THE LIBRARY 
 
 OF 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY 
 OF CALIFORNIA 
 
 LOS ANGELES
 
 LETTER 
 
 TO 
 
 SIR SAMUEL ROMILLY, M. P. 
 
 FAOM 
 
 HENRY BROUGHAM, ESQ. M. P. F. R. S. 
 
 UPON THE 
 
 ABUSE OF CHARITIES. 
 
 * 
 
 PRINTED FOR LONGMAN, HURST, REES, ORME, AND BROWN, 
 PAXERNOSTER-ROW ; AND J. RIDOEWAY, PICCADILLY. 
 
 181$.

 
 w 
 
 LETTER, &c. 
 
 I HAVE resolved to throw together in 
 a letter, several facts and observations respect- 
 ing the Abuse of Charities, and especially res- 
 pecting the bill, which as Chairman of the 
 Education Committee, I introduced into Parlia- 
 ment last session. I prefer this mode of bring- 
 ing the matter before the public, to making a 
 statement in my place; because I shall in my 
 own justification be under the necessity of 
 touching upon several things personal to myself, 
 and which I should therefore most unwillingly 
 obtrude upon the House, whose kind indulgence 
 as I often experience it, I am very reluctant to 
 abuse. It seems also material, that the subject 
 
 ^should be Mirly laid before the Country without 
 waiting- Wthe meeting of Parliament, which 
 
 " may notfluse place until after Christmas. 
 
 Whoever has been permitted by the courtesy 
 of the House, or authorized by the appointment 
 of a Committee to undertake the management 
 
 '/of any important legislative measure, is respon- 
 
 B 
 
 61 '1103 
 
 (KLSTtXX
 
 2 
 
 sible in the first instance for its success ; and if 
 he has, by influence which he could not resist, 
 been prevented from pursuing his object in his 
 own way, he owes to himself the duty of shew- 
 ing to whom the blame of the failure belongs. 
 Yet I hardly think 1 should have been induced 
 to give this explanation in the present case, had 
 the comparatively insignificant question of my 
 own conduct been alone involved in it. My 
 belief is, that great as the errors are which 
 have been committed, some good may yet be 
 attained by directing the public attention to 
 the proceedings under the Act; while, at all 
 events, the defects of that measure, and of 
 the steps already taken to execute it, can only 
 be supplied by a full discussion of the whole 
 subject.. 
 
 I believe there never was a measure brought 
 forward with more deliberation than the Bill for 
 inquiring into the abuse of charitable funds* The 
 Education Committee of J816, having observed 
 many instances of malversation and of negli- 
 gence in the management of such property, re- 
 commended a parliamentary commission, as the 
 most effectual and economical mod^of bring- 
 ing to light the still more numerorR cases of. 
 abuse which every one suspected to exist. In 
 18 1 7, the Committee again met; but my Ul6es$ 
 prevented it from doing more than repeat the 
 recommendation, of the former report. We
 
 3 
 
 knew well enough that a bill might easily have 
 been carried through Parliament during the re- 
 maining part of the session ; but sufficient time 
 for maturing the details of the measure was 
 wanting, and we felt the propriety of avoiding 
 every thing like rashness, even at the risk of 
 being charged with procrastination. As soon as 
 we were again appointed, last March, We ap- 
 plied ourselves to the subject of the Bill, and 
 its introduction being recommended in our re- 
 port, I was instructed to move for leave to 
 bring it in. I did so early in April. Every 
 day's inquiries in the Committee demonstrated 
 the necessity of the measure, and threw light 
 upon its details. Skilful professional men as- 
 sisted me in preparing the Bill ; it underwent a 
 minute discussion above stairs ; it was then com- 
 municated to His Majesty's Ministers and to the 
 law officers of the Crown ; and, as there was 
 reason to apprehend that the principal opposi- 
 tion to it would be made in the Lords, it was 
 submitted to the highest legal authority in that 
 House, as well as to the Secretary of State for 
 the home department, to whose province, I was 
 informed, the subject in an especial manner ap- 
 pertained. About ten weeks elapsed from its 
 introduction to the passing of the Act ; the 
 whole time being occupied in discussing its 
 provisions, and in altering almost every part of 
 them again and again. I believe it was printed 
 not fewer than six times.
 
 
 If the framers of the measure cannot be ac- 
 cused of rashness or impatience, so neither are 
 they liable to the charge of party-feeling or of 
 undue prepossession in favour of their own views. 
 The Committee, composed of above forty mem- 
 bers taken indiscriminately from all parts of the 
 house, have agreed in every matter that has 
 come before them from the first day of their 
 appointment in 1816. I do not recollect a 
 single instance of a division. Of course, as 
 always happens in committees, the regular at- 
 tendance was confined to a few upon whom the 
 labour chiefly devolved ; but these were for the 
 most part gentlemen who dift'er with me in 
 politics; and a constant communication being 
 maintained between those who took an active 
 part in the inquiry and those who attended but 
 seldom, the least dissension among us would 
 have led to an immediate assembly of the greater 
 part of our numbers. I have therefore a right 
 to assume that a real and complete unanimity 
 prevailed among us in all our proceedings. 
 
 Having the fortune to take an active part 
 in the political business of parliament, and to be 
 involved in its contests, 1 was peculiarly so- 
 licitous to avoid every thing that might seem 
 to proceed from party attachments or dislikes. 
 For a proof of this, I appeal to those members of 
 His Majesty's government with whom I had the 
 honour of communicating from time to time; and
 
 5 
 
 I am confident they will admit that I received 
 every suggestion of theirs with the greatest 
 respect. Indeed the changes which I adopted 
 at their desire, sufficiently prove that, if I am 
 liable to any charge, it is to the imputation of 
 having surrendered too many of the provisions 
 originally made in the Bill. It is material that 
 a few of these changes should here be men- 
 tioned. 
 
 As the Bill at first stood, the Commissioners 
 were to be named in it. The Ministers pro- 
 posed that the appointment should be vested 
 in the Crown ; that is in themselves. To this 
 important alteration the Committee with extreme 
 reluctance submitted rather than assented. We 
 were aware that upon the fitness of the persons 
 selected to carry on the inquiry its success 
 mainly depended. We had before us the ex- 
 amples of the Commissions of Public Ac- 
 counts, and of Naval and Military Inquiry, from 
 which the country had derived the most signal 
 benefits, chiefly, as we conceived, because the 
 acts establishing those Boards had nominated the 
 members who were to form them. No private 
 selection of Commissioners, how conscientiously 
 soever it might be performed, could give the 
 same security against improper or inefficient 
 appointments. Without accusing the Minister 
 to whose department it belonged, of so foul a 
 crime as a wilful prostitution of patronage in
 
 6 
 
 this most delicate matter, we felt that all men 
 in high office, are beset by applicants ; that they 
 must frequently trust to others for their infor- 
 mation as to individual merit ; and that private 
 friendships often blind very respectable persons 
 in the reports which they make or the suits 
 which they prefer. We could not indeed be- 
 lieve that the Secretary of State was capable 
 of chusiug men whom the place might suit 
 rather than those suited to the place ; that he 
 could shut his eyes to the claims of acknow- 
 ledged merit, and prefer unknown persons 
 backed by powerful supporters; or that, instead 
 of regarding their fitness for the new office, 
 he should bestow the salary as the wages of 
 former service. Least of all did a suspicion 
 ever enter our minds that care might knowingly 
 and wilfully be taken to avoid those men, whose 
 zeal for the cause, and whose habits of inves- 
 tigation gave a certain pledge that all abuses 
 would be sifted to the bottom, and that the 
 guilty would in uo station be spared. Yet we 
 were afraid that a certain degree of carelessness 
 or easy goodnature, the almost necessary at- 
 tendant upon official habits, might be shewn in 
 the selection; and that he whom we were willing 
 to believe incapable of voluntarily converting into 
 a job the most sacred part of his patronage, or of 
 taking precautions to screen the enormous delin- 
 quency of robbing the poor, might from .im-
 
 perfect information and in the hurry of A busy 
 department, chuse Commissioners far less adapt- 
 ed to the objects of the Act than those upon 
 whose fitness a publick decision by the voice 
 of Parliament should be pronounced. To assist 
 the Legislature in making this selection, we had 
 applied ourselves with much attention in the 
 Committee, canvassing with perfect freedom the 
 qualifications of many gentlemen who were at 
 different times offered to our notice. And we 
 were prepared to propose a list, in which was to 
 be found the name of no one connected by ties, 
 however remote, with any of ourselves. I may add, 
 as far as regards myself, that all but one were of 
 political connexions adverse to my own ; that I 
 was upon a footing of intimacy with none of 
 them ; and that one gentleman, of undeniable 
 qualifications having been proposed, I desired 
 his name might be no more mentioned, as he hap- 
 pened to be a near relation of mine. Some per- 
 sons, whose opinions I highly respect, deemed that 
 we acted unwisely in abandoning this main point 
 of the nomination. But we only gave it up when 
 we found the ministers determined to oppose 
 the Bill, unless they were allowed to name the 
 Commissioners. We still trusted that the power 
 would not be abused ; and we looked to the 
 wholesome controul of Parliament and the 
 public for a security that the work would be
 
 8 
 
 done wi& diligence, upon whomsoever it might 
 devolve. 
 
