## Facts

- Lydia Hancock’s 1777 will devised a brick dwelling house and land in Boston to the Church of Christ in Brattle Street.
- The devise stated that the church would hold the property on the “express condition and limitation” that the minister (or eldest minister) would “constantly reside and dwell” in the house while minister.
- The will further stated that if the property was not improved for that use, it would “revert” to John Hancock and his heirs; John Hancock also received the residuary estate.
- Lydia Hancock died in 1777; John Hancock died in 1793, leaving heirs who later claimed the property under the reverter language.
- Over time, changes to the property and neighborhood made the contemplated residential use impracticable.
- The church proprietors petitioned for authority to sell the property and apply the proceeds to the church’s purposes.
- Hancock’s heirs opposed the petition, arguing the church’s estate had ended (or would end) upon breach of the residence condition and the property should pass to them.

## Issues

1. Whether the will created a conditional estate in the church that would terminate (with reversion to John Hancock’s heirs) upon nonuse as a minister’s residence.
2. Whether impracticability of literal compliance with the residence direction triggered forfeiture or instead permitted equitable modification of the mode of using the gift.
3. Whether the devise should be treated as a charitable gift to a religious body whose administration could be adjusted while preserving the donor’s primary purpose.

## Decision

- The court held the devise was a charitable gift to the church, and the residence direction concerned the mode of applying the gift rather than a rigid forfeiture mechanism.
- The court refused to enforce the reverter language to divest the church merely because the specified residential use became impracticable.
- The court concluded it could authorize sale of the property and permit the proceeds to be applied in a manner consistent with the donor’s religious intent.

## Legal Principles

- A will conveying property to a religious body for a religious purpose is construed to effect the donor’s general charitable intent, not to impose forfeiture based on technical readings when a reasonable construction preserves the gift.
- In charitable dispositions, when changed circumstances make the donor’s precise directions impracticable, equity may vary the mode of administration if the substantial charitable object is maintained.
- Reverter or “condition and limitation” language in a charitable gift may be construed narrowly so that divestment occurs only if the charitable purpose fails, not merely because the original method of carrying it out cannot be followed literally.

## Conclusion

The court treated the devise as an enduring charitable gift to support the church’s ministry, held that impracticability of using the specific house as a parsonage did not cause forfeiture to the Hancock heirs, and permitted judicial authorization to sell and reinvest the proceeds for purposes consistent with the testatrix’s religious intent.


Proprietors of the Church in Brattle Square v. Grant, 69 Mass. (3 Gray) 142 (1855)