The Sun.
London, England, 1836-11-25 00:00:00

CHANCERY COURT.-(THIS DAY.)

IN RE LUDLOW CHARITY.
At the sitting of the Court this morning a great crowd
in barristers and other gentlemen attended to hear the re-
? Tit of the proceedings in which Mr. Lechmere Charlton,
the Member for Ludlow, was concerned. It was generally
said in the Hall that the Hon. Gentleman had gone to
'ranee to avoid the consequences of the rule for his com-
Mittal to the Fleet prison being made absolute.
1_ Shortly after ten o'clock the LORD CHANCELLOR took
seat on the Bensh, and the matter having been three
bllnes called on by the Register without any appearance on
ehalf of Mr. Charlton, his Lordship proceeded to observe,
!f This is the day on which, by an order of this Court, Mr.
84eclitnere Charlton was to have shown cause why he
20111 d not stand committed to the Fleet prison for con-
tempt, and the case having been three times called on and
1° °no on his behalf having appeared, it becomes my duty
,o 1
deal with it as the matter requires. There being no ap-
pearance, the rule Nisi would, as a matter of course, be
made absolute, but this is a case of grave importance, in-
,°'ing the pure administration of justice, and I think
t
'4' right to state the grounds on which I propose
14), act, and to detail the circumstances which have taken
Place. Upon the usual reference to the Master to appoint
trustees in the matter of the Ludlow Charity, regarding
which three petitions were presented to this Court, one of
thern by Mr. Lechmere Charlton, the parties went before
the Master, and after Mr. Lechmere Charlton bad been, as
IPPears from his own letter, fully heard as Counsel for the
I;etitioners of whom he was one, the matter underwent a
1111 discussion, and on the 30th of September Master
Brougham was under the necessity of leaving town. After
he
had left town it appears that Mr. Lechmere Charlton
Obtained from the Master's clerk a memorandum of what
/bad taken place, and of which this is a copy :
C°PY OF NOTES WRITTEN ON THE STATE

OF FACTS.
SITTLED."
Stated, and admittei to be true, that the Corporation
tleling in debt to the Ludlow Bank, and feeling doubtful whe-
er they ought to hand over the deeds and securities be-
"ging to the Corporation and the New Council, deposited
uneer the advice of Sergeant Merewether, with the Bank
"ho now claim a lien upon them, and also that there were
,*l4Portant questions pending between the old trustees and the
vrese nt Town Council. See also affidavits of Mr. Charlton
IPecting money borrowed by the late Trustees from the same
Barkers with whom deeds deposited. I think this makes it
r4Proper to appoint them new Trustees.
'1 In addition to the objection to appoint any of the old Trus-
'eel arising out of the above admission of Mr. Charlton, who
413Peared before me as Council for the petitioners Sankey and
others, and also from what appears in the affidavit of Mr.
Charlton, it is to be observed that the said petitioners are in
eooternpr, inasmuch as they have refused to comply with any
cicier to produce before me the deeds, books, papers, and
"itings relating to the estates and property of the Charity in
uestion. I am, therefore, of opinion that in this case none of
'ne old Trustees ought to be appointed, and have accordingly
'elected some other names from the list proposed by the said
Petitioners Sankey and others.
(Signed)
30th 5ept.,1836."
W. dwards Wm. Felton
J. Hutchens Wm. Jennings
J. Smith H. Salway
Wm. Tinson Sir E. Thomason
Geo. Hooper J. G. Clay
Joseph Sawyer Geo. Wellings
Richard Marshall Jos. Cooper
Richard Jones Thomas Childe
Rd. Baugh
The above 17 names approved subject to consent.
30th Sept., 1836. ( Signed) W. B.
Ludlow—Stated that the estates under Edward Vl.'s cha-
ritY are solely for charitable purposes,
27. Whether—The Corporation contending that this is
.%:,orporate property, it is safe to appoint them ? Assuming
that the whole is applicable to charity the present Corporation
ought not to be appointed.
RICHARD MANTON. THOMAS CHILDE.
RICHARD JONES. Sir E. THOMASON.
GEO. WELLINGS. I. G. CLAY.
JOSEPH COOPER.
The above is not written on the state of facts, but on a se-
Aerate sheet of paper; but to it there is neither the name nor
the initials of Mr. Brougham, so that it stands for nothing.
This memorandum Mr. Charlton made the groundwork
for writing the following letter :

WM. BROUGHAM.

Ludford, Oct. 24, 1836.