 The next change of importance, related to 
 the quorum. The whole excellence of the 
 measure consisted in the ambulatory nature of 
 the Board ; because, beside the great saving of 
 expense, unless the Commissioners repaired to 
 the spot, it was quite vain to expect an effectual 
 investigation of the various particulars relating 
 to local abuses. But, as the performance of 
 this duty would be both cumbrous and endless, 
 if the whole Commissioners were to go round 
 the country in a body, it was provided that they 
 should divide themselves into bodies of two 
 each, and that four boards should thus at the 
 same time carry on the inquiry, with an expe- 
 dition greatly accelerated, and with a salutary 
 rivalship among themselves. The Ministers in 
 the House of Lords, changed the quorum from 
 two to three, and left the whole number of 
 Commissioners eight, as before ; thus reducing 
 the number of Boards from four to two, and 
 leaving two Commissioners wholly unemployed. 
 As it is perfectly well known, even to beginners 
 in arithmetic, that eight is not divisible by 
 three, I am reduced to the necessity of sus- 
 pecting that the authors of this change have no 
 serious intention that the Board shall ever be 
 divided at all ; and that they mean to make the
 
 9 
 
 Commissioners proceed by written interroga- 
 tories sent to different parts of the country. It 
 is already stated out of doors that such a plan 
 has been formed ; I can only say, that it must 
 render the whole inquiry a perfect mockery ; 
 and the labours of the last session, for the cor- 
 rection of abuses, will have ended in adding 
 one of peculiar grossness to the former number, 
 by the creation of about a dozen sinecure places. 
 An addition was proposed by His Majesty's 
 Ministers, which we cheerfully adopted, regard- 
 ing it as an improvement. They suggested the 
 propriety of naming six honorary Commissioners, 
 who might form a superintending and central 
 body, to advise and to regulate the proceedings 
 of the whole. The personages who were pro- 
 posed to fill this department, united to great 
 weight in the country, commanding talents and 
 confirmed habits of business. I need only mention 
 the Speaker, Sir W. Grant, the Marquis of 
 Lansdown, Lord Grenville, and the Bishop of 
 London, to justify the satisfaction experienced 
 by the Committee at this part of the arrange- 
 ment. It seemed even to furnish a security 
 against the consequence of any defects in the 
 choice of the stipendiary Commissioners; and 
 some whose confidence in the measure had been 
 shaken by that choice being left in the Crown, 
 felt it revive when they were told that such 
 
 c
 
 10 
 
 men as I have named, would at all events be 
 placed at the head of the department. 
 /" The changes made in the powers of the Com- 
 missioners were as important as the alterations 
 in the construction of the Board. They were 
 deprived of all authority to prosecute their in- 
 quiries, unless by the consent of every person 
 whom it might be necessary to examine ; and 
 they were only permitted to carry on even this 
 ineffectual investigation, into a class of abuses 
 neither the most numerous nor the most flagrant. 
 It seems hardly credible that any men affecting 
 to have at heart the great objects of the Bill, 
 should have so crippled its powers and narrow- 
 ed its objects. Nevertheless, such I lament to 
 say is the undeniable fact. In the first place, 
 as to the powers We had originally given 
 the Commissioners the same authority which 
 rendered the Naval and Military inquiries so 
 effectual. Imagining that persons concerned 
 in any abuse might be unwilling to give evi- 
 dence against themselves, or to produce 
 documents which made them liable to refund 
 large balances due to the poor, we had 
 armed the Commissioners with the power of 
 compelling the production of papers, and 
 obliging every one to answer such questions 
 as did not criminate himself. The ministers in 
 the House of Lords peremptorily insisted upon 
 this provision being struck out. They said it
 
 was harsh but why should any one complain 
 of being 1 forced to do what it is every one's duty 
 to do, and what no one can refuse to do unless 
 with the design of concealing 1 some malversation? 
 They represented it as indelicate to respectable 
 trustees but can any respectable trustee com- 
 plain of being called upon to disclose the par- 
 ticulars of his conduct in the execution of his 
 trust ? They described it as unconstitutional 
 yet the same powers are possessed by all courts, 
 even by commissioners of bankrupt. They called 
 it unprecedented yet they themselves, when in 
 office with a truly great minister, the renown 
 of whose naval exploits alone eclipses the glory 
 of his civil administration, had furnished the 
 precedent which we followed ; had passed the 
 very act from which we copied verbatim the clause 
 in our Bill. They attempted, indeed, to escape 
 from this dilemma by various outlets. My 
 Lord Chancellor said that he had always disap- 
 proved of that provision in lord St. Vincent's 
 act ; yet he suffered it to pass without a division, 
 and was, with my Lord Ellenborough, the prin- 
 cipal advocate of the measure. My lord Sid- 
 mouth contented himself with observing-, that 
 many persons had objected to lord St. Vin- 
 cent's bill ; but assuredly his lordship, then 
 minister in the House of Commons, was not of 
 the number ; for he strenuously defended it 
 against Mr. Canning, who alone, of the present 
 
 C2
 
 J2 
 
 cabinet, opposed it. A feeble effort was made to 
 distinguish the objects of the two inquiries. 
 But as to their importance can any one main- 
 tain that the expenses of the dock-yards, de- 
 mand more rigorous investigation than the dis- 
 posal of funds destined by benevolence for the 
 relief of wretchedness ; or that the conduct of the 
 person who uses a sum of the public money, with- 
 out authority and then replaces it, shall be sifted 
 by every means of examination which can wring 
 the truth from interested reluctance ; while he 
 who pockets thousands a year belonging to the 
 poor, shall only be invited to disclose the state 
 of his accounts in order that his undue gains 
 may cease, and his past accumulations be re- 
 funded ? Then as to the nature of the two in- 
 quiries can it be contended that the power of 
 examining all private merchants' accounts, in 
 substance possessed by the Naval commissioners, 
 was less liable to abuse, or in itself less vexatious, 
 than the power of examining the accounts of 
 trustees, filling a public office? As for the clamour 
 excited against the clause respecting title-deeds, 
 no one who had read our bill could be de- 
 ceived by it for a moment ; because the possessor 
 of a deed was only obliged to produce it, in case 
 it related wholly to the charity ; if any other 
 matter whatever was contained in it, he was al- 
 lowed to produce a copy of the part relating to 
 the charity.
 
 All our arguments, however, were unavailing. 
 It was resolved that the Commissioners should 
 have no powers ; and what is very remarkable, 
 the Bill had been suffered to pass through all its 
 stages in the Commons without any objection 
 being made to this essential part ; although 
 Mr. Canning and others had given notice 
 of an opposition, and were present at all 
 the debates upon it. The alteration was re- 
 served for the Upper House, where one of the 
 ministers proposed it, and none of his colleagues 
 objected. 
 
 The objects of the Bill were as materially 
 limited, as the powers of the Commissioners had 
 been crippled. 
 
 First, they were prohibited from inquiring 
 generally into the State of Education, although 
 a great saving both of time and expense 
 to the public would have been effected by al- 
 lowing them to make that inquiry when they 
 visited any district for other purposes. 
 
 Secondly, they were no longer to examine 
 abuses of all charities, but only of those connected 
 with the education of the poor. A most unfortu- 
 nate change in the constitution of the Board 
 for every one was aware how many malversations 
 existed in charitable institutions wholly uncon- 
 nected with education, and it was obviously a 
 more natural, as well as more economical course 
 of proceeding, to authorise the Commissioners to
 
 14 
 
 look into these at the same time that they were 
 examining the others, than to send one set of 
 functionaries to investigate school charities, 
 and then dispatch a second body to go over 
 the same ground, in order to see what the 
 former had been ordered to overlook. 
 
 The instruction under which the committee, 
 acted, confined its inquiries to charities con- 
 nected with education. Nevertheless, we had 
 accidentally been made acquainted with abuses 
 of a very gross description in other charities, 
 which the powers of the Commission as now re- 
 stricted cannot reach. We found that one Cor- 
 poration in Hampshire, entrusted with the ma- 
 nagement of estates worth above 2000 a year 
 for the use of the poor, let them for 2 or 300 
 on fines, and would give no account of the 
 manner in which those fines were applied. 
 The same body, it was stated, employed a sum 
 of money confided to it for charitable purposes, 
 in payment of its own debts. At Mere, in Lin- 
 colnshire, is an endowment for a Warden and 
 poor brethren of a very ancient date. The warden 
 and his lessees seem to be well provided for, 
 whatever may be the lot of the brethren ; the 
 estate consists of 650 acres, five miles from 
 Lincoln ; it is let for only half-a-guinea an acre, 
 though it pays neither tythe nor poor's rate; 
 and 24 a year is the whole sum allotted to the 
 poor brethren. The Bishop of the Diocese
 
 15 
 
 is both patron and visitor; he has given the 
 Wardenship to his nephew ; and the former 
 Warden resigned it upon being promoted by 
 the same prelate to a living in his gift. The 
 son of that right reverend person is master of 
 Spital Hospital in the same county. Besides 
 ether landed property, he is in possession of one 
 estate worth 6 or 700 a year n right of his 
 office ; and all that he pays to the poor is 27. 4s. 
 to four or five pensioners. At Wellingborough, 
 in Northamptonshire, there are lands belonging 
 to different charities, of which only one is con- 
 nected with education ; a short time ago they 
 were let for 68, although worth near J 100; and 
 the trustees enjoyed the leases. In the parish of 
 Yeovil in Somersetshire, there are estates possess- 
 ed by trustees, and destined to four different 
 charities, one only of which is a school. Limited 
 as the Commissioners now are, they may ex- 
 amine those trustees as to one part of their trust ; 
 but they must order them to be silent as to the 
 other three. They may inspect the deeds and 
 accounts relating to the school revenue, but they 
 must suddenly shut the book when they perceive 
 any mention of the other charities. And yet 
 all the four seem to have been equally abused. 
 An estate worth 700 a year only educates seven 
 or eight boys; lands valued at 11 or 1200 a 
 year only afford a wretched pittance to sixteen 
 paupers; and property worth 150 a year
 
 is let tor 2. Is. 4d. 9 chiefly to the trustees 
 themselves. There are two estates belonging 
 to the poor of Croydon, which ought to bring- 
 between 1000 and 1500 a year, and yet are 
 worth nothing from being badly let on 90 
 years' leases; but into this the Commissioners 
 must not look, when they go to examine the 
 abuses in the Hospital, because those estates are 
 unconnected with education. In that Hospital 
 itself, they will find but little within their juris- 
 diction ; it is, indeed, full of abuse ; but only 
 a small portion of the charity belongs to the 
 school, and even that is protected from inquiry by 
 the appointment of a visitor which leads me to 
 the next head of exemption. 
 
 Thirdly, among charities connected with edu- 
 cation, there was introduced a large class of excep- 
 tions, comprehending-, not only the Universities 
 and the public schools down to Rugby, but gene- 
 rally all charities having special * c visitors, go- 
 " vernors or overseers." Now it happens that 
 almost every considerable charity is subject to 
 special visitation ; consequently what remains 
 for the operations of the Commissioners lies 
 within a sufficiently narrow compass. 
 
