The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1869-05-15 00:00:00

THE KING OF HANOVER v. THE

BANK OF ENGLAND.

In the Court of Chancery, the cause of "The King
of Hanover v. the Bank of England " has, been brought
forward, and was a suit by the King George of Han-
over and the Crown Prince of Hanover against the
Bank of England, the Duke of Cambridge, and the
Duke of Brunswick, for the purpose of obtaining a
transfer of a sum of £600,000 Three per Cent. Con-
sols standing in their books to the credit of "his Ma-
jesty's Royal Regency of Hanover," into the names of
plaintill a the King and Crown Prince of Hanover, and
of defendants the Dukes of Cambridge and Brunswick
to be held by them in trust for the persons entitled
thereto by virtue of the law of the 31st of August,
1857, which was set out in the bill, and the convention
recently made between the King of Hanover and his
Majesty the King of Prussia with reference to the
property of the King of Hanover. It appeared that
in 1783 a large sum of money arising from the revenues
of the electoral domain of Hanover was invested on
behalf of his Majesty King George 111., then Elector
of Hanover, in Bank Annuities, and carried in the
books of the Bank ~f England to the credit of "the Lords
of his M ajesty 's Electoral Regency of Hanover," and was
now represented by the £6oo,ooosoug htto be dealt with in
this suit. By a law or family statute made in accord-
ance with the constitution of the kingdom of Hanover,
in November, 1836, it was declared that the successor
to the Throne of Hanover, in the event of the death of
King William IV. without male heirs, should devolve
upon the Duke of Cumberland and his male issue, with
remainder to the Duke of Sussex and his male issue of
a marriage conformable to the family law, with re-
mainder to the Duke of Cambridge and his male issue,
with remminder to the then reigning Duke of Bruns-
ts The bill proceeded to state the law, already
referred to, of August, :857, by which the £603,000
was appointed as the fund for "covering the exigencies
of the King and Queen, as well as of the minor princes
and princesses." A protest was lodged in 1867 by the
Prussian Ambassador against the delivering up of the
£600,000, or the interest thereon, to King George, his
heirs, or attorneys. A convention had, however, been
recently made between King George and the King
of Prussia, by which King George was secured in pos-
session of the £600,000. Under these circumstances
the suit was instituted for the purpose of obtaining a
formal authority, under which the Bank of England
could act with security in transferring the money.
Sir R. Palmer, Q.C., and Mr. Eddis appeared for the
plaintiffs.
Mr. Cotton, Q.C., and Mr. Kelcewich, for the Bank
of England, said that they only wished to have that
security which this Court could alone give them in
transferring this large amount, and suggested the al,
pointment f two trusters for the purpose of transfer-
ring, under the direction of the Court, the fund in
question to the four persons above named.
Mr. Osborne Morgan appeared for the Duke of
Cambridge.
The Vice-Chancellor said that the proper course
would be for these Royal personages to name two
persons to act as their trustees in the matter, and the
order for transferring the fund might then be made in
the way proposed by the learned counsel for the Bank
of England.

SIR C. WENTWORTH DILKE, BART.
On Monday last, Sir Charles Wentworth Dilke died
suddenly at St. Petersburg, to which capital he had
repaired as the representative of England at the forth-
coming exhibition of the Russian Horticultural So-
cieties.
The deceased baronet was the only son of Mr.
Charles Wentworth Dilke, some time editor of the
Athenaum, and also editor of the well-known collection
of Old Plays. He was born on the 18th of February,
1810, and was educated at Westminster and at Trinity
Hall, Cambridge. For a short time he studied law, but
afterwards gave up his leisure to the affairs of three
or four of the learned societies. He took a prominent
part in the Society of Arts, of which he was for some
years chairman of the council, and also in the Royal
Horticultural Society, which owes no little of its public
prosperity to his exertions. At the board of these
societies he became acquainted with the Prince Consort
whom he assisted in carrying out many of the great
schemes for public improvements which are associated
with the Prince's name. He was one of the first pro-
moters of the Great Exhibition of 1851, and acted as
one of the executive committee. On the conclusion of
that brilliant success he was loaded with the favours
of foreign countries and sovereigns, and was offered
by the Queen the honour of knighthood, and by
the Royal Commission a large pecuniary reward. The
knighthood he declined, and the gift of money he re-
turned. When the second Great Exhibition—that of
1862—was proposed, the Government appointed him
one of the five Royal Ccmmissioners for zionducting it;
and on the Prince Consort's unexpected demise, her
Majesty, in a manner that was equally striking and
gracious, conferred upon him the honour of a baronetcyl
Sir C. NVentwortb Mike entered Parliament as mem-
ber for Wallingford in 1865, which he represented
during the Russell-Gladstone and Derby-Disraeli Ad-
ministrations. He was a justice of the peace for the
county of Middlesex, a fellow of the Society of Anti-
quaries, a Fellow of the Royal Geographical Society,
a trustee of the Sloane Museum, and an active mem-
ber of many other public and learned bodies.
For some time past he had been in failing health, and
his friends had hoped that the trip to Russia would
have done him good; but the extreme in-:leniency
of the weather in the north of Europe aggravated his
disease. He married Mary, daughter of Captain
Chatfield, of the Madras Cavalry, by whom he leaves
two sons, Charles Wentworth and Ashton Wentworth
—the first of whom (the member for Chelsea) succeeds
to his honours.