers are directed. Proper acquaintances and associations are formed, and useful and moral instruction imparted. In other words, they help the helpless, would keep the innocent innocent, and endeavor by placing clean ideals and experiences before the youth to have them adopt them in their lives. They aid the uneducated to a limited but practical education. This is all done for the love of God and for the love of our neighbor, in the catholic and universal sense, free from the stain of anything that is personal, private, or selfish.'" In Davis v. Cincinnati Camp-Meeting Ass'n, 57 Ohio St. 257, 49 N. E. 401, it was held that the association was an institution of purely public charity, and that the lands used by it for the purpose of camp meetings were not used with a view to profit, although charges were made for the privileges of keeping public stables and of keeping boarding and rooming houses on the grounds for the accommodation of persons attending the meetings. "If the dominant purpose in use made of these rooms is to obtain revenue or profit, although it is to be applied to the general objects of the association, it would render the property liable to taxation. But if the use made" is that "for which the association was" incorporated, and tends immediately and directly to promote those purposes, then its use is within the provisions exempting the property from taxation, although revenue or profit is derived therefrom as incident to such use. * * * Manifestly, a member of the association who was a lodger or inmate of the building would be in a better situation to take advantage of the privileges offered by the association, and more likely to take advantage of them, other things being equal, than a member who lodged elsewhere." In Franklin Square House v. Boston, 188 Mass. 409, 74 N. E. 675, the court held that the property of the corporation, which was organized to provide a home for working girls at a moderate cost, was exempt from taxation on the ground that it was a public charity, even though the girls paid for their keep; the corporation having no capital stock and there being no profits divided among its members. In Contributors to Pennsylvania Hospital v. Delaware County, 169 Pa. St. 305, 32 Atl. 45, it was held that farms purchased and permanently used by a hospital for hospital purposes, as part of the hospital plant and as an open air sanitarium, and incidentally for profit to reduce expenses, are exempt from taxation. The court there distinguished American Sunday School Union v. City of Philadelphia, supra, saying: "But property which is used directly for the is exempt, though it may also be used in a purposes and in the operation of the charity manner to yield some return and thereby reduce the expenses." In Methodist Episcopal Church v. Hinton, 92 Tenn. 188, 21 S. W. 321, it was held that the publishing department of the Methodist Episcopal Church South was an institution of purely religious and charitable purposes, and as such was exempt from taxation. The corporation was organized for the manufacture and distribution of books, tracts, periodicals, and other publications, and the act provided that the corporation should be under the discipline of the Methodist Episcopal Church South, according to its laws and usages. The discipline of the church provided that the purpose of the institution was to advance the cause of Christianity by disseminating religious knowledge and useful literature and scientific information in the form of books, tracts, and periodicals. It further provided maintenance was devoted to a charity, and In Grand Lodge v. Board of Review, 281 Ill. 480, 117 N. E. 1016, we held that the Masonic Home for the care and support of dependent Masons and their families was a charitable institution, and that the land used for its (125 N.E.) we further held that the fact that the benefits [erty from taxation are to be strictly conare restricted to Master Masons, their widows strued against the exemption and in favor of and orphans, does not deprive the institution of the character of a public charity. We also held that a large farm operated by the grand lodge to raise produce for the support of the inmates of the home was exempt from taxation as the property of a public charity, when the profits from the farm were used as a part of the charity fund for the maintenance of the home. We there said: "The primary use to which property is put is to be considered in determining whether it falls within the terms of the exemption. * The primary purpose and use, of the lands in question being the maintenance of the home and the whole net income being devoted to that use, they come within the statutory definition of lands actually and exclusively used for charitable or beneficent purposes and not leased or otherwise used with a view to profit." the state and taxation. First Congregational Church v. Board of Review, supra; Northwestern University v. Hanberg, 237 Ill. 185, 86 N. E. 734; In re Walker, 200 Ill. 566, 66 N. E. 144. On the other hand, charities have always been favored in the law because they relieve the burdens of government, and if appellant fairly comes within the terms of the exemption clauses of our Revenue Act we feel It seems inclined to grant the exemption. clear that the predominant object of appellant *in the use of its stock of books and Sunday school supplies in Chicago is to spread the gospel and to elevate humanity by means of written words embodied in its religious and moral books and in its Sunday school lesson helps. The only means by which it can spread this gospel in printed form is by distribution of its books and Sunday school supplies. The purposes of appellant are directly carried out by the distribution of its books and supplies, and the receipt of the money from sales is incidental and secondary. It is not the profits from the sale of the books that accomplish the purposes of appellant, but it is the distribution of the books, periodicals, and lesson helps-and therefore the use of the property sought to be taxed-that directly accomplishes appellant's religious, charitable, and beneficent purposes. In City of Chicago v. University of Chicago, 228 Ill. 605, 81 N. E. 1138, 10 Ann. Cas. 669, we held that the dormitories and dining halls of the university were not used with a view to profit, even