The Sun.
London, England, 1852-03-27 00:00:00

The whole merit of it was due to the late Government, and
he hoped they had been enabled to frame a measure wliich
would accomplish all the desired benefits, and avoid most,
if not all, the ebjectioes urged against former tneesures pro-
posed. The 13111 dealt with chanties, whose aneuel inceitee
was very nearly 1,500,000/. No less than 21,00 d of t hm.
had incomes of less than 20/. a year, and upwards of 13 0,10
less than 51. a sear. With regard tot suela ch,arities, the
whole of their property would be absored if they were taliea
into Chancery, though for the largely endowed charities it
was impossiele to conceive a trilmual better calculated to
carry into effect a system of control and administration than
the Court of Chancery. The smaller charities, however,
were wholly unprotected. The law mainly depended on
he a
statute passed in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, giving t
control over all charities to the Court of Chancery, but
cctsmissions of the description authorized by that Act be-
came practically obsolete. Don to 1786
but in nothin
thagt year whatever
the
was done in the way of le w
gislation,
Act commonly called Giltiert's Act was passed, which
required the ministers, churchwardens, and overseers
of every parish to make a return of all charities in
the parish. Returns were made of charitable property
amounting annually to between 200,000/. and 300,0001. In
1812 an Act was passed by Sir S. Roundly, a name always to
be mentioned with reverence, especially in connexion with
rif)rms in the law, by which Act a summary remedy was
proposed for abuses in the administration of charities by
enabling parties to proceed in the Court of Chancery by pe-
tition. It had been well said that the word " summary
must be interpreted by the glossary of the Court of Chancery,
for though the course of proceeding by petition was nk:o.e
expeditious and cheap than that by information, vet with
the costly machinery of the Court of Chancery it was little
adapted to meet the case of the smaller charities. In the
same year another Act was passed compelling returns to
be made relating to charities which might be created there-
after, as well as those then existing. 'lle provision with
respect to charities thereafter to be created remained a dead
letter, Rod the Act applied to charities charged on land
only. He had informed the House of the whole law on the
subject in 1816, when a Committee of Inquiry into charities
and education among the lower orders in the metropolis
was appointed, on the motion of Lord Brougham. In conse-
quence of the report of establishingtee, iu 1818 an Act of
Parliament was passe 1, a commission of in-
quiry into educational charities, which, in 1819, was ex-
tended to charitie, throughout England and \\Taes, and
an Act was also passed which empowered the companies t
certify to the Attorney-General any case of abusefrom. These
commissions were renewed by Act of Pment
to time, and the last was appointed on the Ist of July, 1837.
The commissioners made 3 reports, contained in 37 folio
volumes. As early as 1820 the conatnissioners pointed out
the absence of any effieient jurisdiction in regard to small
charities. In all the Acts of Parliament exceptions were
introduced in favour of the Universities, collegiate and ca-
thedral charities, some of the public schools and charities,
where there was a special visitor; but, from 1818 to 1830,
no exception was made with reference to the gre.t London
hospitals, or any City cnnpanies. In 1830 an exemption
_was introduced by the let and 2cl of William IV. in favour
laavineleen;llowedCo eiiStforfoitr years, was taken away
the sth and 6th of William IV. Such exemption, how-
ever, he understood, was to be strongly contended fur on the
present occasion. In 1835 a Committee of that House was
appeinted to consider the evidence and reports of the com-
missioners, and the measures to be adopted for the purpose
of completing the inquiry relating to uninvettigated chari-
ties, and to report in what mode charity funds could be
most efficiently, promptly, and economically administered.
In their report that Committee expressed their opinion as

follows:—
"Your Committee are inclined to recommend that the su-
perintendence, and, in certain cases, the administration of
all property devoted to charitable uses, sh ;aid be entrusted
to a permanent board of three commissioners, or
somthe due other
independent authority, on whom should be imposedduty
of superintendence and control over the administration of all
property devoted to charitable uses; that such board should
have authority to call for, from time to time, and to a
return or an account of the annual funds and.propertyenforce of any
charitable institution, and have power to summon before
themselves, or other persons specially authorized by them, all
parties concerned in the management or administration of
any charitable institution or funds; in case of necessity to
appoint, and, upon adequate cause clearly established, to re•
move trustees; to taee care that no sale, mortgage, or
exchange of charity property be effected without their
concurrence, and that all funds applicable to charitable
purposes be invested upon real or Government security.
