at liberty to change their minds and make whatever disposition of the property that they see fit.27 The power of the corporation to compel a conveyance is unquestionable if the conveyance to the promoters was made upon an express trust to convey to the corporation when formed.28 The equitable title, in such case, vests in the corporation immediately upon its organization.29 § 75. Effect of instrument naming projected corporation as grantee. It frequently happens that a deed, bill of sale, or assignment running directly to the projected corporation is, before its organization, delivered to the promoters. The effect of such an instrument is by no means free from doubt. It has been held that such an instrument passes no title,30 but there are other cases which hold that it takes effect upon the organization of the company.31 27. Camden Land Co. v. Lewis, 101 Me. 78; 63 Atl. 523, and see Tyrrell v. Bank of London, 10 H. L. Cas. 26, 52, 11 Eng. Rep. 934. In the case first cited the purchase was made by the president of the corporation and the court made the point that even though the president had orally agreed with the corporation to make the purchase for it, the statute of frauds would have rendered this promise unenforceable; citing 15 Am. & Eng. Enc. of Law (2nd Ed.) 1187. Cf. Averill v. Barber, 25 N. Y. St. Rep. 194, 198, et seq., 6 Supp. 255, 2 Silv. 40, 53 Hun 636. 28. McCandless V. Inland Acid Co., 115 Ga. 968, 42 S. E. 449; Olympia Min. & Mill. Co. v. Kerns, 24 Idaho, 481, 135 Pac. 255; Hecla Consol. Gold Min. Co. v. O'Neill, 47 N. Y. St. Rep. 211, 19 Supp. 592; Church of St. Stanislaus v. Algemeine Verein, 31 N. Y. App. Div. 133, 52 Supp. 922, affirmed, 164 N. Y. 606, 58 N. E. 1086. And see Coyote G. & S. M. Co. v. Ruble, 8 Or. 284, 299, but compare Kelly v. Ruble, 11 Or. 75, 104-105, 4 Pac. 593, (dissenting opinion of Watson C. J.). 29. McCandless v. Inland Acid Co., 115 Ga. 968, 42 S. E. 449. 30. Wall v. Mines, 130 Cal. 27, 43, 62 Pac. 386; Globe Realty Co. v. Whitney, 106 La. 257, 30 So. 745; Whiting & Sons Co. v. Barton, 204 Mass. 169, 90 N. E. 528. 31. Sumter Tobacco Warehouse Co. v. Phoenix Ass. Co., 76 S. C. 76, 56 S. E. 654, 121 Am. St. Rep. 941, 10 L. R. A. N. S. 736, 11 Am. & Eng. Ann. Cas. 780, (citing 4 Thompson If the corporation is never organized the deed is void32 and a suit in equity to cancel it as a cloud upon title may be maintained,83 The fact that the deed bears date, and was executed, at a time when the company was not yet organized, is immaterial if delivery is made after its organization,34 and even if delivery is made be on Corporations, 5114, 5115); Hecht v. Acme Coal Co., 19 Wyo. 10, 113 Pac. 786. This question is in Tennessee controlled by statute (Code of 1896, § 2036). See Cumberland Land Co. v. Daniel (Tenn.), 52 S. W. 446. As to grants of land by the state for public use, see Trustees of Vincennes Univ. v. Indiana, 14 How. (U. S.) 268, 274, 14 L. Ed. 416; Dartmouth College v. Woodward, 4 