Sin,—l am informed by my solicitor, that the inclosed me-
moranda appear on the statement of facts submitted to you in
the case of the Ludlow Charities, which induced your clerk
to sav that he believe that the Trustees were appointed.
Permit me to say this is exceedingly unfair ; nay, more, it
Is practising a deception on me that is unwarrantable, and which
entitles me to call on you for an explanation, in doing which
I hope I shall not exceed the limits that are allowed to a Gen-
tleman who feels himself to have been undeservedly aggrieved.
As a mere Barrister, advocating the cause of my clients,
question if I have any right to dispute, in this stage
cftke business, your authority, your law, or your deci-
sion in a private communication, as there is another tribu.
1,111
t open to mo for appeal ; but, in the present case, I main-
utbll ' that I am justified in adopting this mode of proceeding,
steesuse you have, in these Notes that is ascribed to you, either
a
ted what is not true, or you have drawn conclusions from
my statements and affidavits which are at variance with the
sets, and which directly or indirectly cast an imputation on
k
Y bcharacter as an advocate, or as a gentleman.
th 'irst--With respect to the word " settled," I assert that
e matter was not settled, and I have your authority tor saying
lat ,
Was not settled. You told me, and I dare you to deny it, that if
ay reply would take up a long time, you must defer it, and you
must recollect that it was only on this express understanding,
t I refused to depart without having your permission to take
that I
out
warrant, which you allowed.
what propriety, then, I ask, did you write the word
settled ?"
But let me remind you of another circumstance.
• rtomilly made a long speech, to prove that the estate de-
al'ecl from Edward VI. was for " corporate," as well as for
a charitable" purposes. Mr. Downes swore (he is not nice to
prilbsde) that it was given for corporate purposes ; but not a
oferect; or the semblance of proof, was in evidence in support
this assertion, save and except a single sentence in the Re-
port of (4 the Charity Commissioners, which so far from bear-
he out the assertion of Mr. Downes, and the logic of Mr.
of.°lllillY, proves—if it proves anything—directly the reverse
and /that they would inferwhen Mr. Romilly had done,
proposed his pure and disinterested squad for Trustees,
You not say, " Let us first go into the question of the
,iviejits of the respective Trustees proposed by each side, after
tu 1:cla you (addretsing yourself to me) will have the oppor
queln.i, of replying as-to the proper disposal of the estate in
, That reply I have never had. It was deferred at
7°r own request, because you said you had no time to hear
:3 if it would take up much time. With what propriety
kr Justice, then, do you say that the question at issue is
settled ?"
, And now to your other memoranda—You assign two rea-
7nsfor not appointing any members of the Old Corporation,
Which, if they are intelligible (and it is really with some diffi-
/lity that I make them out) are untrue. You say that the
deeds, &c., were deposited in the Ludlow Bank, under the
dvice of Mr. Sergeant Mereweather, and that I admitted
!t to be true. I say I did no such thing. Read the report
to the Times newspaper, the reporter of which was happily
Present to confirm the accuracy of nay, statements. Mr. Ser-
bout Mereweather merely advised that the books and deeds
Which related to the charity property should-not be given to
.
lae New Council. It was the Old Corporation, in their ca-
pacity of Trustees, that deposited the property confided to their
iare in that place that was most secure from any lawless vio-
eoee that the rabble may attempt.
You next refer to my affidavit as the ground on which you
u'ulse to make any of the Old Corporators trustees, which is
the
and unjust towards me. My affidavit goes to prove that
tbe old Corporators, as Trustees of the charity estate under
tile Municipal Act, did no more than fulfil the trust reposed in
ketta, without fear or favour ; and I defy you to point out a
th sage that impugns their past conduct, or their eligibility for
e, future.
now come to your " addition I "
Vol/ assert that the old Corporation are in " contempt."
1,1118 is not true, and I need only recal to your recollection
so
Passed to satisfy you that it is not true. I stated that
ae4" Prepared in the first instance to maintain amongst other
ter:cos to which I should advert, that they were not in con-
err* because Mr. Downes, by adding what he had to your
had weakened, if he had not
de:, without your permission,
au,soaed its effect. I stated that I bad in my possession affi-
ts-rats from the parties concerned which they had left to my
/altssaetion to produce, or not to produce, as I thought fit, and I
me Proceeding in my argument when Mr. Romilly interrupted
seal.snd remarked he would pass the subject over for the pre-
arrllia reply to which I said I would not agree to such an
ar
fared
should that is, that he
pass it over altogether,
fared should then proceed with the charge. You then inter.
the, and said that it appeared better to pass it over altoge-
°lA ,aas You understood that the business could proceed with-
acea„7 Papers in question. And it was on this understanding,
ter -‘.Y, that it should be passed over altogether, that the mat-
aertl),Teeeded. With what propriety, then, I ask, do you as-
It ?hat the old Corporation are in " contempt "
!'orie „a however, on the grounds that you say, you have named
11 n° °f the old Corporators as the new Trustees, when. there,
111 ss shadow of blame imputed to them in the affidavits, and
porteedinferences that you have drawn, you are wholly unsup-
nd by facts.
taer who is it that you propose to appoint in their places ?
tro tll);°ne of the persons recommended by the new Council,
the number of ten—every one of the persons supported by
(thZe‘ll-beloved" hack of that over-scrupulous gentleman
y General) for party purposes—
eharile Majority of whom deny that the funds were given for
means able
c m uses—the majority of whom have adopted every
la‘isit at ingenuity. could devise to prevent the rents from the
avt Y estates being paid to the trustees—the majority of whom
tsh, tit red threats and menaces to procure the charity funds for
;I.'ln 11 benefit—the majority of whom have publicly declared
their they only want these charity funds to pay off
IlartutAwo debts--the majority of whom you yourself have in an
Zest
these
paper, declared " ought not to be appointed."
4/ are the persons that you have selected, together
441.114 euerttecui others (a palpable minority!) to. administer honestly
cataeusly the charity funds of this borough. These
Arespersons that you, as a wise and incorruptible Judge,
ePredu to recommend for that important trust, giving the
tOrs (for so they are if they attempt to purloin the cha-
r'