. . . . The board to be empowered to suggest
schemes for the government of all charities, and for the ma-
nagement of all estates and funds be longing to such chari-
ties, and to correct any abuses therein, subject to the like con-
currence in cases where there are special visitors."
The present Bill was founded on the recommendations of
that Committee. The commissioners certified 386 cases to
the Attorney-General, and the charities benefited by the
proceedings taken in those cases to the extent of upwards of
600,0001.; schemes were established having an income of
20,0001. No attempt at legislation was made from 1837 to
1844, when Lord Lyndhurst, then Lord Chancellor, proposed
a Bill to establish a jurisdiction in cases of small charities,
which Bill was read a second time and dropped. Jn 1845
and 1846 similar Bills were introduced, and the last was
thrown out by a majority cf two in the House of Lords.
Those Bills adopted generally the recommendations of the
Committee, and proposed to establish a board not merely for
advice and supervision, bat for absolute jurisdiction over
charities of smaller amount. The blanks were not filed up
in the first Bill ; but the second applied to charities und, r
501., and the third to charities under 1091 Power was given
in those Bills to impose a tax on charities to support the
establishment of the board ; in 1844 3d. in the pound was
proposed, in 1845 61, and in 1846 3d. in the pound on the
smaller charities, and 11/201. in the pound on the larger
charities. Lord Cottenham and Lord Campbell objected
to what they deemed the arbitrary and despotic powers given
to a secret and irresponsible tribunal. Lord Cottenham, who
had rffered a resolute opposition to that portion of Lord Lynd-
hurst's Bills which provided for the establishment of a board,
became Lord Chancellor in 1846, and introduced Bills in
1847, 1848, and 1849. A similar Bill was introduced by the
` Master of the Rolls in 1850. Those Bills go rid of a board,
but provided that where charities existed having an income
of less than 301. the judges of the County Courts should ex-
ercise jurisdiction; where the income NT EIS between 301. and
1001. the Masters in Chancery were enabled to do all that in
respect of the larger charities the Court of Chancery alone
could do. No appeal was given with respect to the decision of
the Masters in Chancery, and those of the County Court judges
could only be appealed against with the consent of the judge
himself. That provision was objected to by the Right Hon.
Gentleman the Member for the University of Cambridge ( Mr.
Goulburn), but the Bill notwithstanding was read a third
time. It was withdrawn, however, in the House of Lords,
and in the meantime a new Commission had been established
for the purpose of making inquiry into the cases
of charities which had not been certified by the Attor-
ney-General. That Commission was issued in 1849, and in
June, 1850, they made their first report, in which they
stated that they had received numerous complaints of mal-
administration of charities, and that it was evident to them
that great abuses still existed for which no sufficient remedy
had yet been provided. They went on to say—
' "It appears to us that in order to apply an effectual and
permanent remedy to these various abuses and defects, it is
necessary to create, by legislative enactment, some public
and permanent authority, who should be charged with the
duty of supervising the administration of all these cho-
ritable trusts. • . We are of opinion that the creation
of such an authority as we have described would be the
means of saving a large amount of charity property by put-
ting a stop to many actual abuses, either of neglect or mis-
application, by advising a better administration to trustees
who are willing to be advised, and, in many instances, by
preventing expensive lineation, which would seldom be
found necessary when it was generally known that any in-
stance of neglect or malversation would meet with a certain
and prompt interference."
In the second report of this Commission thew said—
" Considering, as we have already stated, that some legis-
lative measure was necessary to secure the due administration
of charitable trusts, we have, with the sanction of your Ma-
jesty's Secretary of State for the Home Department, p, e-
pared a Bill for facilitating and better securing the due
administration of charities in England and Wales,' which we
have submitted to the consideration of your Majesty's Go-
vernment."
