The Sun.
London, England, 1817-04-19 00:00:00

VICE•CHANCELLOR's COURT,

His Honour was this day occupied in hearing
the following. important case relative to Leases
of Church binds ;

THE AIVOIINRY-GENERAL V. mnsrs AND °THURS.

An information had been laid before his Honour
respecting some leases which were said to be frau-
dulent, and a Bill prayed for tl►e dissolution of
these leases. Against this Bill there was a de-
mmrer Also-filed.

Mr. Floestr. stated the case in support of the
demurrer: lie began by observing, that he %vas
utterly at a loss to comprehend on what grounds
the" Bill had been brought forward, and in what
manner it could possibly be supported. Atter the
lapse of a ceotory, the Court was now, for the
first time, called to determine respecting the na-
ture of certain leases, and to say, whether thy
had been properly granted or not," The feels of
the case. were shortly these 13. y .the 12th of
()even Anne, the Chapel of Stockton Was erected
into a Parish Church, the patronage of which was
vested in the Bishcip of Durham, and some waste
lands valued then at 201. a year, were allotted to
the Vicar of that neiv Church for his support, tri
Ve hell by'him end his successors in the usual
manner of other church lands. It was, however,
soon forted that this Act was not sufficient in its
rovers, and accordingly another Act was prd-
yet ed iii the Ist ot Ge0..1. by which theiricar was
rillowtal to grant building leases for a suflivient
to:tabor of years, at the highest rent which
could be got, hut he was to, take no preMiom
for the lease. The vestry were associated with
Mai, and also authorized to grant with hini
such leases. It was important that his Honour
should be toll of these two Acts being pto,:ured,
heeanse it proved that the ettentiou of the Legis-
lature had heed) twice called to the subject, end
orte'r due deliberation, they had granted theacti.
Acting theti` on the powers given to him and the
Vestry by the Acts of Parliament, the Vicar in
1716 gramed leases of the grthinds in question for
999 years, and ore lease for a 1000 years, at the
highest rent be could possibly procure, and these
leases were sanctioned by the due forms of law, as
the other side tolMittell. If differences existed.,
it was ordered the Bishop should settle them.
The present uppliCation was made for the purpose
of having these leases dissolved, in consequence
Of their great length. But the Vicar in hinging
this application seemed to have forgot that the
Act prescriited no limits to the number of years,
nod it w:ls shigular, that 0 whole century. should
have dallied without. such a fault to the leases
being seen, especially as. the leases were admitted
to be good in law. One'naturally nsked wbat hall
the former Vicars been about, and Why had it hap-
pened that this lteverend Gentlemen was the first
to see the
.blame attached to the' original lessor
lit granting such it long period ? The rents were
said to be too low stow. This objection was
futile, when his Himont. was rota that they were
the highest tents which conic) be obtained at that
time, when the land was merely a hat rest waste,
Land in fact, it was necessary the long leases' should
be granted to obtain the rent which had been
given. No selfish motives' seem to have actuated
Site then leSsorts or lessees, 'and' it was therefore
impossible 11.4 Eirmour could interfete in a case of
thy ideal equity. No good reason had been Omit
why tbl3 case came on to be heard at the instance
of the Attorney-Getteral. Mr, Horne concluded
by expressing no doubt of his Honour's decision.
Mr. Beto., in support of the bill, contended,
that the,Vestry were authorized to vac: its a Con-
trota over the Vicar, and if they forgot their duty,
the Court had to interfere. He argued, that this
cAse was similar to that ot lenses granted by the
Trustees of a charity, and, the Court had in such
cases always interfered where leases were granted
to.the injury of the charity. He dill not see it
was' ally obje,ction to Itis.cause, that upwards of
a ces.tury had elapsed trout the leases being
granted. This made no difference whatever, for
Loral Eldon had Itch' in the case of Sir John
IN'irris, the( the mere lapse of. time was a matter
of no moment, The.present Vicar lad been col
'Fated by, the Bishop of Durham, in September,
105,, end filed his.bill in May, 1816, so that to
him the lapse of time contd.:be. 110: blame. The,
extreme length :of, the leaset was a
.poWerful
guiecut for their being dissolved, as Lord •Eldon
114(1 dorm the law in Attorney4loneral v.
Barkhouse to_be, that leases for 999 years were
sale proportionate ton lease for 99 years, nod
were. therefore bad. , In fact, it was 'a complete
alteitatiots of the premises, Ile would he glad to
jint!, on %riot faott, it C9tild bee nileged, that ,such
a term for Imilding.leases could be suppotted, or
on, what anthority it could he said to be customary
Durham;?... fle thou ht on the, whole this de-
semtd some inquiry, and it the lessees were to
lop their leases, ritey bed enjoyed diem long.
dough to pay for ally emootee tlisy had been .at.
followed on the-satne tithe.
?4r. Lartco was utkgrly,at:.a lust
,to see what
analogy could pOssibly' be..lo;aetl betw c,ett, truss.
tees nt a charity nod theA6oteot case. 'flit Case
was one of o,,pecultarrydno,vel itityl, and differed
tnateri-dly Irmo efery;Titlte,r, he knew. The,Aut of
Parliantetit authorlted, the vicar with his vestry.
to grata the,"e..le'ases for any number of years,
provided' he oh,;liojed the highest possible rent for
tl.a
‘ Aroond,..ll,t'leits^, bit'Commott Law, ,he could
A-Ve itks" Hoy. tense viititottt lice consent of
his Patron attl4..tle.Q9Apay
,of thx,Rioeca.e... No
It. :Se could be granted tvitliont the cOusent of the
vestry; but was a Court of Equity prepared to,

. .

say, that when a Ica"SewaS poi] in every point of
view, When it was admitted by the opposite side
to be valid in every respect, that nevertheless the
Court would interfere, although the lesser had
strictly aml.literakly fulfilled every syllable of the
Act of Parlianieut -
TiIEVI'CRXHANCELLOR.—CertainIy this is a case
of a very novel natnrc,but it 'is' one of the greatest
possible iinportance. The question involves.some
very interesting points, to which I shall not fail
to direct my attentiOn. I shall minutely examine
the different Acts of Parliament, you have retell-et)
to ;• and after considering the other papers in the
case, 1 shall - give you my opinion how far the
provisions 'of the Acts have been complied with,
and point out what shill I.lPpear to me an equit-
able decision of the case.