 This last alteration of the Bill, we justly 
 viewed as a matter of extreme regret. For of 
 the many instances of gross abuse, which had 
 come to our knowledge, and some of which 
 will be seen in the evidence now made public,
 
 17 
 
 there was hardly one which this clause did not 
 withdraw from the jurisdiction of the Commis- 
 sioners. Thus Pocklington school, with a large 
 revenue, had been suffered to fall into decay, so 
 that only one boy was taught, and the room 
 converted into a saw-pit* ; yet it has visitors, (St. 
 John's College, Cambridge,) who, probably 
 from ignorance of the evil, had taken no step 
 to correct it before last winter. So, the 
 property of the Huntingdon school is grossly 
 misapplied ; the land is let to accommodate the 
 trustees, and is made the means of supporting 
 a political interest in that borough ; yet the cha- 
 rity has visitors in the persons of some of those 
 very trustees, who are thus by the exemption in 
 the Act, secured against all inquiry. It should 
 seem too, that St. Bees school is equally 
 exempted. But that its affairs merit investi- 
 gation clearly appears by the evidence ; for we 
 there find that leases of its land were granted 
 at a remote period, for 1000 years at a very low 
 fixed rentf ; that at a more recent date, the valu- 
 able minerals were leased at a mere trifle 
 (.3. 14s. ) for the term of 8 or 900 years, to one 
 of the trustees ; that one of the present trustees 
 
 * An attempt was made to deny this ; but it seems to be the 
 result of the evidence taken together. At any rate, it is ad- 
 mitted, that the proper school- room was wholly disused, 
 except for keeping lumber and working materials. 
 
 f The rent is about .100, the value of the tenements 
 being above 8000 a year. 
 
 D
 
 18 
 
 now enjoys the lease ; and that a decided majority 
 of the others are clergymen, holding livings 
 under him, and supporting him in his management 
 of the concern. As none of them has made 
 any attempt to set aside a lease which every 
 one must perceive to be utterly void, and as one 
 of their number has expressed his apprehensions 
 of engaging in a contest with so powerful 
 an adversary, it may be presumed that such 
 considerations alone could deter them from per- 
 forming what was obviously their duty to the 
 charity ; and the inference is irresistible, that 
 this was exactly a case which demanded the 
 interposition of the Commissioners. Certain 
 estates devised for the purposes of education at 
 Reading, appear to have been let as late as 181 1 
 for nearly the same rent that they fetched in 
 Charles the Second's reign. It is now considera- 
 bly raised; but some of the lands seem still to 
 be much underlet; at any rate an inquiry would 
 be highly beneficial where such negligence ap- 
 pears so recently to have prevailed : yet all 
 examination is precluded by the proviso; for 
 there is a special visitor. The hospital at 
 Croydon founded by Archbishop Whitgift is 
 protected from investigation by a similar ap- 
 pointment ; but the evidence plainly shews, 
 that all is not right there. The estates are 
 valued by the surveyor of the house itself at 
 2,673 a year; yet they are let for 860; 
 and down to 18 J 2 they fetched no more than.
 
 19 
 
 336. A free school too, is specially appointed 
 to be kept for all the inhabitants of Croydon ; 
 but none has within the memory of man been 
 taught, although the master receives his emolu- 
 ments, teaching another school for his own pro- 
 fit, and although the inhabitants have establish- 
 ed a seminary upon the new plan to give edu- 
 cation at their own expence to the poor of the 
 place, in the very school-room which Archbishop 
 Whitgift devised for their gratuitous instruction. 
 These abuses, I verily believe, are unknown to 
 the distinguished prelate who is visitor of the 
 hospital. Whoever fills his station in the church, 
 has, beside the ordinary functions of his pro- 
 vince, the superintendence of a vast number of 
 charitable institutions in various parts of the 
 kingdom ; and it is quite impossible that his eye 
 should be always fixed upon the abuses which 
 silently creep into each. Until they are de- 
 nounced to him, he must of necessity be igno- 
 rant of their existence, and the office of accuser 
 is a thankless one at the best. The visitatorial 
 power is only put in motion at stated periods ; 
 and even then, if no one comes forward to com- 
 plain, credit is naturally given to the members 
 of the corporation for doing their duty and 
 obeying the statutes. But on the other hand, 
 the assistance of such a body as the Commis- 
 sioners in supplying the want of accusers, and 
 in discovering latent abuses, is precisely that 
 
 J>2
 
 20 
 
 which a conscientious visitor would desire. He 
 can feel no jealousy of any encroachment upon 
 his rights, for these remain as before ; the only 
 difference is, that he has now to exercise his 
 office with a more perfect knowledge of the 
 matters within his jurisdiction, the inquiries of 
 the Commissioners having brought to his notice 
 all the points to which his superintending power 
 should be directed for the purposes of reforma- 
 tion. I think we have a right to assume that the 
 Archbishop of Canterbury viewed the Bill in this, 
 its true light, from the very liberal and candid 
 support which His Grace was pleased to give it. 
 Nothing, indeed, can be more groundless than 
 the jealousy which appears to have been raised 
 by it in other quarters. In what respect could 
 the proceedings of the Commissioners interfere 
 with any person's functions, whether as trustee 
 eras visitor? They were only empowered to 
 inquire and to report; to discover abuses, and 
 to lay them before Parliament and the country. 
 Here their authority ended : they could make 
 no 'Order whatever for correcting the mismanage- 
 ment which they detected, were it ever so glaring. 
 To search tor the evil, and expose it to the light, 
 was their whole office ; the remedv was reserved 
 
 v 
 
 for Parliament, if it required legislative inter- 
 ference ; but in the first instance, it was left to the 
 parties themselves whose conduct had been in- 
 vestigated, and if they failed to amend their 
 ways, the visitors were unquestionably entitled
 
 21 
 
 to interpose as if the Act had never passed. 
 To describe the Commissioners as coming 1 
 into conflict with the visitors, was a gross 
 misrepresentation of the powers and func- 
 tions of both. Yet it was entirely upon this 
 misrepresentation, that the clause exempting 
 charities specially visited was built. The pre- 
 text that it was authorised by the example of 
 the Statute of Elizabeth, is utterly unfounded, 
 The commissioners of Charitable Uses, under 
 that act, have powers which would interfere di- 
 rectly with those of special visitors; for they 
 are not merely to investigate, but to make orders 
 and decrees; they are in fact to sit as a court, 
 and they are entitled to try issues, of fact by a 
 jury. The clause exempting charities specially 
 visited from their jurisdiction, was therefore lie* 
 cessary to preserve the visitatorial power ac T 
 cording 1 to the founder's intentions. But what 
 founder ever dreamt of preventing any inquiry 
 from being made into the state of his charity ? 
 What founder could, were he alive to see it, be 
 otherwise than gratified by an investigation, 
 the result of which can have no possible ten- 
 dency, but that of enabling the visitor appointed 
 by himself to exercise with full effect, the powers 
 of superintendence conferred by him for the 
 express purpose of correcting all abuses in the 
 trusts created by his foundation ? 
 . I have mentioned a few instances of abuses 
 brought to .light by the labours of the Com-
 
 22 
 
 mittee, all growing up to maturity in charities 
 which have special visitors, and which the 
 Commissioners are bound to overlook by virtue 
 of the exemptions introduced into the Bill. 
 It may perhaps be thought that these have 
 been already examined, and that our report, 
 with respect to them at least, will be sufficient 
 to produce a speedy reform. But I cannot quite 
 indulge in this hope. We had not the means of 
 sifting those cases to the bottom : we plainly per- 
 ceived that much remained to be investigated 
 in each. Thus, the sums to be refunded by the 
 Yeovil trustees severally, we had no means of 
 tracing. We were equally unable to ascertain 
 how much in value of the St. Bees school 
 property remained in the hands of the noble 
 lord, who sustains in his own person the 
 double character of trustee and lessee. It was 
 in like manner impossible to estimate the ar- 
 rears due to the poor from the worthy magis- 
 trates of Huntingdon, and the noble family 
 whose political interest in that borough has been 
 founded upon the misapplication of the charity 
 estates. Nor did we see, in the past conduct of 
 any of those parties, the slightest reason to expect 
 that the publication of our report would of itself 
 have the immediate effect of restoring the poor 
 to their rights. On the contrary, an extra- 
 ordinary pertinacity had been evinced by them 
 all, in defence of their actual possessions, and in 
 resisting every investigation of their titles.
 
 23 
 
 Besides, there is every reason to believe that 
 abuses of a similar description, which we had 
 not time to investigate, exist in all parts of the 
 country. The parochial returns to our circu- 
 lar letters, have brought cases to our know- 
 ledge, which no Board sitting in London 
 could examine within a moderate period of 
 time. Other abuses omitted in those returns 
 may be reasonably supposed to prevail ; and let 
 it be observed that the probability of abuses 
 existing in any charity, is by no means di- 
 minished by the circumstance of a special visitor 
 having been appointed. In general, the visitor 
 resides at a distance ; he is most commonly an 
 official person with other duties to engage him, as 
 the Bishop of the diocese, or the Head of a 
 House at one of the Universities ; he is usually 
 directed to visit once in so many years; and if no 
 term is specified, he is only by law obliged to visit 
 every third year; above all, the exemption in the 
 Statute of Elizabeth, has increased the probability 
 of mismanagement in such charities, by prevent- 
 ing them from ever being examined by a Com- 
 mission of Charitable Uses ; while a great pro- 
 portion of the other charities have undergone 
 this investigation once or twice since their 
 foundation. Now, the transference of the pro- 
 viso from the Statute of Elizabeth to the present 
 Act, has precisely the effect of confining 1 the in- 
 quiries of the Commissioners to those charities, 
 most of winch have already been examined j and
 
 24 
 
 of making 1 them pass over those which have never 
 before been looked into, except by their visitors. 
 If any persons should still conceive that the eye 
 of the visitor is sufficient, I would beseech them 
 to consider two things the slowness with which 
 the knowledge of the evil reaches him, and the 
 risk of his requiring superintendence himself. 
 Abuses are generally speaking of slow growth ; 
 they creep into public institutions with a sure 
 pace, indeed, if unchecked, but they move on by 
 degrees ; and those who are constantly habituated 
 to see their progress, become accustomed to it, 
 and cease to think of it. These, however, are 
 chiefly the persons on whom the visitor must rely 
 for his information ; and, even where the change 
 is more rapid and the abuse more glaring, men 
 who live on the spot are not likely to court the 
 odious office of accusing their neighbours. The 
 grand difference between the visitor and the 
 Commissioners is that the former, for the most 
 part will only examine where there is a charge; 
 whereas the latter are to examine at all events, 
 and to find out whether there be ground for com- 
 plaining although nobody may have actually 
 preferred a complaint. Then what security have 
 we against negligence or connivance in the 
 visitor* themselves ? Quiscustodiet ipsos custodes ? 
 True, the founders have intrusted them with the 
 superintendance ; but, where no visitation is ap- 
 pointed, the founders have reposed an entire con- 
 fidence in the trustees ; and yet no one has ever
 
