The Sun.
London, England, 1837-01-13 00:00:00

VICE-CHANCERY.-(THIS DAY.)

The part-heard case of Bowes v. Strathmore, occupied
his Honour the Vice-Chancellor the whole of the morning.

ROLLS' COURT.-(THIS DAY.)

ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. CORPORATION OF NORWICH.
JUDGMENT.

Lord LANGDALE, in giving judgment in this case, stated
that two informations had been filed by the Attorney-Ge-
neral, at the relation of Samuel Bignold, against the Cor-
poration of Norwich, praying that certain applications in-
tended to be made Of the funds of the borough of
Norwich, might be declared by the decree of the Court
to be contrary to, and in direct violation of, the provi-
sions of the Municipal Corporation Act, and that such
application of the funds might be restrained by the
injunction of the Court. The alleged misapplications which
the defendants were charged with an intention of making,
were twofold ; one being for the purpose of defraying cer-
tain costs incurred in relation to a charity petition, by the
appointment of trustees ; the other being for the purpose
of defraying expenses incurred in relation to certain pro-
ceedings in the Court of King's Bench upon applications
for informations in the nature of quo warrantos. The
prayer of the information was supported by a general
allegation that the intended application of the funds
was altogether wrongful, directly contrary to the clear
and expressed words of the Statute, and in breach and vio-
lation of the duties and obligations of the Mayor, Alder-
men, and Burgesses, as trustees of the Borough fund ; but
there was no allegation that the Corporation was not in-
terested either in the appointment of trustees of the Cha-
rity, or in the proceedings which had taken place in the
Court of King's Bench ; or that the Borough fund was
insufficient to pay those expenses. To the informations two
general demurrers bad been put in by the defendants fer
want of equity. In support of the information, it had been
contended that the expenses intended to be defrayed out of the
borough fund were not such as were authorised by the 92d
section of the Municipal Corporation Act ; that the pro-
ceedings which had taken place in the Court of King's
Bench were such as the Corporation could have nothing
to do with ; and that if the expenses were to be paid out
the borough fund, the burden would ultimately fall upon
the rate-payers in the shape of an additional rate, which
was authorised to be made by the act. It did not appear
to him (Lord Langdale) to be a necessary or reasonable
construction of the Statute to say that a corporation had
no interest in charities not vested in the Corporation
or in any of its members in their corporate capacity, be-
cause although the administration of charity estates was to
be kept distinct from the administration of the borough
fund, yet the corporation, attending to the public benefit of
its members and the inhabitants, would have a due interest
ilFh
in the appointmen of trustees, and in the proper regulation
of the charities. e petition to the Lord Chancellor for
the appointment o trustees must be presumed to have been
necessary for carrying into effect the provisions of the Act;
and as to the proceedings in the Court of King's Bench,
if the Corporation was not allowed to defend an election
duly made, the interests of the Corporation, and even its
existence, might be put to hazard in every case in which a
Mayor, Alderman, or other officer, did not choose to be at
the expense of defending his own election against a rule
Nisi. His Lordship was of opinion that the present case
did not impose on him the duty of deciding on any general
question as to the jurisdiction of the Court to interfere in
the case of an alleged misapplication of a borough fund; be-
cause, even if that jurisdiction did exist, a case was not made
out in the present information for applying it. A mere
general charge that the proposed applications were wrong-
ful, would not supply the want of those facts from which
it was fairly to be deduced, that wrong was about to be
done. Under all the circumstances of the case his Lord-
ship thought both the demurrers ought to be allowed.

TIMSON V. RAMSBOTTONI.

In this case, which involved no point of public interest.
his Lordship confirmed the Master's report, and dismissed
the cross petition.
The COURT then proceeded with the remaining unop-
posed petitions.