The Bill so prepared by this Commission was, in point of
fact, the Bill now presented to the House. ft was brought
into the House of Lords in 1851 ; it was received with una-
nimous approbation, so far as the principle was concerned ;
the Bill was read a third time, out it came down at so late
a period of the session that it shared the fate of all its pre-
decessors, and no law existed at the present moment for the
correction of the abuses in question. The general character
of the Bill at present before the House was this :—Adopting
the recommendations of the Committee of 1835, and follow-
ing out the precedent of the Bills of 1844, 1545, and 1840,
it was proposed to establish a board, which was to con-
sist of five Commissioners, two of whom were to be
paid. Whether these two would be sufficient or
not would be a matter of important consideration
for the House.—(Hear.)
Lord Chancellor to was reserved for the
appoint a third paid Commis-
sioner, and his (the Attorney-General's) belief was, that the
labours of the board, when first established, would be so
considerable, in bringing matters into form, and hi bringing
into operation a system applicable to all the charities
throughout the kingdom, thee the proposed board of
two would be insufficient. This board was not to be
invested with any jurisdiction over charities at
all. It was to be - a board for the purpose of
supervision, of control, and of advice, and it was
proposed that no suit or proceedings should be instituted in
reseect to any breach of trust, or of any matter connected
with these charities, wit bout the con,
effect the ent of the Commis-
sioners of the Board. The object and of this pro-
vision would be to prevent a number of suits which had un-
fortunately from time to time been brought, notwithstanding
the check and control of the Attorney-General, merely for
the purpose of costs. It was a check which would be infi-
nitely more beneficial in the case of large than of small cha-
rities, because the former were more likely to tempt the
cupidity of speculators for costs. With respect to charities
with incomes under 301., it was proposed to give juriedic-
tien to the County Courts— alear)--or the district Courts
of Bankruptcy ; and as to the cha ities with incomes between
30/. and 1001., to give jurisdiction to the Masters in Chan-
eery, not compelling parties, as now, to go by petition to the
court More they could be sent to the Master. There was a I
provision in the Bill upon which he laid great stress, tor
enabling trustees and persons interested in charities to oh-
rain the advice of the Commi-sioners of the Board as to their
proceedings under the trust (Hear, hear)—and it was pro- i
posed to render those persons who resorted to the Commis-
sinners for their advice safe in acting under it by giving I
them an indemnity. The Commissionersati would
all have power
if the Bill passed, to send questions relng to charities
with incomes below 301., either to the County Courts or to
the district courts of bankruptcy ; and they would have
power also to interpose, and to stay any proceedings which
they thought were improperly conducted. At the same
time, in order to provide a check against any improper in-
terference on the part of the C ommis.sionerie they were
who
to
have no control at all over the Attorney-G,
notice to them.
miht proceed ex cio without giving any
When the Attorney - General k proceedings,
no certificate was necessary from the Commis-
sioners; but in any other case it was absolutely requisite
before any suit could he instituted either in
b thefo re Ceuany
nty
Courts or the district courts of bankruptcy, or e
proceedings could be taken before the Muter or the Lord
Chancellor. The system proposed by the present Bill would
obviate soma of the objections which had been urged against
former measures. In the first place, the Commis3hear ioners
would be strictly a board and not a court —Wear, .)
