The Statesman.
London, England, 1818-05-09 00:00:00

Tilt STAIVSMAN

prope and stigmatized that melte&
ion o rty, f
private rights. Bat it might he said tee Le.
g•stsr ore had, in ail its measures, done that. The
Statute of the 391 h of Elisabeth, it might be said,
bad dealt web those funds as if they were erivate
property. But who ever beard er conceived that
such was the fact ? When a man let his land at too
low a rate, or managed his estate to a disadvantage,
was it ever thought fit to bring him into a Court of
Equity ? Vet, by the Solute of Elizabeth, they were
empowered to issue Commissions of charitable -uses,
where charitable institutions were supposed to be
abused, and they were not to be limitted io their
power, but a Commission had the power of em.
panelling a Jury to try rights, and to make orders
end judgments liable to an appeal, to minims be-
tween the property and the poor, and to see that the
fonds that were raised were properly employed. By
Mr. Gilbert's Act, the 36th George 111., it might be
seen bow these powers were given, and bow to be
le:lncised. Whoever called on a landlord to produce
tan account of the state of his property ? Whoever
thought by a qui toss action to compel any private
individual to bring forward returns of thestate of any
particular property ? Such a proceeding .weeld be
the grossest invasion of the tights of the subject ;
such a transaction never did occur. By. the 36th
Geo. 111. whenever a man was in possession of a
part of the fend of any charity, or the whale, be it
rent charge, be it rent of lend, or be it mosey which
ought to be applied, or whether applied or not, Intl
was ordered, ender a severe penalty, to retern air
account of that, and to show it with all its details.—
By the two Statutes 514 Geo. email might be
made to the Court of Chancery, by petition, to be
signed by any peruse connected with the affair, by
which enquiry might be made into the whole amount
of money or property which might be suspected to
have been diverted from its proper use. Atl con-
siderations were not there entered into, hut never.
Curless, power was given to petition. Not to men.'
lion the common law right of the Attorney-General
to file an information against all abases of charities;
the Common as well as Statute Law had denied, must
peremptorily, that charitable funds were in any way
to be considered private. It was said to be a hard-
ship to have accounts and deeds called fur. Where,
however, the whole of the deed related to the cha-
ritable use, there could he no reason why the owner
should withheld them; but if any part of the deed
related to a public charity, he was only compelled
to produce an attested copy of the part which relat-
ed to that charity. If no part of the deed related to
sny charity, if that question was asked him, he had
only to make oath that it did not, and be had
no necessity to produce it at all: so that unless the
deed related to charities, the Commissioners had no
power to call upon the owner to show it : unless any
thing else were in the deed but his own affairs, it
was sacred from all enquiry and examination. The
principle of the title-deed should be most carefully
examined, and most scrupulously attended to. With
regard to the power of committal, he might say that
that was very essential. Without some power of
that kind, it was impossible completely to effect what
was intended. With respect to the Universities, he
should make a few observation', and Out was the
only remaining part of his subject on which he
thought it necessary to say a few words. Were there
no abuses on the present subject committed by them?
If there were not, why refuse enquiry ? Were t •es P
any abuses? If there were, why tint enquire?
true way of concluding the case, and of setting aside
all doubts, was by throwing open their doors to the
fullest enquiry ; and their dignity, he thought, we.,
much more in jeopardy by leaving any thing dark
and mysterious than by such a mode of prvt eeding
They did not act, however, upon the Wei4lit or
taw
grounds. He could have wished that those learth.,l
bodies had been the first to put in practice, h
not deprecated the provisions of the Bill. hut i
was not so. and therefore it would contain a clau'e
exempting them from its operation. The reason whi
be submitted that, was not merely for the dignity
the Universities themselves, but because the mair
objects on which the Bill operated were in other and
different places. 'Vbe principal objects to he locked
to, were institutions, whence danger arose from their
obscurity and insignificance. They were such, that
often nobody knew of them; they disappeared and
dropped out of notice. Things were in such a state
often, that they could not go above stairs ; that the%
could not file a bill, or have a petition presented
Every body knew of (Void and Cambridge. and
Eton and Winchester. Thu Court of Chancery w
open to them. But their dignity, it was thought,
would he injured by this business, and for 0%1
reason, amongst others, they had bees Included.
Ile remembered, in Daxe's Journal, a case of
a complaint of abuses in the Colleges in Oxford
and Cambridge to the /loose. The whole trans-
action was referred to the Members belonging
to the Temple, and e Bill had been brought in
upon the subject which went through the Commons ;
but the Archbishop of Canterbury introduced a pro.
'is° for exempting the Universities from the whole
of the provisions of the Bill. That was one remark'.
ble instance of a Bill having lost the whole of its in.
tended operation, by the introduction of an amend-
ment. It was said they had the benefit of the Statute
of Elizabeth, but why had they not more frequent
Commissions? [Here the Hon. and Learned Mem-
ber stated the number of Commissions that had oc-
curred within particular intervals.] Up to 1700
there had been a great number of Commissions. It
then happened, from the cumbrous and unwieldy
machinery, and an indisposition to do the office, that
every year there appeared fewer Commissions than be-
fore. From 1700 to 1740 there had been 120, and
up to the beginning of the present neighs 954. From
1760 to 181 S, since Mr. Gilbert's Act, there had
been but one. Appeals to the Court of Chancery
were onfrequent doting Commissions, and the person
interested seldom fail to come. Abuses ezieted in
mementos instances in funds of charities, and they
bad been proved—again and *edit most glaring in-
stances before the Committee of the House, from the
bench and other situations. And the answer that
was given in all sucii cases was no more than this,—
' What right have you to complain ? Have you not
the Coors of Chancery to go to?' It was said to the
poor, whose funds were dilapidated, and who had
not a halfpenny remaining, 6 What reason have you
to complain, is not the Court of Chancery ready to
bear you, and to pay attentiou toy ou If the peti-