 25 
 
 contended that they should be exempt from the 
 inquiries of the Commissioners ? What good 
 reason then can be assigned for investigating 
 abuses committed wholly by trustees, and sparing 
 those committed by trustees and visitors jointly ? 
 St. John's College is visitor of Pocklington 
 school j for years the gross perversion of its 
 am[;^ revenues, known to all Yorkshire, had 
 never penetrated into Cambridge. The Dean 
 and Chapter of Lincoln have the patronage as 
 well as the superintendence of Spital charity ; 
 yet they allow the Warden, son of their Diocesan, 
 to enjoy the produce of large estates, devised 
 to him in trust for the poor of two parishes as 
 well as of the hospital, while he only pays a few 
 pounds to four or five of the latter.* The Bishop 
 himself is patron and visitor of Mere, and per- 
 mits the Warden, his nephew (for whom he made 
 the vacancy by promoting his predecessor) to 
 enjoy or underlet a considerable trust estate, 
 paying only .24 a year to the poor. The evi- 
 dence shews that the visitors of the Huntingdon 
 Hospital are the parties chiefly concerned in 
 misapplying its funds being themselves trus- 
 tees occupying the charity lands for trifling 
 
 * The Rev. Incumbent states, that there are no poor in 
 Spital ; but the endowment is in favor of the " parish poor 
 of Little Carlton and Skellingthorpe," the charge of main. 
 taming whom appears, from the Poor Abstract, to be from 
 2 to .300 a year. 
 
 B
 
 26 
 
 rents and using the estate for election purposes. 
 I am very far from asserting that the apparent 
 negligence of St. John's College, the apparent 
 connivance of the Chapter and the Bishop, and 
 the apparent participation of the Corporators 
 are incapable of explanation ; but at least these 
 facts shew the necessity of an inquiry into the 
 conduct of visitors as well as trustees; whi& the 
 alterations made in the Bill by his Majesty's 
 Ministers, shut out all inquiry, and prevent the 
 public from receiving any explanation. 
 
 The exception of which I have been speaking 
 is the more to be lamented ; because the charities 
 thus screened from the investigation of the Com- 
 missioners, are in the ordinary course of events, 
 and as the law now stands, almost certain to 
 escape every other inquiry. From the juris- 
 diction created by the Statute of Elizabeth, 
 they are wholly exempted; and that of the 
 Court of Chancery extends to them only in a 
 limited degree. Where funds have been mis- 
 applied, the Court will interfere, notwithstand- 
 ing the appointment of a visitor ; but then 
 its interposition is confined entirely to this 
 breach of trust. It will take no cognizance 
 whatever of any other neglect or misconduct 
 on the part of the trustees. They may have 
 perverted the charity, to purposes wholly foreign 
 to the Founder's intention j they may have suf- 
 fered the school to decay, while the master 
 reaped the profits; they may, through folly, or
 
 27 
 
 even by design, have adopted measures calcu- 
 lated to ensure its ruin. Still if there be a special 
 visitor, who neglects or violates his duty, per- 
 mitting or abetting the misconduct of the 
 managers, Courts of Equity cannot entertain 
 the discussion of their proceedings, unless the 
 funds are directly misapplied. Thus I take it 
 to be clear, that neither Whitgift's hospital nor 
 Pocklington school, could have been examined 
 by information or petition to the Lord Chancellor, 
 although large revenues are expended, in the 
 one case, upon the education of a single child, 
 and in the other, to make a complete sinecure 
 for the master. In the case of a richly en- 
 dowed school at Berkhamstead, his Lordship 
 admitted that he could not interfere, although 
 
 ' O 
 
 he saw the master teaching only one boy and the 
 usher living in Hampshire*. But even as to di- 
 rect breaches of trust, a court of equity affords 
 most inadequate means of inquiry. No prudent 
 man will easily be induced to involve himself in 
 a Chancery suit, where his private interests are 
 at stake. To expect that any one will do so from 
 the love of justice, and a sense of duty towards 
 the public, is in all but a few extraordinary 
 cases truly chimerical. Nor will the facts dis- 
 
 * 2 Ves. and Beames, 138. His Lordship was obliged to 
 decree the money received for fines, then about .5000, to 
 the master and usher, according to the foundation, leaving 
 their conduct in office to be examined by the visitor. 
 
 E 2
 
 28 
 
 closed in the Committee's Report, tend to lessen 
 this very natural dislike of such proceedings. We 
 there find the parish officers of Yeovil ruined by 
 their attempts to obtain justice for the poor; a 
 respectable solicitor and a clergyman in Hun- 
 tingdon, expending large sums of their own 
 money in the same pious work, and rewarded 
 by the general contempt and even hatred of 
 their fellow citizens; a worthy inhabitant of 
 Croydon, exposed to every kind of vexation 
 for similar exertions, and his coadjutor falsely 
 and maliciously indicted for perjury; and, not 
 to multiply instances, the venerable Head of a 
 College at Oxford deterred from exposing the* 
 St. Bees case, by the dread of a conflict with 
 his powerful colleague, before a tribunal where 
 a long purse is as essential as a good cause. 
 You, better than any man, are acquainted with 
 the defects of this remedy; and you are no less 
 impartial than competent to decide upon them. 
 Elevated to an eminence in the Court of Chan- 
 cery, which no other advocate, perhaps, ever 
 attained in any department of forensic life, 
 you can hardly be supposed to feel prejudice 
 against its proceedings. Yet to you I will ven- 
 ture without hesitation to appeal; and I am 
 confident you will admit that abuses which are 
 fated to flourish in the shade, until a suit in 
 equity exposes, and a decree extirpates them, 
 must live and grow until they work the ruin 
 of the institutions to which they cling.
 
 29 
 
 I have now gone through the principal changes 
 which his Majesty's Ministers thought proper to 
 make in the Bill ; and when their magnitude is 
 considered when it is perceived how little of 
 the original plan was left when it is found that 
 the Commissioners were to be chosen by the 
 Crown, deprived of the usual powers of inquiry, 
 and prevented from directing their attention to 
 the objects which most demanded investigation- 
 it will naturally be asked why the friends of the 
 measure consented to accept of so mutilated a 
 substitute for it ; why they did not at once ap- 
 peal to Parliament and the Country, from the 
 decision of a Cabinet which had clearly shown 
 themselves unfriendly to all effectual exposure 
 of the abuses universally complained of? I must 
 take upon myself, in common with several per- 
 sons whose opinions I deeply respect, the re- 
 sponsibility of having been willing to accept a 
 law, the inadequacy of which we admitted, 
 rather than allow the session to pass without 
 obtaining any thing at all. Various considera- 
 tions influenced this decision. The manifest 
 hostility to the whole measure, which appeared 
 in the House of Lords, was not among the least 
 of these. Vehemently opposed upon its prin- 
 ciple by the chief law authorities, and a formida- 
 ble body of the prelates feebly and reluctantly 
 supported by the Ministers of the Crown-the Bill 
 had been sent to a committee only by a majority
 
 30 
 
 of one ; and some who gave their voices for its 
 commitment, in the hope apparently of its 
 compleat mutilation, announced their intention 
 to throw it out on the third reading-, whatever 
 changes it might undergo ; thus consenting to 
 prolong its existence for a moment, that they 
 might first mangle what they were bent upon 
 destroying. When it came out of the commit- 
 tee, the amendments had indeed so entirely 
 defeated the whole object in view, that no 
 man, how great soever his wish to conciliate and 
 accommodate, could think of lending himself to 
 the unworthy farce of passing such an Act. The 
 Committee, upon learning the scope of those alte- 
 rations, which left the Bill a mere dead letter * t 
 agreed with me in resolving to reject it, and 
 proceed in the House of Commons by way of 
 Address. There being very little reason to doubt 
 that the Address would be carried, the enemies 
 of the Bill in the Lords consented to re-commit 
 
 * The two provisions which principally tended to defeat 
 the object of the Bill, and which were afterwards given up by 
 their Lordships, were these : The Commissioners were only 
 authorized to inquire into abuses respecting which they had 
 information previously laid before them upon oath; nay, 
 they could not summon a witness without oath being first 
 made, that he had material information to communicate. 
 They were also prohibited from asking for any paper, unless 
 it wholly related to a separate charity, and where it con- 
 tained other matter, they were not allowed to call for ex- 
 tracts or copies of the parts relating to the charity.
 
 31 
 
 it, to give up several of their amendments, and 
 to withdraw their opposition to the third read- 
 ing. Such being the feelings entertained by 
 the Lords towards the whole plan feelings of 
 which an adequate idea could only be formed 
 by a near observer of the temper in which it 
 was discussed ; and so great being the difficulty 
 of obtaining the assent of their Lordships to 
 the Inquiry, even crippled and confined as it 
 now is ; we felt compelled to rest satisfied with 
 the little we had thus reluctantly obtained from 
 them, apprehensive that any other course might 
 involve the two Houses in a serious difference of 
 opinion, alike prejudicial to the public weal and 
 to the success of the measure in question. Nor 
 were we without hopes that the experience of 
 the Act when put in force, might quiet the un- 
 founded alarms which prevailed among their 
 Lordships ; and prepare them for an extension oi 
 its powers at a future time. 
 
 I must further mention as a reason for the line 
 of conduct pursued, that we thought there was 
 a mode of supplying indirectly the want of 
 powers in the Commissioners. They would 
 have an opportunity of reporting the names of 
 all persons who refused to be examined, or to 
 deliver up documents in their possession. A 
 dread of exposure to the suspicion which this 
 concealment must create, would probably in- 
 duce many trustees, however reluctant, to obey
 
 the Commissioners ; while those who obstinate- 
 ly held out might be examined by the Com- 
 mittee on its revival next session. In .like 
 manner, we presumed that the Reports of the 
 Commissioners would direct the attention of the 
 Committee to all charities with special visitors ; 
 and that if Parliament persisted in refusing to 
 subject these to the scrutiny of the new Board, 
 the Committee might proceed, as it had already 
 begun, to examine them. Thus we conceived 
 that the Act, with all its imperfections, would do 
 some good in the mean time, and lead to still 
 further benefits hereafter. Convinced of the 
 necessity of a thorough investigation, we thought 
 that the sooner a beginning was made in it the 
 better. Unable to get all we wished, we deem- 
 ed it wise and prudent to take what we could 
 get, and not impracticably reject the advantages 
 within our reach, because they were less im- 
 portant than we looked for, and were entitled 
 to. An honest execution of the Act, such as it 
 was, seemed to promise material benefits to the 
 country, provided the certain re-appointment of 
 the Committee next session supported the Com- 
 missioners in the discharge of their duties, and 
 supplied the defects in their jurisdiction as well 
 as in their powers. But upon that revival, and 
 upon the good faith with which the Act should 
 be carried into effect both by the Ministers and 
 the Board, every thing manifestly depended.
 