though the students paid fees for lodging and board, and that therefore the property was exempt from a water tax. In Monticello Female Seminary v. People, 106 Ill. 398, 46 Am. Rep. 702, a tract of land used by the seminary for promenade grounds, gardens, orchards, pastures, and crop lands, when all the returns from the lands were used to supply the institution, was held exempt from taxation under our statute. In Sisters of St. Francis v. Board of Review, 231 Ill. 317, 83 N. E. 272, we held that the St. Francis Hospital was an institution of public charity where persons who are without money or property are cared for without charge, and that it did not lose its right to exemption from taxation by reason of the fact that the patients received by it who are able to pay are required to do so, or by reason of the fact that it receives contributions from outside sources, so long as all the money received by it is devoted to the general purposes of charity and no portion of the money received by it is permitted to inure to the benefit of any private individual engaged in managing the charity. We further held it was no objection that far the greater number of patients paid for the care and attention they received at the institution. So long as charity was dispensed to all those who needed and who applied for it, and so long as no private gain or profit came to any person connected with the institution, and so long as it did not appear that any obstacle of any character was by the corporation placed in the way of those who might need charity of the kind dispensed by the institution, the institution was a charitable and beneficent organization. [Ed. Note. For other definitions, see Words [9] We recognize the rule adopted by this and Phrases, First and Second Series, Charitacourt that statutes for the exemption of prop-ble Trust; Charity.] For other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes 2. CHARITIES 48(1)-CHARITABLE CORPORA- | and that the hospital furnish facilities for bedTION CANNOT DONATE ITS FUNDS TO SIMILAR CORPORATIONS. A charitable corporation is created by law for a definite purpose, and cannot donate its funds to another corporation organized for similar or other purposes, except that such donation assist to carry out the purpose for which such corporation was created. TION NOT FOR CHARITABLE PURPOSE. side and clinic teaching for donor's students, the donor could compel the donce by a proceeding in equity to carry out such conditions; the gift being made without any condition of reverter. 9. CHARITIES 49-MUTUAL RIGHT TO EN FORCE CONDITIONS OF GIFT. Where money was donated to a hospital corporation for the benefit of the hospital and 3. CHARITIES 10-CONVEYANCE BY EDUCA- an educational corporation, the donor indicatTIONAL CORPORATION TO ANOTHER CORPORA-ing that gift was made to better both beneficiary institutions, in that the hospital staff was to Where an educational corporation conveyed be appointed from the faculty of the educationland to another corporation on condition that al corporation, the obligations imposed upon the a hospital be constructed thereon, the purpose two corporations were mutual, and of such a of the conveyance being to provide additional character that either might maintain a bill teaching facilities for the donor, the conveyance against the other to enforce performance of the was in no sense one made for a charitable pur-conditions of the gift in accordance with the terms of the trust. pose, but was one made solely for the purpose of better enabling the donor to carry out one of its corporate purposes, and as such did not give rise to a charitable trust between the two institutions. 4. DEEDS 145-PROVISIONS IN DEED CONDITIONS SUBSEQUENT AND NOT COVENANTS. Provisions in a deed by an educational corporation to effect that the property conveyed should revert to the grantor unless it should be used for hospital purposes, and the hospital staff to be appointed from the faculty of the grantor, were conditions subsequent, and not covenants, because providing for a forfeiture. 5. CHARITIES 29-NO REVERTER ON MISUSER UNLESS THERE IS AN EXPRESS CONDI TION. If the trustees of a charity abuse the trust, misapply the charity fund, or commit a breach of trust, the property does not revert to the heir or legal representative of the donor, unless there is an express condition of the gift that it shall revert to the donor or his heirs in case the trust is abused. 6. DEEDS 145-"COVENANT" AND "CONDITION" DISTINGUISHED. A covenant differs from a condition, in that in a proper case a court of chancery may enforce specific performance of the former, while it will not of the latter, for the reason that to do so would work a forfeiture of the estate; a court of equity not lending its aid to enforce a forfeiture. [Ed. Note. For other definitions, see Words and Phrases, First and Second Series, Condition; Covenant.] 10. ATTORNEY GENERAL ~9 NOT A NEC ESSARY PARTY TO ENFORCE CONDITIONS OF Where a donation was made to a hospital DENTAL TO OBJECT OF BILL GRANTED. The aim of a court of equity is to administer complete relief in one suit and investigate and determine all matters which form the basis for the complainant's right to relief, and as a general rule the court will, in a single suit, investigate and determine all questions incidental to the main controversy and grant all relief incidental to the accomplishment of the main object of the bill. 12. EQUITY 148(2)-BILL TO ENFORCE CON DITIONS OF CHARITABLE GIFT NOT MULTIFARI- A bill by an educational corporation against a hospital corporation to compel the latter to appoint its staff from the former's faculty was not multifarious, in that it based right to an injunction on a conveyance by it to the hospital 7. CHARITIES 38-CONSTRUCTION OF CON- corporation of the land on which the hospital DITIONS IN CONVEYANCE TO HOSPITAL. Provisions in a conveyance of land by an educational corporation to a hospital corporation, providing that the staff of the hospital was to be selected from the faculty of the grantor, held to mean that the entire staff of the hospital was to be selected from the faculty. 