.dos. was a 20th part less expensive than it really was,
there was something even in the name of the Coed of
Chancery that barred its doors in itosgination, how-
ever widely they might be thrbwn open in reality.—
There was a feeling like that implied in the words
once used to a Noble Lord on the Bench by Mr.
(now Lord) Erskine, when the Judge said, 4. You
west go to the Court of Chancery," and Mr. Er-
lithie. bad said, " Would your Lordship send a fel-1
low.c. restore there ?"—ln 1803, there had been a
*Conimission to enquire into a charity to Yoikshirel
sod in 1804, there had been * Petition presented to
confirm the decision tibias they lad come to. Ea-
rceptiou had boon taken. Great and solema ergs-
Inents; and; .ito doubt, learned and long argument*,
were held; and the Coon were soppoted to befit*
for &visits in 1908; and one *add have thotagiii
by that lid* it might hive decided. Ever side* that
time, however, that case bad stood upon the Lord,
Chancellor's paper. Ten years bad elapsed ; for the
last four it had stood first on the list and was eves
now undetermined. To use the language of the law'
that was his case ; and if 'any one said to him, there
were the Statutes to which he might have racoons, he
would refer him to the three Commissions, and the
way one for the last 30 years; and if any one said
theta was the Court of Chancery, the cases oodeter-
imined, and' all that bed passed plainly showed the
as/ malty of deviating from their former course. They
should have men to consider the subject who knew it
thoroughly, end were willing to devote themselves to
4t ; men who would move themselves from place to
..place, and not be deterred from entering into investi-
gation even upon common report, never shutting their
against any enquiry, never discrediting because
the abuse appeared too great to be possible; never
considering any man too high to he guilty. They
should be accessible at all times; they should listen,
enquire, and investigate, and only declare a charge
without foundation, alter it had been examined ; only
declare the defendant not guilty, after his case had
been investigated. A power was given to them to
divide themselves, each Board acting as if there were
no other than themselves, proceeding by its own
means, and dependent on its own exertions ; not
filtering away their time end continuing abuses, by
holding meetings of six or seven persons, as some did
in this or that great House, but acting each upon
their own strength and with their own personal re-
sponsibility, and all entering into an honest rivalry
sod competition which should first develop and which
first destroy those abuses. From these principles, he
was sanguine that they would prove successful, and i
produce the must beneficial results. Ile could not
conclude without stating, in justice to many who's,
might think their conduct attacked, that many
abuses had existed of great amount, in which no
man could distinctly hear the s ightest imputation.
—Neglect in managing large establishments,
and want of care in conducting the affairs of
Corporations, which were at first perhaps very
complicated, had often produced the ill effects
I they would have to rempd). The want of proper
provisions to fill up vacancies, the loss of the machi-
nery (if he might so sal), were often found to have,
occasioned evils which they would have to destroy.
Even in some cases it might happen that there was no
person to pay the mosey to, and then the present,
possessor perhaps said he would open a book or keep
the money till clainte.l, or give it to the poor. Of
11
the funds which were collected for the poor it was
impossible to speak with the admiration which the
founders deserved. When they came to examine
those, they would often find that it was pot a man
who had .massed great wealth in the service of his
Country wishing to give to the People some of his
lair gains, or to compound a little with his conscience
for his unfair acquisitions: it was most probably I
some numble, low.born trailesman—some poor, wore
hy. ilolivii!ual, who had raised himself from the
meanest rank in society, who had brought himself
to
situation which he hail scarcely allowed himself to
‘lol.e for, who made endowments on children and
y•oung men who might be doomed to struggle through
the camp dgeipi ac himself. But the picture was
mailo far more loucAlig, when, in addition to all our
masters had done. he In. lied up to the devotion of
wealth told the sacrisce of health that was so often
made for the relief of want and p .•erty. The lion.
and Learned Gentleman, after comparing the chaii•
lies of a free and happy Country, with the ostesita-
tious in4titutions of countries where a more arbitrary
Government prevailed, in a most eloquent manner
concluded his very interesting speech by moving,
that the House should g into the Committee on the
Bill for the Education of the lions.
Lord CASTLEREAGH hail no disposition what-
ever to oppose the Bill ; its objects were most desir-
able in a national point of view ; and he hoped the
lion. and Learned Gentleman would not depait from
the principle upon which tie 13,11 emanated from the
Committee appointed on the subject, nor attempt to
check the spirit of individual and voluntary charity,
which was the great artery which fed all the channels
and ramifications of the st stem of improvement in
the lower orders, end which so feelingly responded
to the public sentiment and independent turn of
mind peculiarly the characteristic of the People of
England. It must he admitted, the treater the num-
ber of charities, the greater the opportunity of their
abuse. But he was certainly of opinion, no system
would prevent abuse so effectually, as an active and
intelligent Board of Commissioners. He regretted
the Hon. and Learned Gentleman had leaned so very
hardly otv the Statute of Elizabeth and the Court of
1 Chancery. It was obvious the Commissioners, how-
ever, only could enquire and make a suitable appli-
cation to that very Court of Chancery which he had
so deeply arraigned. The insinuation against the
Court, too, had proceeded upon au exparte state-
' merit of a case as yet unexplained. He feared there
was little probability of ever attaining those two de-
siderata in such cases—namely, an equitable decision
in very complicated cases, combined with expedition.
He here would protest against the charge, as not
warranted by the facts stated. If the Bill should
materially step out of the line proposed by the Com-
mittee, be should withhold his support from it.—
Much good might be (lone by the interference of
Parliament, if it was only to quicken the pulse of ex-
ertion in those who had the management of founda-
tions of this nature—[Near, hear !) —and much
might be expected from intelligent active Conarns7
sioners. The foundations, though public ptoptity
u ere bail private property as to their restriction to

