The Sun.
London, England, 1835-02-17 00:00:00

CHANCERY COURT-(THIS DAY

THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. SHORE.

This case having been appointed specially for hearing to-
day, long before the Lord Chancellor took his seat the Court
was surrounded with persons anxious to hear the arguments in
the case. Shortly after ten o'clock the Lord Chancellor, Mr.
Justice Pattison, and Mr. Baron Alderson took their seat on
the Bench ; immmediately upon which the cause was called on.
Mr. ROMILLY opened the Bill ; and Mr. Boo.rn, Mr.
COOPER, and Mr. DUCKWORTH, opened the answer of the dif-
ferent defendants.
Mr. KNIGHT, the principal counsel for the appellants, stated
the ease to their Lordship's. The question in the cause involved
not only a question of form but of merit. The late Lady
Hewley, by her will, gave certain property to the charities
in question. The case came before the present Vice-Chan-
cellor, against whose judgment the present appeal was brought.,
The bill was filed for the purpose of redressing certain alleged
grievances in the administration of the charity in question.
This charity was created more than a century since by a lady
of the name of Hewley. The material question in the ens°
was, whether, consistently with the intention of the founder,
the benefit of the charity could be applied to the assistance
and promotion of the Unitarian belief? The relators con-
tended that such an application of the Church funds
was unjust and inconsistent with the intentions of the founder.
If it could be made apparent by the evidence in the cause that,.
it was the express instruction of the Testator that the objects of
her bounty were to be in favour of the doctrines of the Trinity,
there would be an end of the case. If, however, their Lord-
ship's should be of opinion that the intentions of the Testator
were not clearly expressod, then a question would arise in
what manner the charity was to be applied. Lady Hewley exe*
clued a deed on the 13th of Jan. 1704, by which she gave cer-
tain estates to charitable purposes, &c., and after giving legacies
to Lady Bromley and other persons, she gave the residue of her
property to poor and godly preachers of Christ's Holy Gospel.
In 1707, Lady Hewley executed another deed, by which she
gave certain sums for the erecting of alms-houses, the inhabi-
tants of which were to repeat by heart the Lord's Prayer, tne
Creed, and the Ten Commandments, and Bowie's Catechism.
Lady Hewley distinguished her principal trustees for the
alms-houses by the name of Grand. Those gentlemen were
Samuel Shore, Mr. Wiley, who, it would be proved, Were,
Unitarians, and Mr. Pemberton Hayward, who was not propel
to be of that persuasion. The trustees of the alms-houses
were Mr. Wellbeloved, and several other gentlemen 0f.14.11
respectability: Mr. Wellbeloved was the preacher oft e
chapel at St. Saviour's Gate, and under that gentletna°
and the trustees, the plaintiff contended that the
charity had been carried oh directly at variance
with the wish and intention of the testatrix. One
stance was as good as a thousand to show the rnal-ad-
ministration of a charity. Unitarian ministers, and persons
professing Unitarianism, were largely supported out of this OW
rity, and the trustees, at length, became so constituted, that
the positive directions of Lady Hewley were allowed to fall
into disuse ; in fact there was a complete abandonment of bier
directions with respect to the use of Bowles' Catechism. 'll
this state of things was the administration of this CharitYP
when the Charity Commissioners sat at York, and these gen-
tlemen being conversant with legal subjects, and finding
how the funds of this Charity were applied, though'
it right to have the opinion of a Court of Equiti,
upon the subject. This information was not filed
their name, or under their directions, but under those of eer.
tarn individuals acting on their opinion. It appeared to the!:
that the assistance and support of Unitarian preachers all;
doctrines was an improper mode of applying the bounty of thf
founder of this charity. This brought him to the decree °
his Honour the Vice-Chancellor, which was most favourable
and kind to the trustees, though it pronounced for the ill
gality of their mode of Administration. The trustees wen
allowed the whole of their costs in the largest sense of
term : they were not called upon to restore a single shilling
but they were removed for obvious reasons not in any
affecting the personal character of One of them. The decree
of his Honour was " that Ministers and preachers of Vq';t
rian belief were not fit objects of this charity." The ° t
i.
question they had to deal with was a matter of fact as to whsi.
were poor and godly minister's widows, and godly students, e„,
whose benefit this charity was established. There could be c"'
doubt that this charity was created for the support of a part).
cular worship, and it was not in the power of any set of trier
tees to change the mode of applying this trust to one sct, who;
it was clear that it was intended for another. He would her
detain the Court upon a point so clear, but would merely ref
to certain cases that were applicable to the subject. 'nod
was the case of " - v. Deacon," in the first volume
" Dow's Reports ;" the case of " Foley v. Wontner,"
Jacob and Walker," page 2430 ; and that most import'7
case of the " Attorney- General v. Pearson," in 3. " 14e;
vale," page 353. This last was like the present, a case where
the the funds of a charity got into the hands of Unitarians. The t
was one question raised there which it was unnecessary to Ole
at present, namely, having regard to the law as it existed in
early part of the eighteenth century, any foundation for the sue
port ofthe Unitarian worship would be lawful. Lord Eldon lath?!
case said that if the institution were founded for the express P 0;
pose of supporting one particular form of worship, it was el,
in the power of the individuals having the management of i.lO
to alter that purpose for which it was first established, and Po
the nature of the original institution must be looked to• ig
should be recollected that the dates of the deeds by whichto
Charity was established, were in a very early part of the, 'the
century. The ejected ministers of 1662, were believerSll,J
Trinity, and considered this doctrine to be an essential ?i..0,
Christianity, and any one conversant with these times would m''„(l
know that the most ancient Dissenters, such as Baxter 8-0
the eldest Celanny mere as firm believers in the Trinity
r,
or Cranmer. It was then a fact, well known to all peed
sons conversant with theological history, that the ProteStati,
Dissenters, in the 17th and the early part of the 18th ceetof
ries, were as firm believers in the Trinity, and the doctrine of
original sin, as the most faithful members of the Chilrebisw
England. In fact, the Toleration Act of W. & M. c. 18.
was not extended to Papists, or to those who denied the too,
trine of the blessed Trinity ; and the 9th & 10th of W.
c. 32. denounced penalties against any one who openlY,P4
fessed the blasphemous doctrine of Unitarianism, or denieo;i,e
one of the persons of the Holy Trinity. The doctrine 01 .0(
Trinity was professed by the original founder and supporteP
this charity. The will of Sir John Hewley, the husbalt_of
Lady Hewley, contained these words, "so as to be sirret:„,o
the duty, merits, and mediation of Jesus Christ our Saab
and Redeemer." This, as showing what was the religriA
belief of Lady Hewley's family, was not to be overloo,o
though of course it was not in any way conclusive.
the will of Lady Hewley herself contained these 'o'9
" I, dame Sarah Hewley, of the city of York, haviiig eoes
milted my immortal soul into the hands of my R•edee:Lof
to be washed from sin in his blood," &c. In .„he °P"isd
Dr. Cotton, the minister whom Lady Hewley atAended,o.
who was the first trustee of this charity, he 'Ztescriberl,:tiol
self as "an unworthy minister of Jesus C;nrist, conarn" se
his immortal soul into the hands of Grod, hoping to VA
deemed and purged by the precious, blood of his only 6.;;#
It was clear, therefore, that Lady Hawley herself ne
Trinitarian, and that this charity could only have beel:,ritr
tended for the support of those who professed the sarne r
ciples of belief.
,11