Wheat. (U. S.) 518, 690, et seq., 4 L. Ed. 629. As to ordinances granting franchises to corporations, before organization, see Spring Valley Water Works v. San Francisco, 22 Cal. 434; Aspen Water & Light Co. v. Aspen, 5 Colo. App. 12, 37 Pac. 728; Chicago Tel. Co. v. Northwestern Tel. Co., 199 Ill. 324, 346, 65 N. E. 329, affirming, 100 Ill. App. 57, 62–63; McWethy v. Aurora Elec. Light Co., 202 Ill. 218, 228-229, 67 N. E. 9; Stevens v. Borough of Merchantville, 62 N. J. Law 167, 40 Atl. 688; Lake v. Ocean City, etc., Co., 62 N. J. Law 160, 41 Atl. 427; Clarksburg Elec. Light Co. v. City of Clarksburg, 47 W. Va. 739, 749-750, 35 S. E. 994, 50 L. R. A. 142, 152. And see cases cited, American Di"Munigest, Decennial Edition, cipal Corporations," § 111 (1). As to the rights of a railroad corporation under surveys made by its promoters, see Washington, etc., R. R. Co. v. Coeur D'Alene Ry. & Nav. Co., 160 U. S. 77, 99, 16 Sup. Ct. 231, 40 L. Ed. 355; New Brighton, etc., R. R. Co. v. Pittsburgh, etc., R. R. Co., 105 Pa. 13; Homestead Street Ry. Co. v. Pittsburg & Homestead Elec. Street R. Co., 166 Pa. 162, 30 Atl. 950, 27 L. R. A. 383; Chesapeake & O. Ry. Co. v. Deepwater Ry. Co., 57 W. Va. 641, 667, 50 S. E. 890; Milwaukee, etc., Co. v. Milwaukee No. Ry., 132 Wis. 313, 341, 112 N. W. 663, 672. As to the effect of the promoters' surveys and contracts upon the power of other railroads to take a right of way by eminent domain, see Toledo & I. Traction Co. v. Toledo & C. Interurban Ry. Co., 171 Ind. 213, 86 N. E. 54. 32. Wyckoff v. Vicary, 75 Hun (N. Y.) 409, 56 St. R. 774, 27 Supp. 103; Bogard v. Sweet, 17 Okla. 40, 87 Pac. 669, affirmed, 209 U. S. 464, 52 L. Ed. 892, 28 Sup. Ct. 595. 33. Bogard v. Sweet, 17 Okla. 40, 87 Pac. 669, affirmed, 209 U. S. 464, 52 L. Ed. 892, 28 Sup. Ct. 595. 34. San Diego Gas. Co. v. Frame, 137 Cal. 441, 446, 70 Pac. 295; Dyer v. Rich, 1 Metc. (Mass.) 180, 190; Sayward v. Gardner, 5 Wash. 247, fore that time a redelivery may sometimes be inferred.35 A delivery to the promoter in escrow for the projected corporation has been held valid to pass title.36 It has been held that the grantor of a deed naming as grantee a corporation afterwards organized, is estopped from denying the power of his grantee to take the conveyance.37 In African M. E. Church v. Conover,38 it was held that a deed to a voluntary association afterwards incorporated, left the title in the vendor in trust, at first for the members of the association, and later for the corporation. In Smith v. First National Bank,39 it was held that a deed to a corporation not yet organized, is valid, in equity at least, to pass title to the incorporators individually. It is held in McCandless v. Inland Acid Co.40 that a deed to certain persons as directors or incorporators does not pass title to the corporation upon its organization. A deed to the corporation made between the date of the granting of the charter and the date of the complete organization of the company, is a valid deed to a legally existing body.41 31 Pac. 761, 33 Pac. 389, and see cases cited in succeeding notes. 