could not be diverted.

particular trust, G om which the \
WOW-I
—He felt a Ittivir Strong
polo, to take the seperintentletice out of the hand* of
the Crown. What had been &me as to the appoint-
meet of Commissioners of Naval Enquiry had ori4i-
grated in a spirit of jealousy of the Crown, which he
hoped never to see cause to revive as ito.:e;:sary,
the opinicin of the House.—( Hew !)—lie thought
would, in this instance, be a proceeding highly
derogatory to the Crown, not to proceed as in the
appointment of a similar enquiry into the Irish
Insulations in 1806, which bad completely effected
all-tbe purposes for which it had been appointed.
It ass, however, impossible to combine enquiry and
remedy In these Commissions; and if it was intended
to render it effective, considers We eapence would be
naturally incurred upon a scale of such magnitude as
the scrutiny of these charities all over England
enf
Wales. Much of this ezpence would naturally fail
opon the House to make good. The Conintii:sioners
slideld be constituted intrtry'ef professional, intelli-
gent, and active Members, and partly of persons of
high tank and consideration. 11. hoped the Hon.
and Learned Member would so frame the Bill in the
Committee as to make it consistent with his view of
the subject, to lend bins all the advantages of his
support, which be should find his; in that case,
molt prompt to afford to the enactment of the Bill.
—( Hear, hear!)
Mr. BROUGHAM captained.