They would have the power of directing proceedings to
be taken ; they would specify the court in which those
proceedings would be instituted, subject
check on of course to
the
the
limitation he had mentioned; and, as a up
County Court Judges, they might remove a case from those
courts, and direct it to be carried before the
Maßillster or
wasthe
Lord Chancellor himself. To one part of the he
*old that he must expect considerable opposition. He
meant that which proposed to tax the charities indiscatrimi-
the
nately to the amount of 2d. in the pound, provided
same time that the amount paid by no charity was to exceed
501. It was anticipated that this would raise a sum of
s,soVlyear, which nuld, beli eyed, be eufEcient for

the maintenance of the board anti the necessary :toff. He I
11.1:1 heard it call this Bill !night, ne .sleubt, I,a abeo-
lutely essenti el for ,the peotecii. ei of small clonities,
en 1 that therefore it was perfectly right to call on them to
pay for the great benefit they would derive from this mea-
sure ; but with rrspoct to the larger charities, the me ens
Which they had of reen eying abuses were such that they
would derive no advantage. He thought, however, that this
was a misappreheo.sion, and that the charities in mestioa
weal.' receive a benefit from this measure at least commen-
surate with the rate which it was proposed to impose upon
them, In the first place they woul I find that provision was
made by which the necessity of resorting to Perlianient for
Bills to accomplish various objects, which were absolutely
necessary under the existing state of law, would now he en-
tirely removed.—(Heas, hear.) He fund by a list before
him that since 1800 there were no less than 135 private. Bills
sought for by different charities. Now, the average cost of
those Bills would be 6001. each, making a total expendi-
ture of 81,0001. He asked whether tile benefit would not
be very considerable of a measure which would prevent
any necessity for these applications to Parliament,
and whether it was reasonable to object to pay 501. a year
in order to get rid of a cost which might go far beyond what
they would be called on to pay under this Bill.-4llear.)
As to the question of exemption, his opinion was that any
other exemptions than those proposed would disable the Bill
itself. —(Wear, hear.) The only bodies which it was pro-
posed at present to exempt were the universities, collegiate
and cathedral churches, the British Museum, and institutions I
supported wholly by voluntary contributione. Upon former
occasions institutions supported prineipalis,s by charitable
contributions were exempted, but to this there were objec-
then-, and it was now stetted i the exemption Cl ;Ilse that
where institutions were supported partly by charitable con-
tributions and pertly by endowment, that portion af the
fends arising from the former source should not be liable to
supervision. There would be an endeavour also made, he
MIS aware, to exempt the great London hospitals from the
operation of the Act, but, notwithst aiding the strong appeals
made on this point, he should feel it his duty most srenuouely
to resist the endeavour. He looked with considerable anxiety
to the result of the Committee on the Bill. Everybod✓y ad-
mitted the necessity fur leaielatiou.—(lleer, hear.) Year
after year the objections te the present system had been
pointed out in the most forcible manner; year after year the
subject bad been brought before the attention of the House,
and the House had been asked to interfere for the protection of
charities, many of which had been, he believed, annihilated,
from their b ing unprotected--(Hear)-and if, after all the
carious attempts which had been made, this carefully p-e-
-pared measure should fah like its predecessors, he should ut-
terly despair of ever being able to carry out any reform on
the subject. When the attention of Parliament had been
so repeatedly called to this subject —when so urgent a ne-
cessity for legislation had been proved, it world be a re-
proach to the Legislature to lose what he might almost
descri e as the last opportunity of introducing a measure
which would meet every case and obviate every objection.
He did hope that Parliament would at last pass a Bill
which would be-of the utmost benefit to the country.
Sir A. COCKBURN said he should be happy to asreisst his
stated that the income of the charities affected by this Bill'
amounted tei about 1,503,0001 per annum, which at-twenty
years' purchase gave 30,000,0001. worth of property; every
one would see the importance of the question. The grossest
acuses had prevailed in the administration of charitable
trusts. 'I hey were bestowed by donors, who were about to
quit the world, for the benefit of the poor and needy, who
were without means to maintain their rights; so that it was
no wander that abuses had sprung up. The municipal cor-
porations who were charged with the administration of these
charities had abused their trusts in a very great degree. In
other cases local jobbing had absorbed the funds of the chari-
ties. Since the attentlon of Parliament had been directed
to this subject, no less than 600,000/. had been recovered
from persons who had abused their trust. The charity of
St. Cross, one of the noblest in the kingdom, afforded an il-
lustration of the manner in which the funds of these chari-
ties were perverted by individuals. A suit had, however,
been instituted, and he hoped that before long the funds of
the charity would he made subservient to the purposes of
education, and the other objects contemplated by its founder.
Some such measure as the prevent was absolutely necessary.