35. Valk v. Crandall, 1 Sandf. Ch. (N. Y.) 179, 182. And see Charles F. Hollwedel Co. v. Auerbach & Co., 67 N. Y. Misc. 148, 121 Supp. 597. 36. Santaquin Min. Co. v. High Roller Min. Co., 25 Utah 282, 289, et seq., 71 Pac. 77; Spring Garden Bank v. Hulings Lumber Co., 32 W. Va. 357, 9 S. E. 243, 3 L. R. A. 583. 37. Dyer v. Rich, 1 Metc. (Mass.) 180, 190; White Oak, etc., Soc. v. Murray, 145 Mo. 622, 47 S. W. 501; Broadwell v. Merritt, 87 Mo. 95; Reinhard v. Virginia Lead Mining Co., 107 Mo. 616, 18 S. W. 17. Cf. Jones v. Aspen Hardware Co., 21 Colo. 263, 268, 40 Pac. 457, 29 L. 38. 27 N. J. Eq. 157. 39. 43 Tex. Civ. App. 495, 504, 95 S. W. 1111, 1116, 16 Tex. Ct. Rep. 729, writ of error refused, 101 Tex. 659. See also Smith v. Texas & N. 0. R. Co., 101 Tex. 405, 108 S. W. 819. And William Cameron & Co. v. Trueheart, Tex. Civ. App., 165 S. W. 58. 40. 112 Ga. 291, 37 S. E. 419; see also Frank v. Drenkhahn, 76 Mo. 508. 41. Dyer v. Rich, 1 Metc. (Mass.) 180, 190, and see Rotch's Wharf Co. v. Judd, 108 Mass. 224; Rathbone v. Tioga Nav. Co., 2 Watts & Serg. 1 § 76. Title to property which corporation is expressly organized to acquire. It has been held that the organization of a corporation, pursuant to a special act describing the particular real estate which the corporation is to take over, which real estate is owned by the incorporators as tenants in common, vests the title to such property in the corporation without further action on the part of the owners.42 Ordinarily, however, a corporation organized to take over specific real property does not obtain title except by a proper deed of conveyance.$3 Title to personal property which the corporation is organized to acquire does not vest in the corporation without some act of transfer, but title to such property may in general be transferred by delivery.45 § 77. Liability of promoter on contract made for the corpora tion. A promoter who assumes to make a contract for a projected corporation, acts as agent for a non-existing principal, and is, (Pa.) 74; Burhop v. City of Milwaukee, 21 Wis. 257. Cf. Aspen Water & Light Co. v. Aspen, 5 Colo. App. 12, 37 Pac. 728. 42. Colquitt v. Howard, 11 Ga. 556; Santa Rosa City R. Co. v. Central St. Ry. Co. (Cal.), 38 Pac. 986, dealing with a street railroad franchise; and see Rau v. Union Paper Mill Co., 95 Ga. 208, 22 S. E. 146. Cf. Florida Coca Cola, etc., Co. V Ricker, 136 Ga. 411, 71 S. E. 734. 43. Leffingwell v. Elliott, 8 Pick. (Mass.) 455, 19 Am. Dec. 343; Holland v. Cruft, 3 Gray (Mass.) 162, 173; Schneider v. Sellers, 81 S. W. 126, (modified, 98 Tex. 380, 84 S. W. 417); McLeary v. Dawson, 87 Cf. Cooke v. Watson, 30 N. J. Eq. 345, where the court, under the special facts, held the equitable title to have passed to the corporation. 