 33 
 
 It is with great pain that t now feel my- 
 self compelled by a sense of duty, to state 
 the disappointment of the expectations, which 
 in common with the rest of the Committee, I 
 had entertained, that His Majesty's Ministers 
 would faithfully discharge the trust thus re- 
 posed in them. On so important a matter I 
 cannot allow considerations of a personal na- 
 ture to impose silence upon me, or to qualify 
 the expression of an .opinion which I have re., 
 luctantly been forced to adopt, that a full and 
 searching exposure of abuses is not in the con- 
 templation of those who have issued the Com- 
 mission. It would be acting from a false deli- 
 cacy towards individuals, for whom in their 
 private capacity I can feel nothing but respect, 
 were I to abstain from frankly urging this com- 
 plaint, and substantiating it by entering into 
 particulars, how painful soever the detail may 
 prove to me. Before I proceed, let me observe, 
 that the attempts made to frustrate the Bill en- 
 tirely ; the great mutilations actually performed 
 upon it; the indisposition to pass it in any the 
 least efficient form strongly indicated a dispo- 
 sition unfavourable to the inquiry, and excited 
 the vigilance if not the suspicions of its friends 
 towards the manner in which the powers con- 
 ferred by it should be executed. We are now 
 to see whether those unfavourable impressions 
 have been confirmed or removed.
 
 34 
 
 If the first object of the ministers had been 
 to render the Act as effectual as possible, they 
 would naturally have listened to the recom- 
 mendation of the Committee in the formation of 
 the Board. It was known to every person that 
 the individuals suggested by us, were selected 
 solely, because they appeared to be the best 
 qualified for the office. No suspicion had for 
 a moment existed in any quarter, indeed, the 
 composition of the Committee, made it impossi- 
 ble to suspect, that party views had influenced 
 us in the suggestion of a single name. At all 
 events, there would have been no impropriety 
 in the noble Secretary of State conferring with 
 some of us who had applied closely to the busi- 
 ness. The prerogative of the Crown is not 
 supposed to suffer, nor the dignity of its ministers 
 to be lowered, by freely communicating with 
 members of the House of Commons for other 
 purposes. Where could have been the harm 
 in consulting a Committee indiscriminately 
 taken from all parts of the House, upon a matter 
 which had occupied so much of their attention ? 
 His lordship thought otherwise ; of the gen- 
 tlemen pointed out by us, only two have been, 
 put in the Commission ; and these, I have 
 reason to think, by no means through our re- 
 commendation, but doubtless from the accident, 
 a fortunate one for the public, of their having 
 more favoured palrons.
 
 
 35 
 
 Of the other paid Commissioners, t have 
 understood that some look forward to the duties 
 of the office as quite compatible with those 
 of a most laborious profession ; while others are 
 supposed to regard the existence of abuses 
 generally, in any establishment, with an un- 
 willing, if not incredulous mind. Nay, 1 have 
 reason to believe, that one very respectable 
 member of the board has publicly professed an 
 opinion, that a great anxiety for the welfare of the 
 poor is symptomatic of Jacobinism. Exclusive 
 devotion to professional vocations, is a meri- 
 torious frame of mind; but does not perhaps 
 very naturally point a man out as fit for a second 
 occupation. A fond disposition to find every 
 thing right in our political system ; an aversion 
 to believe in the existence of defects; a proneness 
 to charge with disaffection those who spy 
 them out; a tendency to suspect all who busy 
 themselves for the poor as influenced by sinister 
 motives, and even as contrivers of political mis- 
 chief, these, for aught I know may be praise- 
 worthy feelings; or amiable weaknesses; or 
 excusable mistakes ; and far be it from me 
 to think the worse of any man who is ho- 
 nestly influenced by what may seem the 
 least rational of such propensities. But then 
 I must take leave to think that they form 
 very indifferent qualifications for sitting at a 
 Board, the object of which is to pry into abuses, 
 
 F 2
 
 36 
 
 to expose errors and malversations, and to drag- 
 forth to public view, those who have robbed the 
 poor of their rights. Persons under the influence 
 of such impressions will enter upon their inqui- 
 sitorial functions with a disposition to find 
 ground of justification rather than of charge ; 
 will reluctantly open their eyes to truths which 
 thwart their favorite prejudices j and feel de- 
 sirous that their inquiries should convict of 
 exaggeration the statements now before the 
 public. 
 
 That the choice of my lord Sidmouth has 
 been guided by this consideration, or by any 
 wish to quiet the fears of charitable trustees, 
 I am far from asserting; on the contrary, I 
 rather believe, that the usual motives may have 
 influenced the appointments, favor towards si- 
 milarity in political sentiments, and the wish to 
 oblige political connexions. But it seems impos- 
 sible to maintain that his lordship passed over cer- 
 tain names by mere accident. These omissions 
 require further notice as throwing light upon 
 the spirit in which the ministers are executing 
 the Act. 
 
 The Committee had in their Report strongly 
 recommended to the attention of Parliament, 
 and of the ministers, two professional gentlemen 
 to whose voluntary assistance they had been 
 greatly indebted during the course of their in- 
 quiries. I allude to Mr. Parry and Mr. Koe. 
 Of their eminent qualifications to fill -the place
 
 37 
 
 of Commissioners every one who attended to our 
 proceedings was aware. The case of Mr. Parry 
 was indeed, peculiarly strong. It happened 
 that he had for some years devoted himself pri- 
 vately to the very investigation which the Board 
 was to prosecute. He had been occupied in 
 examining the abuses in the Berkshire CharitieSj 
 upon which he has just published a valuable 
 treatise. He was the very man for the new 
 office ; he was a Commissioner, if I may so speak, 
 ready made to our hand ; he was trained to the 
 business by a lucky coincidence; he was by this 
 accident, the only man who could be found to 
 unite experience with the other qualities re- 
 quired ; and all of which he also possessed. 
 Nor had he any of the drawbacks which might 
 be supposed to prevent his appointment. He 
 had never mixed in politics at all ; his con- 
 nexions were ministerial ; he was known to the 
 Lord Chancellor, and much esteemed by him ; 
 he had, indeed, been promoted by his lordship 
 to the place of Commissioner of Bankrupt; to 
 the members of the Committee he was wholly 
 unknown except by his co-operation; none 
 of us had ever heard his name mentioned until 
 the member for Berks informed us of the 
 similarity of his ptirsuits. Thus, then, fortune 
 seemed to present a person eminently fitted 
 for the service of the public, and it might 
 have been supposed that lord Sid mouth would 
 eagerly avail himself of the opportunity to ap
 
 38 
 
 point at least one Commissioner whom all men 
 
 would allow to be well chosen. What were 
 
 the grounds of his rejection, 1 am yet to learn. 
 
 Whether that he had incurred the guilt of 
 
 drawing forth my warm commendations, solely 
 
 by his own merits; or that abounding in all 
 
 other requisites, he had no friend at court; or 
 
 that his inquisitorial habits might give alarm 
 
 to many favoured personages ; or that his claims 
 
 stood in the way of illustrious birth united 
 
 to obscure merit; or that the patronage of 
 
 the Home Department, was at all hazards to 
 
 be defended against every inroad of desert as 
 
 well as of parliamentary recommendation All 
 
 we know is the fact, that neither Mr. Parry nor 
 
 Mr. Roe are in the Commission. 
 
 Among the honorary Commissioners, we had 
 been led to hope that Lord Lansdowne and the 
 Bishop of London would appear. It is not 
 easy to find two individuals more admirably 
 qualified for the office, by the union of inflexible 
 integrity with conciliatory temper, and of acute 
 understanding with habits of application to af- 
 fairs. But I own that in my eyes those dis- 
 tinguished persons were still further recom- 
 mended by their avowed disposition in favour 
 of the proposed inquiry ; and I am therefore 
 the more disheartened, when I find their places 
 supplied by two right reverend prelates, one 
 of whom displayed his irreconcileable hostility 
 to the Bill, by even voting against its com.
 
 39 
 
 mitnient; and the other, his disinclination towards 
 it, by retiring* before the division, in which the 
 bench of bishops took so active a share*. These 
 are the only peers whose names I find in the 
 list. Neither Lord Rosslyn, who brought for- 
 ward the question with such signal ability, nor 
 Lord Holland, nor Lord Carnarvon, who power- 
 fully supported him, are includedf. 
 
 But I feel myself compelled, however irksome 
 the task, to take notice of another omission. 
 No members of the Education Committee are 
 stationed at the Board, to superintend the exe- 
 cution of their own measure, to keep watch for 
 the public, stimulating the doubtful zeal of some, 
 and checking the declared hostility of others; 
 in a word, to give the Country a substantial 
 security, that the abuses so loudly complained 
 of shall in good earnest be investigated, and 
 that the Commission shall not be changed from 
 
 O 
 
 an unsparing inquisition, into a thicker cloak 
 than that under which the poor have already 
 been despoiled. It might have been expected 
 that either Mr. Babington or myself, who had 
 taken the principal part in the labours of the 
 Committee, would have been placed upon the 
 
 * The Bishops of Peterborough and St Asaph. 
 
 f It is singularly unfortunate, that neither the speech of 
 Lord Rosslyn, so replete with important information, as well 
 as sound and enlightened views, on National Education, nor 
 that of Lord Holland, worthy of his illustrious kinsman, 
 were reported.
 
