The Sun.
London, England, 1845-05-23 00:00:00

It was an absurdity then to think of their allowing an
army of marauders to assemble on the frontiers of
Turkey, under the sanction of this newly formsd Go-
v( rament. What, he would ask, was done by Tetkey
under these circumstances ? They bore it patiently.
They had trusted to the foreign Powers to interfere, and
if they had done so he was satisfied that the disgraceful
scenes to which he had adverted would not have oc-
curred. He would move, therefore, for copies of the
correspondence which had passed between the Noble
Earl at the head of the Foreign Affairs and Sir S.rat-
ford Canning and Sir Edward Lyons, relative to the
disturbances to which he had alludsd, but he would leave
it to the discretion of the Noble Earl how much or how
little of that correspondence he would produce.
The Earl of ABERDEEN—From the notice of motion
given by the Noble Lord who bad sat down, it was not
easy for him to know the precise object he had in view,
or to give a correct opinion as to the evils to which he
referred. But from the speech of the Noble Lord he
learned that certain incursions of Greek troops had
been recently made upon the frontiers of Turkey.
He had no doubt that these exigencies, however to bs
deprecated, were as much lamented at Atli its as at Con-
stantinople, and that the Greek Government had
nothicg to do with the lawless acts orthe banditti. The
fact had no existence except in the Noble Lord's (Lord
Beaumont's) imagination that the Greek Government
had sent an army to the frontier. He was not prepared
to find fault with the Turkish Government for sending a
force on to their frontier, for they had been persecuted by
incendiary proclamations, and they could not be blamed
for taking measures for their own protection. But the
Greeks had no means of preventing the provocation to
which the Noble Lord had referred. These publica-
tions were issued perfectly independent of the Greek
Government. The Greek newspapers published the
opinions referred to, and the only rsmedy which
the nature of things admitted had been an-
plied, for the Turkish Government had strictly
prohibited the circulation of these documents.
There was no information, except with respect to that
insignificant affair, which was totally unworthy of being
laid before the llouse. It was a mere act of robbery on
the part of individuals quite unconnected with the Go-
vernment. The Noble Lord had described at length the
various parties into which Greece was now divided. The
Noble Lord was, of course, perfectly free to make any
comments he thought fit upon that subject ; but he
would scarcely expect him (Lord Aberdeen) to follow
him in his criticism. His (Lord Aberdeen's) business
was, as far as he was able, to preserve friendly relations
between this country and foreign nations. If it were
true that bad Ministers had been appointed in Greece,
that was the misfortune of the country ; but it was a
misfortune to which other countries were also liable.—

(Laughter.) He did not know how the Noble Lord
could expect him (Lord Aberdeen) to advise his Helenic
Majesty as to the manner in which he should act with
resp .ct to the appointment of his Ministers. The Noble
Lord said that the English party in Greece were reduced
to the very lowest degree of degradation ; but he (Lord
Aberdeen) could assure the Noble Lord that he was mis-
taken. English influence in Greece really depended
on the wealth, integrity, and enterprise of our
merchants, and our commercial chitlings with that
country. He could assure the Noble Lord that
the interests of British subjects would be pro-
tected, i•e the Minister in Greece whom he
might. There wsa no intention on the part of the
three Powers to tot,rate any aggression on the part of
Greece against the Turkish empire. They, however,
did not feel called upon to interfere because a small
band of robbers, totally unconnected with the country,
had attacked end murdered three or four unfortunate
persons. The force which the Turkish Government had
sent out had advanced entirely against pamphlets and
newspapers. There was no real necessity for it. In
conclusion, he could is,ure the Noble Lord that there
were newspapers such as those to which heliad referred,
which he could produce, and he must decline to hunt for
others which might meet the Noble Lord's views.
Lord BEAUMONT said a few words in reply, and
withdrew his motion.
CHARITABLE TRUSTS BILL.
The LORD CHANCELLOR then rose to move the
second reading of the Charitable Trusts Bill, and to
state shortly the nature of the measure. The only pur-
pose which he had in view at present, was briefly to
state the object of the Bill, and to make it distinctly
understood by their Lordships. Their Lordships, no
doubt, recollected that in the year 1818 a Commission
was appointed to inquire into the charitable trusts of
England and Wales, and this Commission was con-
tinued up to 1837. It was but due to the gentlemen
who had composed that Commission to say that they had
discharged their duties with fidelity, zeal, and ability.
They had published thirty-seven volumes of reports,
containing a most valuable digest of all the matters con-
nected with the subject into which the Commission had
inquired: Such was the effect of those reports, that
their mere publication had tended to correct abuses in
a great variety of instances. It had always been be-
lieved that those reports would be followed by some
legislative measure. He believed that some attempts at
legislation were made, but they ended in no practical
result. He had, therefore, felt it his duty, as one of her
Majesty's Government, in connexion with her Majesty's
Ministers, to bring forward a Bill for the purpose of •
supplying that defect, and he submitted this measure to
the consideration of their Lordships' mature deliberation.