All these charities were under the jurisdiction of the Crown,
which was exercised in the Court of Chancery, and set in
motion by the Attorney-General. But the Attorney- General
was wholly incotnpetent to exercise any superintendence over
these charities.
by`here gross abuses were brought to his
knowledge, as the Commissioners or by individuals, he
could institute proceedings to allow his name to be used by
relators. But cases were submitted to by which be was
sometimes misled. The consequence was that he allowed
suites to be instituted in his name fer bad purposes, and for
getting costs, and in this way suits were compromised for
selfish purposes. Of the existing charities there were
18,010 whose property did not exceed 101. per annum, and
whose income did ~not exceed 60,c00/. Any application to
the Court of Chancery relative to these charities involved
au expense which rendered it utterly impossible for the
trustees to move the Court. It was not intended to invest
the Commissioners with judicial powers, because the parties
interested would not in that case communicate. with them
with that entire freedom and absence of reserve which was
necessary to enable them to exercise the
Ac guidanc It e, suseemed pervi-
sion, and control contemplated by this t. to
him that this Bill d d all that could be desired. The Com-
missioners appointed under it would exercise no arbitrary
or inquisitorial powers. Its provisions were calculated to re-
dress the abuses that prevailed, and he should therefore be
happy to give it his supper .—(Cheers. )
Mr. Alderman THOMPSON telt the disadvantageous po-
sition in which he stood in opposing this. Bill. He was
aware of the great amount of property involved, the abuses
that existed in certain endowed charities, and the necessity
of some more efficient control over them. But there was a
wide difference between charitable foundations endowed in
former ages and those in which the management was en-
trusted to respectable individuals, and which was in great
part supported by the contributions of benevolent persons.
He had no personal interest in opposing this Bill, but he had
for nearly years taken a deep interest in the welfare and ma-
nagement of one if these institutions.— (Hear.) He all uded
to Christ's Hospital, an institution having an income t f
1 ,000/. a year, which was managed by governors n,,w living
who had contributed not less than 200.0001. to its funds.—
(Hear ) Were these parties to continue to have the .ma-
nagement of that institution, or were they to submit to the
interference of commissioners?' In the latter event he felt
confident that the revenue, or a great part. of it, would very
shortly disappear. There were 500 governors, every one
of whom was summoned from eight to ten times a year to
attend the business of that hospital Twelve auditors were
elected by the subscribers, who audited and publishe
er d
northe
accounts in extenso, and sent a copy to every Gov.
What need could there be for the interference proposed by
this Bill with such an institution? It was not the paltry
50/. a year that Christ'S Hospital would contribute to the
general fund that he cared about, but those distinguished in-
dividuals would be disgusted at the interference of the Com-
missioners, and would no longer feel the same interest in the
management of the institution. Christ's Hospital clothed,
maintained, and educated 1,400 children—the children of
poor clergymen with large families, of half-pay officers in
her .dajesty's army and navy, and the orphans of officers who
had fallen in the defence of their country. He denied that
any objection was made cn the part of the royal hospitals
to the most searching inquiry by the Commissioners,
For more than twelve months they have been employed
examining into Christchurch Hospital, and they pub-
lished their report in three folio volumes. The Hon
Gentleman here entered into an explanation of the manage-
show t several of the large hospitals of the metropolis, to
the great care with which they were conducted and
the very close attention paid to the administration of their
funds. These inetitutions were tho pride of the inhabitants
and the wonder of foreigne:•s, who were utterly astonished
when told that they were supported by voluntary contribu-
tions. if a clause were inserted exempting from the opera-
tion of the Bill all estaelishments under the control of any I
committee, as governors, appointed by voluntary subscribers,
as wastthe,
the case in previous Acts, he should be satisfied ; but
he was satisfied that if they were subjected to toe p
of the Bill is would go far to stop the stream of charity in
this country.—(llear, hear.), He thought, at the name
dtirmayer,nthfaritanthecheaxrpiteinessesidof
ththeer.CaoymVsasiroant,e,insehteoaucildofb
e paidbeing
the Hon. Gentleman moved that the Bill be sent to a Select
out of the consolidated fund.—( Hear, hear.) In conclusion,
Committee upstairs.