 40 
 
 watch for these purposes. Of -Mr. Babtngton'g 
 claims to the office, every one who knows him 
 will admit that I need say nothing 1 . Unfor- 
 tunately he has lately by his retirement from 
 public life, added one qualification, which all 
 who have marked the honesty and usefulness 
 of his parliamentary conduct will allow, that 
 the Country has cause to lament. After titles 
 to notice, so much higher than any that 
 I can bring forward, had been disregarded, I 
 could hardly feel surprised at my own offer 
 of service being rejected, with silent contempt, 
 by the eminent head of the Home Depart- 
 ment. I was induced to tender myself, by the 
 strong representations of my fellow labourers in 
 the Committee. As the office conferred neither 
 emolument, nor patronage, nor power; as it 
 only gave the privilege of hard labour, of which 
 the habits of my life and my zeal for the cause, 
 made it very clear that I should cheerfully take 
 advantage ; I imagined that the most impla- 
 cable species of malice the spite of peculators 
 trembling for their unjust gains could hardly 
 impute any selfish views to the application: 
 I therefore openly stated in my place that I 
 was anxious to be an honorary member of 
 the Commission. I added, that even if my 
 temporary retirement from Parliament were 
 deemed an indispensable condition of the ap- 
 pointment, I still desired to have the option, 
 upon those terms ; being of opinion that I might
 
 41 
 
 render more valuable service to the Country, by 
 devoting 1 to the proposed inquiry the whole time 
 which I could spare from professional avoca- 
 tions. But I do not find that great leisure is 
 thought necessary for the business of the Board. 
 The Speaker is at the head of it ; and Sir W. 
 Scott is another of its members. Than the 
 former no man can be a more fit president; but 
 I am not quite disposed to look for very active, 
 investigation from the right honourable member 
 for Oxford. He is understood to be decidedly 
 hostile to the Bill. His constituents are known 
 to be in general, the warmest enemies of the 
 whole inquiry. That he and Mr. Yorke are 
 named instead of Mr. Babington and myself, 
 .1 trust I may be permitted to regret with the 
 most perfect respect for two gentlemen whose 
 fair difference of opinion, widely as it separates 
 us, I entirely honour. 
 
 That party considerations dictated this deci- 
 sion, I feel unwilling to believe. In the case of 
 Mr. Babington they could have no weight. In 
 my own, I will venture to say they would be ex- 
 ceedingly misplaced ; for I appeal with confi- 
 dence to every member of the Committee and 
 to every person in government with whom I 
 have had the honour of communicating, to de- 
 fend me from the suspicion of having in any 
 one instance shewn myself influenced by politi- 
 cal feelings during the course of the inquiry. 
 
 G
 
 42 
 
 So determined was I to avoid every thing- which 
 might lead to such imputations, that I inter- 
 fered at the Westmorland election to prevent 
 any allusion from being" made to the case of 
 St. Bees school, and uniformly refused access 
 to the evidence touching 1 that extraordinary 
 affair to persons who might use it for the pur- 
 poses of the contest. It has been suggested 
 that I am omitted because the ministers were 
 apprehensive of my carrying the inquiry further 
 than they wished it to go. Certainly, I should 
 have felt no desire to push it beyond the just 
 limits. I should have only taken care that every 
 abuse was searched to the very bottom, whoever 
 might be engaged in it. One step short of this 
 I should not have consented to stop; further, 
 there was no occasion to go. 
 
 It is necessary to add a remark or two upon 
 the choice of the Secretary. That important 
 officer is directed by the Act to be named by the 
 Commissioners themselves. The reason is ob- 
 vious; he ought to be a person possessing their 
 confidence ; known to them ; selected by them. 
 The law was purposely so framed, and the terms 
 of it explicitly shew the intent of the legisla- 
 ture. The secretary of state, however, is under- 
 stood to have desired the stipendiary Commis- 
 missioners immediately after their nomination, 
 and before the seal was affixed, to reserve them- 
 selves upon the appointment of a secretary. It
 
 43 
 
 is not to be doubted, that this suggestion was 
 meant as a notice that the Home Department 
 would recommend a proper person. According- 
 ly I am informed that Mr. Parry, the omission 
 of whose name at the Board had created con- 
 siderable discussion, has since received intima- 
 tion that an application by him for the office 
 would be favourably received. If Lord Sid- 
 mouth recommends him, it will be a deviation 
 from the Act of Parliament*, useful no doubt to 
 the public, but only rendered so by his lordship 
 having previously left him out of his proper 
 place at the Board. Had he been appointed a 
 Commissioner, the minister would have only exer- 
 cised the patronage vested in him by law ; an able 
 servant would have been secured in the depart- 
 ment that most required him ; and the discretion 
 vested by the Act in the Board would have 
 been kept sacred from ministerial encroachmentf, 
 
 * The words are (Sect. 4.) " The said Commissioners are 
 " hereby authorized to appoint and employ such Secretary 
 " as they shall think meet, and to administer to the said 
 " Secretary an oath for his true and faithful demeanour in 
 all things relating to the due performance of any trust 
 " respecting the execution of this Act, reposed in him by the 
 ft said Commissioners." 
 
 t It is remarkable that the Police Committee have com- 
 plained, in their Third Report t of the same disposition in the 
 Home Department to grasp at patronage not vested in it by 
 law. " This breach of an act of parliament, (says the Re* 
 port) on the part of the Secretary of State, has produced the 
 result which might have been anticipated. One of the per-
 
 44 
 
 I have now finished the most painful part of 
 these observations; painful, because I have been 
 compelled to criticise the selection of persons 
 against whose general characters and respecta- 
 bility I have never heard a suspicion whispered, 
 and to express a disapprobation of the choice, 
 founded upon an invidious comparison of their 
 deserts with those of other men. Let it not, 
 however, be supposed that 1 expect no good to 
 result from their labours ; still less do I impute 
 to them any backwardness to discharge the 
 duty which they have sworn to fulfil. It is the 
 inferior energy of some that I lament. It is 
 the unfortunate prejudices of others which I 
 dread, against which I feel anxious that they 
 themselves should be warned, and of which a 
 jealous Public ought thus early to be apprized. 
 Even thus constituted, and with powers so de- 
 sons so appointed by Lord Sidmouth, was a worthless, aban- 
 doned character, a Jew bail, who was imprisoned in the King's 
 Bench, and not being able to perform his duty, was turned 
 out of his situation ; he is described by the chief clerk as a 
 man who hired himself out as a fraudulent bail, and was never 
 known at the office till he came to be sworn in. Your Com- 
 mittee beg leave to observe, that this interference of the 
 Secretary of State is not warranted by the law which regu- 
 lates the police, and will no doubt, if persevered in, be attended 
 with the worst effects. Of the four persons nominated by 
 Lord Sidmouth, one declined his appointment, another was 
 turned out of the office, and the remaining two were con- 
 firmed in their situations, in defiance of the proper remon- 
 strance of the magistrates upon the subject.*'
 
 45 
 
 fective as I have shown, this Board may render 
 service to the state : but he is guilty of no failure 
 iu courtesy towards its members who betrays a 
 constitutional desire that their proceedings should 
 attract the watchful eye of the community at 
 large. 
 
 Of the Ministers who first mutilated the Act, 
 and then entrusted the execution of it to its ene- 
 mies rather than its authors or supporters, no man 
 can long hesitate what opinion he should form. 
 Their conduct can only be accounted for upon the 
 supposition that they do not wish to see a zealous 
 and unsparing investigation of charitable abuses. 
 That they should favour neglect or peculation 
 for its own sake, is inconceivable ; but they may 
 be deterred from fearlessly joining in the expo- 
 sure of it by the clamours of those who are in- 
 terested in its concealment, or the alarms of 
 men easily disquieted, willing to believe that 
 there is safety in supporting whatever exists, 
 ready to fancy that there is danger wherever 
 there is movement, and to forget that in the 
 neighbourhood of mischief repose is perilous. 
 Certain it is, that the present Ministers have at 
 all times betrayed a reluctance to reformation of 
 every sort ; and that, whether from interest, or 
 weak compliance, or fear of disquieting the alar- 
 mists, they have so acted as to afford abuses of all 
 descriptions effectual shelter. Upon the present 
 occasion the) .have not deviated from their accus-
 
 : . 
 
 tomed course; and the interposition of Parliament 
 will be required to force them out of it, as it has 
 frequently done before. The season has happily 
 passed away when the country could be frightened 
 out of a necessary attention to the mismanagement 
 of its affairs 5 and an opinion is daily gaining 
 ground, that its safety might be secured, instead 
 of endangered, by the steady yet temperate pro- 
 gress of well-considered, timely reformation. 
 
 It is devoutly to be hoped, that the clamours, 
 and the still more dangerous intrigues of men 
 directly interested in the continuance of abuse, 
 may not be permitted to influence the House of 
 Commons during the approaching session. If 
 any thing has been clearly proved in the fore 
 going pages, it is the absolute necessity of re- 
 viving the Education Committee, and extending 
 its powers to all charities whatever. This mea- 
 sure alone can strengthen the hands of the Com- 
 missioners, whom all good men must wish to 
 support, whether they approve or blame the 
 selection that has been made. It is no less ne- 
 cessary for pursuing the investigation of the 
 important matters withdrawn from the jurisdic- 
 tion of the Board. An opposition to the renewal 
 of that Committee can only originate in a deter- 
 mined resolution to screen delinquents, to per- 
 petuate neglect and malversation. I trust I 
 may be permitted to affirm, without incurring 
 the charge of presumption, that never did any
 
 *-. '* -. 
 
 47 
 
 Committee better deserve the confidence of Par- 
 liament and of the Country, whether we regard 
 the diligence or the impartiality with which it 
 performed its duty. Gratitude to my colleagues, 
 as well as justice to the public, require from me 
 this acknowledgment. 
 