Their Lordships.were aware that the only tribunal which
had jurisdiction with respect to breaches of trust in cases
of charity was the. Court of Chancery. Now, he was
ready to admit, from the experience that he had had in
that Court, that no tribunal was better calculated to do
complete justice in cases of charity than the Court to
which be had referred. A series of decisions had been
come to by men of great eminence, by which had been
established a system to perfect, as it appeared to him,
for the purpose of doing justice in cases to which the
reaehine.ry of that Court was applicable. But, unfortu-
nately for the constitution of the Court of Chancery, and
the nature of that tribunal, it was inapplicable to small
charities. In cases where the charity was not more than
201. a year,, the expenses of a suit in Chancery might
absorb the whole. Every one knew that the mere
entrance into that Court caused the delivery of briefs
and references to the Master before a decree or final
order could be made. The whole amount of the charity
might be absorbed. Sir Samuel Romilly had attempted
in S3lllO degree to lessen these expenses. In 1812, he
introduced a Bill, the object of which was, as declared
in the preamble, to give a more summary
jurisdiction in cases of breachallof trust in cha-
rities. That Bill provided that instead of proceeding
by information, the parties should proceed by petition,
and that the Chancellor should summarily adjudicate the
matter on application. That word " summarily" should
not be taken in its ordinary sense, but must be taken
accordins, to the glossary of the Court of Chancery. He
knew what had been the course of proceeding under that
Bill. ' The expenses certainly had been diminished, but
a petition had to be presented to the Chancellor, and a
copy to be served on the opposite party whose conduct
Was called into question. The case came into Court with
an array of two or three counsel on each side. It might
last two or three days—questions would arise which
would have to be referred to the Master—the Master
had to report—that report would be returned to the
Court of Chancery, and exceptions and objections
might be taken to it. Possi ly the report would he con-
firmed, possibly might be referred back to the Master,
and, after all, when a final order had been obtained, an
appeal might be made to their Lordships' House. In
support of what he had been saying, he would refer to one
or two instances—he would take them as they happened.
There was a case of a charity at Battle, in Sussex, which
was mentioned by Mr. Hyde. The charity was a house,
value lat 48/. a year, to let. It was thought desirable
to sell the house, and invest the proceeds in the public
funds. It was impossible to do that, without an appli-
cation to the Court of Chancery. The application was
made. A bill was filled, and referred, of course, to the
Master, to ascertain whether the sale would be benefi-
cial to the charity. The Master reported in favour of
the sale, which took place, and the proceeds were in-
vested in the funds. What was the cost of those pro-
ceedings ? As he had said, the value of the property WAS
48/. a year, and the costs of the application amounted
to 3001. or six years' incOme of the charity. There were
numerous cases of that description. There was the case
of a charity in Essex, which realised 601 per annum,
and this property was let on lease. Some parties ques-
tioned the propriety of that lease, and an information
was filed for the, purpose of setting it aside. The pro-
ceedings were commenced in the Court of Chancery and
occupied a considerable period of time. At length both
parties became tired of litigation, and the result was,
, that the information was abandoned on condition that the
parties proving the, information should pay their costs.
The costs of those proceedings amounted to 6501. It
would be seen therefore that in such cases as these
the Court of Chancery was ineffectual, and the conse-
quence was, that many of the charities were entirely lost.
There were 13,000 charities in this kingdom whose in-
dividual amount was less than 51. a year ; there were
18,000 which did not exceed 101. a year ; and there
were 21,000 not, exceeding 201. a year. For the control
of these the Court of Chancery was wholly inapplicable.
In his opiniOn the interposition of that tribunal was in-
sufficient for any charity under 50/. a year, and there
were no less than 25,000. charities of that nature in the
kingdom, over which there was no judicial control, and
no practical means of their being preserved to those who by
the bounty of others were entitled to them. The principle
he recognised in this Bill was that recommended by the
Commission appointed under the Lower House to 'eport
upon the subject. He proposed to create a tribunal com-
posed of three Commissioners, invested with a power of
adjudication, absolutely summary; that power should
extend over all charities under 201. a year, although, as
he had before observed, in his opinion, 50/. would be
the preferable amount. As to the limits of their
authority, they should, in the first place, be empowered
to call on trustees to render an account of the trust com-
mitted to their guardianship. Secondly, of appointing
new trustees, of effecting sales, of exchanging and
granting leases, and, in fact, possessed of all those
powers vested in the Court of Chancery. Such should
, be their jurisdictien in cases of small charities, unlimited
and summary; but Le preposed to extend their powers
to other large amounts. They should be authorised to
cell on the trustees of such important charities to fur-
nish returns elucidatory of the nature and due discharge
' of the trust, but with no power to rectify what they
might consider an abuse. One part of the Bill related to
the directions of municipal eharities. When the municipal
'. Bill was passed, it had been apprehended that such
' rights would have been dangerously interfered with.
Corporate bodies were then invested with the trust p?o
tempore, and, on the non 'interposition of Parliament,
' trustees were selected ; and, but for the expense attend-
ing it, no better course could be adopted. But when he
' remembered that in the case of the Shrewsbury trust
5501. was paid out of the charity for the appointment of
trustees, in the Salisbury charity 4081., in the Exeter
' 6001, and in the Hereford 7501., solely as tax costs for
supplying the vacancies of trustees, he did think that a
' measure was imperatively called for to rectify the abuse,
especially when two or three persons, in as many hours,
.• could settle the subject, without all that intricacy of