8. CHARITIES 50- EQUITY HAS JURISDICTION TO ENFORCE CONDITIONS OF GIFT. Where an educational corporation donated funds to a hospital corporation on condition that staff of hospital be selected from donor's faculty. was constructed, and also on the conditions of a donation subsequently made by it, and a donation made by a third party to the hospital for the benefit of both institutions. Appeal from Circuit Court, Cook County; M. W. Pinckney, Judge. Bill by the Northwestern University against the Wesley Memorial Hospital and another. From a decree dismissing the bill on demurrer, plaintiff appeals. Reversed and remanded, with directions. For other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes (125 N.E.) Merrick & Merrick and Whitman & Miller, [ president of Northwestern University, the dean all of Chicago (John S. Miller, George P. of its medical department and an additional Merrick, and Russell Whitman, all of Chica- member of its board of trustees selected by its go, of counsel), for appellant. N. M. Jones, Archibald Cattell, and E. Allen Frost, all of Chicago (Chytraus, Healy & Frost, of Chicago, of counsel), for appellees. executive committee, all of whom shall also be always be members of the board of trustees members of such executive committee, shall of Wesley Memorial Hospital,-the additional member above specified to be one who can and will be active and attentive to the affairs of THOMPSON, J. This is an appeal from a the university and the hospital. The duties and decree of the circuit court of Cook county, such executive committee, may be restricted to powers of the aforesaid dean, as a member of dismissing on demurrer, for want of jurisdic- the relations between the university and the tion and for want of equity, an amended and hospital. The three persons so specified also to engrossed bill filed by the Northwestern Uni- be constituted, by a resolution or by-law adoptversity, appellant, against the Wesley Memo-ed by the board of trustees of the university, a rial Hospital, appellee, and James Deering. committee on relations between the university The controversy grows out of the construc- and the hospital. Also, the president of Wesley tion to be placed upon certain provisions in Memorial Hospital, its superintendent and an two deeds establishing trust relations be- additional member of its board of trustees setween the parties. On June 30, 1899, appel- shall also be members of such executive comlected by the executive committee, all of whom lant conveyed to appellee lots 25 to 33, inclu-mittee, shall also be members of the board of sive, in block 11, in Uhlich & Muhlke's ad- trustees of Northwestern University, the addition to the city of Chicago, valued at from ditional member above specified to be one who $20,000 to $25,000. The consideration stated in the deed is $1 and other good and valuable considerations. The deed contained this further provision: can and will be active and attentive to the affairs of the university and the hospital. The three persons aforesaid to be constituted, by a resolution or by-law adopted by the board of trustees of the hospital, a committee on relations between the hospital and the university. These two committees so selected from the university and the hospital, respectively, as aforesaid, shall meet together at least once each month for the discussion and consideration of the joint inter "This conveyance is made upon the express condition that said Wesley Hospital, the grantee herein, shall erect a hospital building on said lot within a reasonable time, costing not less than $150,000, and maintain and operate said hospital, and that the staff of the hospital beest of the hospital and university, and the comdrawn from the faculties of the Northwestern University Medical School, and that facilities for clinic teaching be afforded the students of those schools in the wards and amphitheater of the hospital, as required by the grantor herein, and that on the failure of said Wesley Hospital to carry out these conditions the title shall revert to Northwestern University." mittee may decide all questions that arise, in so far as they are severally authorized so to do by their respective boards of trustees. If any member habitually neglects the meetings of said committee or is otherwise neglectful of the affairs of the university or hospital, he shall be removed from the committee by the executive committee appointing him and his place shall be supplied by another appointment. "Fourth.-Under this gift Wesley Memorial Hospital shall be a teaching hospital, and both in the charity work herein provided for and everywhere else in the hospital it shall give all proper teaching facilities consistent with the principle that the patient's welfare is the first consideration. The medical department must maintain and strictly enforce a high standard of preparatory studies for the admission of students. The medical school must provide an adequate staff for the hospital. It is my hope that the time will come when by mutual agreement between the school and the hospital an be an ipso facto appointment to the staff of appointment to the faculty of the school will Thereafter, between April, 1900, and May, 1901, appellant gave to appellee approximately $30,000 in cash to assist in constructing and equipping the hospital building. April 9, 1914, James Deering, son of a former president of the board of trustees of appellant, made a deed of gift conveying to appellee, in trust, securities valued at over $1,000,000. The deed provided, among other things, that the name of the hospital should be changed to Wesley Memorial Hospital, that the income from the property given should be used for charity work, and that any accumulation of interest might be used for erecting the hospital, but I do not now insist upon this. buildings or procuring appliances needed in the hospital charitable work. The deed further provided in its third and fourth paragraphs as follows: "Third. It is my belief that the best hospital is the one that has close relations with a good medical school and the best medical school is the one that has close relations with a complete and well-conducted hospital. For this reason I desire the medical school of Northwestern University and Wesley Memorial Hospital to act in close and friendly relation with each other. To this end I specify that the I recognize that in a medical school and hospi- The deed further provided that the fund given should be held, managed, and controlled |