 It is true we had enemies, who from the first 
 regarded our proceedings with a jealous eye; 
 and whose numbers as well as animosity were 
 increased by the progress of our inquiries. With 
 those who openly met us we had no reason to 
 dread the result of a conflict ; but our most im- 
 placable adversaries chose a more formidable 
 manner of attack. They hated us for one thing, 
 and arraigned us for another; or concealing 
 themselves and their grounds of aversion, they 
 worked upon the fears of others, and opposed us 
 by deputy. Men who had no possessions of their 
 own, affected a tender regard for the secrecy of 
 title deeds, while they feared only the disclosure 
 of conveyances, that would oblige them to sur- 
 render the property of the poor. Many who 
 cared but little for the Church, and had too 
 much sense to suppose it could be endangered 
 by the restitution of charitable funds to their 
 proper objects, worked upon the apprehensions 
 of their weaker brethren, and made them cry 
 out, that nothing was sacred from our inqui- 
 sition, while certain secular abuses, cherished for 
 convenience, rather than consecrated by time,
 
 48 
 
 were the only objects of their own veneration. 
 Above all, advantage was taken of the romantic 
 attachment which English gentlemen feel to* 
 wards the academic scenes of their early life.; 
 and the generous natures of persons who had 
 honoured those retreats of learning by their ac- 
 quirements, or at the most, only made them the 
 abodes of harmless indolence, were enlisted in 
 the defence of practices from which they would 
 have revolted, had they not suffered themselves 
 to be persuaded that our object was an illiberal, 
 unlettered, gothic invasion of all classic ground. 
 Accordingly, we were severely reproved for 
 pushing our inquiries into establishments, des- 
 tined, it was said, for the education of the upper 
 classes, while our instructions confined us to 
 schools for the lower orders. Unfortunately, we 
 no sooner looked into any of those institutions, 
 than we found that this objection to our juris- 
 diction rested upon the very abuses, which we 
 were investigating, and not upon the real nature 
 of the foundation. For as often as we examined 
 any establishment, the production of the charter 
 or statutes proved that it was originally des- 
 tined for the education of the poor " One free 
 schoolefor the instructing, teaching, maintenance 
 and Education of POOR CHILDREN and Scho- 
 lars"* says, the charter of the " Hospital and 
 " Free Grammar School in the Charter-House." 
 " PAUPJERES^INDIOENTES scfwlares," say the 
 * 1 Report, 1816, p. 128.
 
 49 
 
 Statutes of Winchester College* " Unurii Col~ 
 leyium perpetuum PAUPERUM ET INDIGEN- 
 TIUM scholarium Canlabriyice, et quoddam alum 
 collegium perpetuum ALFORUM PAUPERUM ET 
 INDIGENTIUM scholarium Etoniee" say the sta- 
 tutes which founded King's College Cambridge, 
 and Eton College ;f and they further require 
 the scholars to take a solemn oath, that they 
 have not five marcs (j3 (5s.) a year to spend. 
 The Westminster statutes, expressly prohibit 
 any boy being elected on the foundation, " who 
 " has, or at his father's death will inherit a pa- 
 " trimony of above ten pounds. J " The same po- 
 verty is the qualification required by the Statutes 
 of Trinity College, Cambridge : the scholars 
 are there called " PAUPERES," and in chusing 
 them, where other merits are equal, the prefe- 
 rence is ordered to be given " INOPIJE." In 
 chusing the fellows of St. John's College, a pre- 
 ference is prescribed in favour of the most de- 
 serving, " et inter hos, illis qui INDIGENTIORES 
 " fuerint ;" for scholars, the " INOPES " are di- 
 rected to be preferred, and an oath of poverty, 
 similar to that of Eton and Winchester is so- 
 lemnly taken. || There is no doubt that some 
 
 * Rep. 1818. 
 
 f Vid. Stat. 1. intitled < men* et institutum fundatoris." 
 Rep. 1816. 
 
 $ Report 1816, p. 199. 
 Cap. 1 and 13. Report 1818. 
 U Cap. 12, 15, 16. Report 1818. 
 
 H
 
 50 
 
 other institutions, as St. Paul's School, and St. 
 Saviour's in Sonthwark, were intended for the 
 rich ; the former by manifest implication was 
 founded for them only; the latter by the ex- 
 press terms of the foundation was meant for rich 
 and poor indifferently* ; but in the original sta- 
 tutes of the great schools and colleges, as far as we 
 examined them, there was to be found no provi- 
 sion except for the poor. Nor are the Committee 
 the first persons who have regarded those magnifi- 
 cent endowments in this light. Lord Coke, and the 
 other judges of England so considered the two 
 Universities in general ; for in his report of a 
 decision touching a charity school, he says, that 
 they all held it applied to Oxford and Cambridge j 
 he mentions those foundations as works of charity, 
 speaks of their members, as " poor scholars," and 
 in reference to the misapplication of their funds, 
 quotes the text, " panis egentium vita paupe- 
 " rum ; et qui defraudal eos homo sanguinis 
 " e$J."t The application of such expressions 
 to those rich endowments, has, indeed, given 
 offence to many. They think it hard that they 
 should be obliged to take the name with the 
 estate ; probably because the property came not 
 by inheritance, and because the appellation is 
 very inconsistent with the possession. 
 
 I presume, however, that I have said enough to 
 
 * Report 1816, 224-, 170. f 8 Rep. 130,
 
 61 
 
 justify the Committee for venturing to consider 
 those greatest ablish men ts as within its jurisdiction. 
 But situated as they are in the eyesofall the world, 
 administered by highly gifted personages, super- 
 intended by visitors of exalted station, it might 
 be deemed superfluous to exercise, with respect 
 to them, the inquisitorial power which our in- 
 structions gave us. Now, whether beneficially or 
 not, I have no right to determine, but certainly 
 the fact is that great deviations have been made 
 from the original foundation in all those venera- 
 ble establishments. For the particulars I must 
 refer to the Evidence.* I shall here only men- 
 tion a few things relating to Winchester College, 
 which may serve to shew that such endowments 
 are not less liable to perversion, than more ob- 
 scure charities. The statutes, as has already 
 been observed, require in the most express 
 terms, that only " the poor and indigent" shall 
 be admitted upon the ..foundation* They are in 
 
 * The Report 1818 contains copies of the Statutes of 
 Eton and King's College, Trinity and St. John's, Cambridge, 
 and a part of the foundation of Christ Church, Oxford. The 
 singular accuracy with which they are printed does great credit 
 to the industry and skill of Mr. Ellis of the British Museum, 
 who has been employed for some months in superintending 
 the press. This part of the Report will in a few weeks be 
 in circulation ; the part about to appear immediately con- 
 tains important extracts from the Winton Statutes. The 
 Report of 1816, contains the foundation of Westminster, 
 Charter House, St. Paul's, and others. 
 
 H2
 
 fact all children of persons in easy circum- 
 stances; many of opulent parents. The boys when 
 they attain the age of fifteen, solemnly swear 
 that they have not 3. 6s. a year to spend ; yet 
 as a practical commentary on this oath, they 
 pay ten guineas a year to the masters ; and the 
 average of their other expences exceeds fifty. It is 
 ordered that if any boy comes into the possession 
 of property to the amount of 5. a year, he shall 
 be expelled ; and this is construed (56. 13*. 4d. 
 regard being had to the diminished value of 
 money, although the warden, fellows and scholars 
 all swear to observe the statutes, *' according to 
 " their plain, literal, and grammatical sense and 
 ." understanding" It is strictly enjoined that 
 no boy shall be admitted above twelve years of 
 age. This is wholly disregarded. The fellow- 
 ships are augmented in revenue by a liberal in- 
 terpretation of the terms describing their money 
 payments ; the strictest construction is adopted 
 as to the payments to scholars, including even 
 the founder's kin, the peculiar objects of his 
 bounty. Thus, too, while the latter are refused 
 the convenience of knives, forks, spoons, plates, 
 &c. on the ground that such articles of furniture 
 were unknown in the time of William of Wyk- 
 ham, the fellows are allowed those accommoda- 
 tions, although the fellowships were founded at 
 the same early period. The revenues are between 
 13 and 14,000 a year j the yearly expence of
 
 53 
 
 the foundation scholars, as now borne by their 
 parents, is between 60 and 70 : so that there 
 cannot be any fair reason for not defraying 
 the whole of this out of the revenues, as 
 the founder obviously intended ; and thus re 
 storing- the school to its original state. Nor 
 would it be a deviation from his plan by 
 any means so wide as many which have been 
 adopted, were the number of seventy scholars 
 enlarged, which the opulence of the establishment 
 would render very easy. The fellowships would 
 still be lucrative, if reduced to the ordinary 
 value of those at Oxford and Cambridge, and 
 they are tenable with church preferment. The 
 infractions of the original statutes are sought to be 
 justified by the connivance of successive visitors, 
 and it is ailed ged that they have even authorised 
 them by positive orders (injunctions). But the 
 statutes appointing the visitor, expressly prohibit 
 him from altering them in any manner of way 
 directly or indirectly, and declare all acts in 
 contravention of them absolutely null.* I must 
 add, that notwithstanding the disregard shewn 
 jto some statutes and some oaths, there was a 
 strong disposition manifested in the members of 
 the college to respect those which they imagined 
 Jxmnd them to keep their foundation and their 
 poncerns secret. 
 
 * Report 1818.
 
 54 
 
 I am very far from taking upon me to decide, 
 that in all those great Institutions, many de- 
 viations from the letter of the original Statutes, 
 may not have been rendered necessary, and 
 some infractions of their spirit advantageous, 
 by the change of circumstances. But let it be 
 remembered that the Committee only investi- 
 gated, leaving others to act upon the result of 
 the inquiry. We contend for nothing beyond 
 the propriety of having the whole matter exa- 
 mined, arid the real state of things exposed to 
 Parliament, and the Country. They who ob- 
 ject to our proceedings, on the other hand, 
 begin by assuming either that all is right, or that 
 the subject is too sacred to be touched; and 
 they oppose every attempt to let in the light 
 upon what is passing within their precincts, as 
 if the hand of destruction were lifted against 
 establishments, while in truth, we are only for 
 subjecting them to the public eye. Nevertheless, 
 in all such matters, it is consistent with a wise 
 policy to respect even the prejudices of worthy 
 men ; and where voluntary improvement in 
 any Institution, may reasonably be expected, a 
 short delay is well bestowed, to attain the ad- 
 vantages of a reform at once safe and durable. 
 Acting upon this principle, the Committee 
 hardly touched the Universities, leaving to the 
 distinguished individuals entrusted with their 
 concerns, the task of pursuing the general sug-
 
 55 
 
 gestions of the Report, and of adopting such 
 measures, as their more intimate knowledge of 
 the details might point out. 
 
 It is natural indeed, even at this early stage of 
 the inquiry, to carry forward our views to the 
 ultimate result, and to ask what measures may 
 arise out of it. For the present I consider that 
 it would be premature to enter minutely into 
 this subject; but some consequences likely to 
 follow from the proceedings in question, appear 
 to deserve attention. 
 
