Franklin Square House v. City of Boston

• Decision Date: 21 June 1905
• Parties: FRANKLIN SQUARE HOUSE v. CITY OF BOSTON.
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

188 Mass. 409

74 N.E. 675

FRANKLIN SQUARE HOUSE v. CITY OF BOSTON.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk.

June 21, 1905

COUNSEL

Rogers, North & Johnson, Frank A. North, and J. Porter Russell, for petitioner.

Philip Nichols, for respondent.

OPINION

BARKER, J.

The petitioner is a corporation organized under Pub. St. c. 115 'to provide a home for working girls at moderate cost.' The petition is for the abatement of a tax assessed on the land and building of the corporation. It was tried without a jury, and the court, upon facts either agreed to by the parties or found by the presiding judge at the hearing, found and ruled that the petitioner was entitled to an abatement, and reported the case for our decision. The tax was assessed as of May 1, 1903, and the question in the court below was whether the petitioner had shown that its property was exempt under the provisions of Rev. Laws, c. 12, § 5, cl 3, concerning the property of literary, benevolent charitable, and scientific institutions. The decision of the trial court having been that upon the facts stated in the report that court determined that the petitioner's property was exempt, the present question is whether it appears as matter of law that that decision was wrong. See New England Theosophical Association v. Board, 172 Mass. 60, 51 N.E. 456, 42 L. R. A. 281. This court has often considered the meaning of the words 'benevolent' and 'benevolence.' See Saltonstall v. Sanders, 11 Allen, 446, 465-471; Rotch v. Emerson, 105 Mass. 431; Chamberlain v. Stearns, 111 Mass. 267; Suter v. Hilliard, 132 Mass. 412, 42 Am. Rep. 444; Massachusetts Society, etc., v. Boston, 142 Mass. 24, 6 N.E. 840; Young Men's Protestant Temperance & Benevolent Society v. Fall River, 160 Mass. 409, 36 N.E. 57; New England Theosophical Corporation v. Board, 172 Mass. 60, 51 N.E. 456, 42 L. R. A. 281. It never has decided whether every benevolent institution, to be entitled to the exemption, must also be charitable. Young Men's Protestant Temperance & Benevolent Society v. Fall River, supra; New England Theosophical Corp. v. Board, supra. It is not necessary in the present case to decide that question if upon the facts stated in the report the purpose and work of the petitioner in furnishing a home for working girls at moderate cost fairly could be found by the court below to have been charitable. In the present conditions of life there is a large class of young women who have no homes of their own, and who must work hard, and suffer privation. Though not paupers, they are so poor as to make it a work of charity to provide for them a home. The individuals of the class change from day to day. They are sufficiently numerous, and so a part of the public, and so connected with it and with the public welfare, as to give to the work of providing a home for any individuals comprised in the class that quality of indefiniteness in the persons helped, which, with the charitable purpose aimed at, makes a public...