Mr. LESLIE FOSTER stated, that great 'dun.
tags had been found to result in Ireland front the
Commission basing the power to carry on Chancery
suits to theie conclusion. Re apprehended mach of
the delay in Chancery with regard to charitable
fosodatioas, had arisen from the eireametance, that °
there was often no person interested to carry on the
snits. The Commissioners would supply the wens of
an Actor in these suits.
Mr. ROBINSON thought the School of Harrow
should also be excepted, as a few years ago a Bill bad
been hied against the Trustees of that School for a
misapplication of the funds, but it had been decided
that the present administration of those funds was
unexceptionable.
Mr. BROUGHAM observed, that if one 'seep.
tin.* was made after another, en no general princi-
ple, nothing would be left to the Commissioners to
enquire into.

Mr. PEEL observed, that the Bill professed to ap-
point Commissioners to enquire into the places for
the Education of the Poor. Harrow had been deter-
mined by the Master of the Rolls, to be a place not
destined by Mr. Lyon, its founder, to the Education
of the Poor.
Mr. ABERCROMBIE said, that, on the same
principle on which it was sought to exclude Harrow,
every charity respecting-which a legal enquiry bad at
any time taken place might be exempted. As to the
principle of the Bill he observed, that he hoped the
remedy for the abuses which might be foend to exist,
would not be confined to the Court of Chancery.—
He disapproved of the tocsin which the Noble Lord
bad spoken of the abuses which had been brought to
light. If the Commissioners were appointed, as por-
tions who were not likely to meet with any thin; bat
unavoidable abuses, their appointments would not
lead to much good. It was necessary that they should
undertake their task witba perfect conviction that they
-would meet with all the opposition which could be
offered by persons contending for character and pro.
r perty. The utmost care should be taken in selecting
the Commissioners, who should be not only active
persons, bat such as could devote their whole time to
the occupation. It was, therefore, onadvisable that
they should be appointed among Barristers who were
in practice, though a legal education might tie ne-
cessary. He did not see the use of the ornamental
Commissioners of high rank whom the Noble Lord
proposed. They would not perform any part of the
duties, and they would thus be subjected to en on-
necessary responsibility, and attain for the Commis-
sion a confidence which was not due to it.
Lord CASTLEREAGII and Mr. ABERCROM-
BIE explained.
i Sir J. NEWPORT observed, that the Act of
1806, for Irelandl
1788, and the Bill had wthhiecrhe h
be
adh ad
beenfoonnod eeduneppotni 0 itn ii
in,
favour of any body whatever. By that Act (of
1 I SO6), the Bishops were to choose seven Commis-
sioners, and the Lord Lieutenant six. The Lord
Lieutenant did not choose men who were illustrious
in any way except by their talents and virtue, such
as Mr. Grattan, Mr. Corry, Mr. Tighe, Mr. Edg-
worth, tcr.
Mr. BROUGHAM observed, that it would be is
the poster of Parliament to relieve itself from any
expense no this subject. If any sums were recovered
for a charitable fund, it was in the practice of the
Court of Chancery to defray the expenses which
were incurred in recovering it, out of those sums.—
Ile dirt not see why Parliament might not, with the
utmost equity, defray the expenses of the Commis-
sion out of the accumulated sums of those funds
which the Commissioners might recover fur the dif-
ferent Charities.
The House then resolved itself into the Committee
en lite Bill.
Mr. ROBINSON proposed the exemption of Har.
row as well as Westminster and Eton, kc. from the
operation of this Bill.
Mr. BROUGHAM opposed this proposition, ob•
serving, that if there were in the House an yGentle-
man who had been educated at Rugby, or
connected with its residents, the exemption of that
school also would be proposed, and so on with re•
spect to other schools, until the exemptions would
be sonomemus as to defeat the object of the Bill.
Sir T. ACLA ND spoke on the same side.
Mr. MILLS said, that if the proposition for
exempting Harrow was adopted, he should feel him•
i self justified in proposing the exemption of Rugby.
Mr. BENNETT said, that in case Harrow was
lexempted, he .Ahoulil also propose the exemption of
the Free ichnol of Shrewsbury. .r ,
Mr. C. HARVEY thought himself warranted.
upon the same ground, to propose the eaemptiee t
the Free Schools of Norwich.—[.4 hoes] • ! tit rl
Sir M. W. RIDLEY eup•reped his opinion, that
upon the ground stated, he was entitled to propose..
& exemption elle Free MINA. of Neweastle-opou-i
iTyne, et ithichrthe Lard, ahaiseellor aud his. brother,,
`iiil other ilistinsakhett Whitest', bed beseted:
xl. --* , t c./.... ti r', , • 1
414407 le.)8 rvf/t.l /114 4ria:lif 41;11 •
4ei:taki.l- .4