Sir R. H. INGLIS seconded the amendment. He did not
deny that some legislation was necessary, but the presentnt
Bill would punish those who were guiltless. It
very much to the injury of the voluntary charitable esta-
blishments of the country if they were to be exposed to the
visits and examinations of a paid commissioner, it should
be remembered that those institutions were conducted by
persons who rendered their services purely from motives of
Christian charity. In the case o
Literf some of these societies—
such, for example, as the Reyal ary Fund where the
recipients of relief were peculiarly sensitive, the publicity
thus given to the proceedings would go far to deprive the
relief given of its value.—(Hear, hear.) If societies like
these were not exempted, the aid given to decayed literary
men. would become almost as public as that given at the
union workhouse.—(Hear, hear.) He agreed with the Hon.
Alderman (Alderman Thompson) that the expense of super-
vising those charities that required it should be paid cut of
the consolidated fund —(Hear, hear.) The sums given by
in. tividuals to some of the great hospitals were perfectly
astonishing in emunt, and be might state that he one
heard of oral gentlemea who intended to give 5.00e1. to one
of the hospitals of the metropolis, but who had refrained from
doing so till be learned whether those institutions were or
were not to be exempted from the operation of this measure.
lie hoped his lion. and Learned Friend would not drive them
to object to the bill in Coto, and that the measures of the
late Government could be carried out without depriving
thos administered toe charities of London and of other
e who
places of all personal interest in those great establishments.
Mr. Alderman SIDNEY could not concur in the amend-
ment. He admitted the present efficacy of the administra-
tion of Christ',. Hospital, but how could they be sure the
"me spirit would be evinced hereafter? The foundation
they
intended for the sons of indigent f, eemen ; but in effect
rialiyfouunnddetrh,,atot tdhesusco,hnswof nt,hobelecianseen. hlandbeen brought up
there,--(A laugh, and cries (f" No !") Well it was com-
as
monly
the intentions ui not administered with the
general the
sheuld be included under chari-
ties of London were least. r gard
nedierrbeneficent founders, and all of them
hospitals, well as St. let's Hospital, the other
Bill. If they excepted
Bartholomew's and St. Thomas's
supervision proposed by the
must also be excepted from its operation. royal
And yet, but a
short time ago Sr. Thomas's bad a
inconve-
nienced by the defalcation of the treasurer;eengreatly
aud disorderly persons were as common in and, while idle
as in the days of Edward VI., they did inn
the streets now
Bridewell Hospital was carrying out the purposes
find that the
it had been instituted. At all events, oroes e tor which
could
disadvantage in making proper inquiry into the node io
be no
which these great trusts had been discharged, an(le
ob-
jected strongly to the exemption of the universities hefrom
the operation of the Bill in that respect. Provision had
inquiry
into made so far back as the reign of George 11. for a
iato the charities connected with the prisons of the city
of London by one of the Chief Justices or the Chief Baron
and three magistrates, but it was only within the last few
weeks the first inquiry of the kind had commenced. As
an instance of the abuses which had taken place in this
matter, lie might observe, that the Ashton charities, which
were founded 125 years ago, for the payment of 951. yearly
to the pensioners, had never paid one farthing up to the
present time; and it was calcAated ' that the sum due
from them, taken at 3 per cent., was no less than 100,0001.
The trusts were still in existence, but all that came of them
was. that the respectable solicitor who wes interested in the
charity stated he had now 2,000/. or 30001. to render avail-
able for the purpose. He thought it absolutely necessary
that these charity funds should be inquired into, and ha
hoped no further opposition would be offered to so excellent
a measure as the one before the Mute.
Mr. Alderman THOMPSON, in reply to the statement
that sons of noblemen had been presented to Christ's Hos-
pital, expressed his belief that there was on'y one case
which could have afforded ground for such an assertion, and
that was the presentation, made by himself, of a grandson
of the great Lord Rodney, an orphan.
Sir P. WOOD assured the'llon
. . Alderman that the com-
missioners under the Bill would have no other control over
the different charities except that of examination and re-
porting, if they eo thought fit.. He should be sorry to see