Definition
Civil corporations are a classification of lay corporations defined by what they are not: they are neither religious nor eleemosynary (charitable) in purpose. The category encompasses corporations organized for temporal, secular ends — including municipal bodies, commercial enterprises, educational institutions, and associations formed to advance trade, agriculture, or civic life.
The term originates in English legal taxonomy and was used to divide lay corporations into two branches: civil corporations and eleemosynary corporations. Civil corporations are the broader and more varied of the two, capturing essentially all secular corporations organized for purposes other than the relief of poverty or the administration of charity.
Examples consistently cited in historical sources include municipal corporations (counties, cities, towns, villages), incorporated trading, manufacturing, banking, and insurance companies, and colleges or universities founded for the instruction of youth — so long as they are not organized primarily as charitable foundations.
---
Common Confusion
Civil corporations are frequently conflated with the broader category of lay corporations. The distinction matters: lay corporation is the parent category, defined in contrast to ecclesiastical corporations. Civil corporation is a subdivision within that parent category, defined in contrast to eleemosynary corporations. A researcher who treats these terms as synonyms will miss the taxonomy entirely.
The word "civil" here does not mean civil as opposed to criminal, nor does it invoke civil law as a legal system. It means secular or temporal — relating to the ordinary affairs of organized social and commercial life. This is a persistent source of misreading in historical sources.
---
Why It Matters in Research
This term is a historical classification, not a term of active modern legal use. Researchers encountering it in older English or American treatises and cases — particularly pre-twentieth-century materials — need to recognize it as part of a formal taxonomic system that has largely dissolved into more specific modern categories.
The taxonomy matters in historical research because courts and treatises used it to determine what rules applied to a given corporation. Powers, duties, and liabilities sometimes turned on whether a corporation was civil or eleemosynary, and cases analyzing corporate capacity or the cy-pres doctrine often begin by placing the corporation in one category or the other.
Several traps exist for corpus researchers:
First, "civil corporation" in nineteenth-century American sources often tracks English usage but is not always applied consistently. Some American writers use it loosely to mean any non-charitable corporation; others preserve the more precise English taxonomy. Context is essential.
Second, municipal corporations appear in virtually every historical list of civil corporations, but municipal corporations developed a robust independent body of law. A researcher following the civil corporations thread into municipal law will quickly need to pivot to the separate literature on municipal corporations specifically.
Third, the term largely disappears from American legal usage by the early twentieth century. Modern sources categorize corporations by purpose, tax status, ownership structure, and formation statute — not by the civil/eleemosynary axis. If a modern source uses the phrase, it is almost certainly either quoting a historical source or operating in an academic comparative law context.
The connection to eleemosynary corporations is the most important cross-reference in this corpus. The civil/eleemosynary distinction generated significant litigation over charitable immunity, cy-pres application, and the powers of corporate trustees, and the relevant cases cannot be understood without the underlying taxonomy.
---
Historical Dictionary Support
Black's, Rapalje & Lawrence, and Burrill are in agreement on the core definition: civil corporations are lay corporations that are not eleemosynary. The sources do not conflict; they differ only in the examples they emphasize and the depth of treatment.
Burrill provides the most analytically useful entry, citing Stephen's Commentaries and Kent's Commentaries for authority and giving a concrete list of examples: municipal corporations, manufacturing companies, banks, insurance companies, and trading companies. The citation to 3 Stephen's Commentaries and 2 Kent's Commentaries anchors the term in the mainstream of Anglo-American corporate law commentary.
Black's adds the formulation that civil corporations are those "which relate to temporal police" — a phrase that reflects the older English usage of "police" to mean the regulation of civil order and public affairs, not law enforcement. This phrasing can confuse modern readers and should be understood in its eighteenth-century sense.
Rapalje & Lawrence treats the term briefly and cross-references eleemosynary corporations, signaling that the two entries should be read together. All three sources would benefit from a note that the taxonomy, while analytically clear in the treatise literature, was not always applied with precision in reported American cases.
---
Jurisdictional Note
The civil/eleemosynary classification originated in English law and was adopted broadly in American treatises and early American cases. It was never codified uniformly across states and is not a term found in modern incorporation statutes. Researchers working in any American jurisdiction should treat it as a common-law analytical category rather than a statutory one.
---
Encyclopedia Cross-Reference
Corporate Formation — Corporate Types (Close, Professional, Benefit Corporations), The Law Mind Business Organizations & Corporate Law Encyclopedia
---