44. Ruettell v. Greenwich Ins. Co., 16 N. D. 546, 113 N. W. 1029; Manahan v. Varnum, 11 Gray (Mass.) 405; Florida Coca Cola Bottling Co. v. Ricker, 136 Ga. 411, 71 S. E. 734. But see American Silk Works v. Salomon, 4 Hun (N. Y.) 135, 6 T. & C. 352; Brooks v. Bonner, Tex. Civ. App. —, 149 S. W. 564. 45. See Grand Rapids Furniture Co. v. Grand Hotel, etc., Co., 11 Wyo. 128, 70 Pac. 838, 72 Pac. 687. according to the weight of authority, personally liable thereon,46 unless it is expressly agreed that the other party shall look for 46. Federal-Marconi's Telegraph Co. v. Cross, 16 Hawaii 390. Colorado.-Colorado Land & Water Co. v. Adams, 5 Colo. App. 190, 201, 37 Pac. 39; Hersey v. Tully, 8 Colo. App. 110, 44 Pac. 854. Georgia.-Meinhard Schaul & Co. v. Bedingfield Mercantile Co., 4 Ga. App. 176, 61 S. E. 34, 36; Pratt v. Finkle, 99 Ga. 616, 25 S. E. 941; Jos. Rosenheim Shoe Co. v. Horne, 10 Ga. App. 582, 73 S. E. 953; McRee v. Quitman Oil Co., Ga. App. 84 S. E. 487; Wells v. J. A. Fay & Egan Co., Ga., 85 S. E. 873. Kansas.-Whetstone V. Crane Bros. Manuf'g Co., 1 Kan. App. 320, 41 Pac. 211. V. Fulton Kentucky.-Kennedy Mercantile Co., 33 Ky. L. R. 60, 108 S. W. 948. Michigan.-Belding Land & Imp. Co. v. City of Belding, 128 Mich. 79, 87 N. W. 113; Carmody v. Powers, 60 Mich. 26, 26 N. W. 801, 13 Am. & Eng. Corp. Cas. 4. Cf. Durgin v. Smith, 133 Mich. 331, 94 N. W. 1044; Lockwood v. Wynkoop, 178 Mich. 388, 144 N. W. 846. Missouri.-Queen City Furniture Co. v. Crawford, 127 Mo. 356, 364, 30 S. W. 163, 165; Hurt v. Salisbury, 55 Mo. 310; Lewis v. Fisher, 167 Mo. App. 674, 151 S. W. 172. New York.-Oakes v. Cattaraugus Water Co., 143 N. Y. 430, 439-440, 38 N. E. 461, 62 St. Rep. 445, 26 L. R. A. 544; Hub Publishing Co. v. Richardson, 13 Supp. 665; 37 St. R. 541, 59 Hun 626; Munson v. Syra cuse G. & C. R. R. Co., 103 N. Y. 58, 76, 8 N. E. 355, 29 Am. & Eng. R. R. Cas. 377. Ohio.-Mosier v. Parry, 60 Ohio St. 388, 54 N. E. 364; Farmer's Co.-op. Trust Co. v. Floyd, 47 Ohio St. 525, 26 N. E. 110, 12 L. R. A. 346, 21 Am. St. Rep. 846. Pennsylvania.-Bell's Gap R. R. Co. v. Christy, 79 Pa. 54, 59, 21 Am. Rep. 39; O'Rorke v. Geary, 207 Pa. 240, 56 Atl. 541. Texas.-Weatherford M. W. & N. W. Ry. Co. v. Granger, 86 Tex. 350, 354, 24 S. W. 795, 40 Am. St. Rep. 837; Ennis Cotton Oil Co. v. Burks, 39 S. W. 966; Bradshaw v. Jones, Tex. Civ. App. 152 S. W. 695. United Kingdom and Colonies.— Caledonian & Dumbartonshire Ry. Co. v. Magistrates of Helensburgh, 2 Macq. 391, 407-408, 2 Jur. N. S. 695; In re Hereford & South Wales Waggon & Engineering Co., L. R. 2 Ch. Div. 621, 627, 35 L. T. N. S. 40; Hopcroft v. Parker, 16 L. T. N. S. 561; Bell v. Francis, 9 C. & P. 66; Barton v. Hutchinson, 2 Car. & K. 712; Job v. Lamb, 25 L. J. Exch. 87; Cullen v. O'Meara, Ir. R. 1 Com. Law 640, reversed on other grounds, Ir. R. 4 Com. Law 537; Clergue v. Humphrey, 31 Can. S. C. 66; Coit v. Dowling, 4 N. W. Terr. 464; Thomson v. Feeley, 41 U. C. Q. B. 229; Thames Nav. Co. v. Reid, 9 Ont. 754, rev'd, 13 Ont. App. 303. See note to Greenberg v. Whitcomb Lumber Co., 48 Am. St. Rep. |