 In the first place if they only lead to an ac- 
 curate knowledge of all the charitable funds in 
 the kingdom, without detecting a single abuse, 
 we shall owe to them very yaluable information, 
 which has never yet been obtained, notwith- 
 standing frequent attempts for that purpose by 
 different legislative provisions. The inaccuracy 
 of the former returns may be perceived at 
 once, by looking at the abstract of school 
 charities, which Mr. Rickman was kind enough 
 to make from the returns under Mr. Gilbert's 
 Act. * To take only two examples In the 
 East Riding of Yorkshire, 73 places are 
 said to possess 67 charitable donations for 
 schools, and their united revenue is stated at 
 880: whereas we now have ascertained that 
 one school alone, that of Pocklington, has a 
 
 I , * Report 1816. p. 169.
 
 56 
 
 revenue of about 900 year.* In Middlesex the 
 whole revenue is returned under 5000, in 151 
 donations, possessed by 64 places : but the re- 
 venues of three schools, the Charter-House, 
 Christ's Hospital and St. Paul's School, are 
 proved to exceed 70,000 a year.f 
 
 Secondly. It must be of the greatest import- 
 ance, to investigate all the instances of misma- 
 nagement and abuse in Charities, although no- 
 thing should be done, except to make them 
 public in all their details by a high authority. 
 When this publicity is given to them, a great 
 step is made towards their correction. Where 
 the evil arises from error of judgment, discussion 
 may rectify it, as we frequently have found 
 in the Committee, when, examining subscrip- 
 tion Charities administered on a bad principle, 
 we convinced their patrons of the error, and 
 induced them to amend their plan. Where 
 neglect or breach of trust is committed, the 
 exposure is likely to check it; nay the know- 
 ledge that an enquiry is approaching, has in many 
 instances already had this effect. Where further 
 steps become necessary, the interposition of the 
 tribunals now constituted for such superinten- 
 dance,the Visitors and the Courts of Equity, must 
 be ensured by the attention excited, and facili- 
 tated by the information obtained. And if, as 
 
 * Report 1818. f .Report 1816.
 
 57 
 
 is too probable, this remedy should be found 
 inefficacious, both in respect of ceconomy and 
 dispatch, the surest foundation is laid upon 
 which new legislative measures can be grounded. 
 It may therefore fairly be assumed that the 
 inquiry will end, if rightly conducted, in throw- 
 ing complete light on the state of Charities, and 
 in correctingall the abuses, to which they are now 
 liable. The estate of the Poor will be, as it were, 
 accurately surveyed, and restored to its rightfnl 
 owners ; or rather rescued from the hands which 
 have no title to hold it, and placed at the dis- 
 posal of the Legislature, the supreme power in 
 the State, to be managed in the way most bene- 
 ficial to those for whose use it was destined. If it 
 were merely given to those portions of the Poor 
 who are literally pointed out by the original de- 
 stination, and bestowed strictly in the manner 
 described, a great benefit would be gained, and 
 among other advantages, this would result, that 
 charitable persons, confiding in the secure appli- 
 cation of their benefactions might be encou- 
 raged to new acts of liberality. But we may 
 reasonably expect a further improvement to fol- 
 low, from attending to the great changes in the 
 circumstances of the times, and in the revenues 
 of most charities. The will of the donor, 
 which ought to be closely pursued, may often be 
 better complied with, by a deviation from the 
 letter of his directions. An alteration which no 
 
 I
 
 58 
 
 
 
 man can doubt that he would have made him- 
 self, had he lived to the present day. Thus the 
 founder of Hemsworth Hospital, in Yorkshire, 
 when he appointed it for the reception of twenty 
 poor persons above sixty years of age, appears 
 to have estimated its revenues, as not likely to 
 exceed .70 a year : they are now more than 
 2,000. Who can believe that he meant to con- 
 vert so many paupers, at a certain period of 
 life, into wealthy annuitants? Or is it pro- 
 bable that the revenues of a school, in Nor- 
 thumberland, exclusively appropriated by the 
 foundation to educate the children of a small 
 chapelry, would have been so limited, had the 
 donor foreseen their increase to such a sum as 
 can only be expended, by attiring the boys in 
 cloth of gold, and giving them editiones principes 
 to read ? Or is there a doubt, that the founders 
 of the Leeds Grammar School, had they foreseen 
 the increase of its revenues, as well as of the com- 
 mercial population of the town, would have gladly 
 permitted arithmetic and the modern languages 
 to be taught, with Latin and Greek, out of funds 
 greater than can now be spenton alearned educa- 
 tion* ? Or can it be imagined that King Edward 
 the Sixth, would have strictly ordered the whole 
 revenues of the Birmingham Charity to be divided 
 
 * See Attorney General v. Whitely, 10 Ves. jun. 24?. where 
 it is held, " that the words grammar school exclude all learn- 
 ing byt the learned languages." -
 
 59 
 
 between the two masters, had he known that they 
 would amount to 3 or .4,000 a year ? Cases 
 are not wanting of charities which would be 
 highly detrimental to the community were the 
 will of the donors strictly pursued. Thus large 
 funds were raised by voluntary contribution to 
 endow an hospital for the small pox inoculation. 
 Recent discoveries have proved that this prac- 
 tice extends the ravages of the disease. Could 
 any of the original subscribers, were he alive, 
 blame the application of this institution to the 
 vaccine method ? The Foundling Hospital has 
 a revenue of .10,000 a year, which will, in a 
 few years, be increased three or fourfold, all in- 
 tended originally for the maintenance of chil- 
 dren " cast off, deserted, or exposed by their 
 parents*." Yet such an expenditure of those 
 funds would certainly prove injurious to the 
 community, by encouraging improvident mar- 
 riages as well as illicit connexions, and thus 
 increasing the numbers of the poor. No one, 
 therefore, can blame the total change of the 
 plan which for the last sixty years has been 
 made, with whatever view, by adopting the rule 
 to admit no child whose mother does not appear 
 to be examined f. The founder of the Bedford 
 charity certainly never expected that the thirteen 
 acres in Holborn parish, with which he en* 
 
 * Vide Charter 1739. Rep. 1816, p. 215. 
 f Rep. 1816, 244. 
 12
 
 60 
 
 dowedit, would let for 7 or ..18,000 a year, and 
 be the means of attracting paupers from every 
 quarter to the town which he especially de- 
 signed to favour. In all cases of either descrip- 
 tion, both where much of the benefit plainly 
 intended to be conferred is lost, and where 
 positive injury is occasioned, by closely ad- 
 hering to the donor's directions, it seems the 
 duty of the Legislature to supply his place, and 
 to make such alterations as he might be pre- 
 sumed to sanction were he alive, in like man- 
 ner as the Court of Chancery endeavours to 
 fulfil his intentions, where his orders are imper- 
 fect, or where he has omitted altogether to 
 make a provision. 
 
 The course of proceeding which the Legis- 
 lature ought to pursue in dealing with the estates 
 of the poor, is a subject of peculiar delicacy, 
 and closely connected with the great question of 
 the Poor Laws. It is chiefly in this connexion, 
 that I have from the beginning been induced to 
 regard both the subject of Charities and of National 
 Education. You are aware that my intention is 
 to submit certain propositions to Parliament 
 upon the Poor Laws during the ensuing ses- 
 sion, and I shall not here anticipate the dis- 
 cussion, which may then be expected to take 
 place. But a few observations may properly 
 find a place in this letter, respecting the con-
 
 flexion between the general question, and per- 
 manent charitable funds. The remarks, theh f 
 with which J. am about to conclude, relate to 
 the principles which ought to regulate the con- 
 duct of the Legislature in dealing with charities, 
 and which should guide us in forming our opi- 
 nion upon the relief, likely to be felt by the coun- 
 try from the due application of funds destined to 
 assist the poor. 
 
 1 take it to be a principle which will admit of 
 no contradiction, that the existence of any per- 
 manent fund for the support of the poor the ap- 
 propriation of any revenue, however raised, 
 which must peremptorily be expended in main- 
 taining such as have no other means of -sub- 
 sistence has upon the whole a direct tendency 
 to increase their numbers. It produces this 
 effect in two ways by discouraging industry, 
 foresight, economy and by encouraging im- 
 provident marriages ; nor is the former operation 
 more certain than the latter. It is equally clear 
 that this increase will always exceed the propor- 
 tion which the revenues in question can maintain.* 
 To the class of funds directly productive of pau- 
 pers belong all revenues of alms-houses, hospitals, 
 and schools where children are supported as well 
 as educated j all yearly sums to be given away to 
 
 * " Languescet industria, intendetur socordia, si nullusex 
 se metus aut spes, et securi omnes aliena subsidia expec- 
 tabunt, sibi ignavi, nobis graves." TACIT.
 
 62 
 
 mendicants or poor families; regular donations of 
 religious houses in catholic countries ; the portion 
 of the tythes in this country which went to main- 
 tain the poor before the statutory provision was 
 made; and finally, and above all, that provision 
 itself.* But charitable funds will prove harm- 
 less (and may be moreover beneficial) exactly 
 in proportion as their application is limited to 
 combinations of circumstances out of the ordinary 
 course of calculation, and not likely to be taken 
 into account by the labouring classes in the esti- 
 mate which they form of their future means of 
 gaining a livelihood. Thus they may safely 
 be appropriated to the support of persons dis- 
 abled from working by accident or incurable 
 malady, as the blind, and the maimed ; and we 
 may even extend the rule to hospitals generally, 
 for the cure of diseases; nor can orphan hospitals 
 be excepted, upon the whole ; for although cer- 
 tainly the dread of leaving a family in want, is one 
 check to improvident marriages, yet the, loss of 
 both parents is not an event likely to be contem- 
 plated. In like manner, although the existence 
 of a certain provision for old age, independent of 
 individual saving, comes within the description 
 
 * The Poor Rates come clearly within this description as 
 now raised and applied, for though they do not exist previ- 
 ously to the demand on the part of the persons claiming re- 
 lief, the mode of calling them into existence and the right 
 to do so is known, and that has the same effect.
 
 63 
 
 ' . . / 
 
 of the mischief, it is nevertheless far less de- 
 trimental than the existence of an equal fund 
 for maintaining , 'young persons, and more espe- 
 cially for supporting children. Keeping- these 
 remarks in our view, let us add to them the 
 consideration, that as the Poor Laws have 
 been administered, the character of the labour- 
 ing classes has suffered a material injury, from 
 which it ought by all means to be restored, and 
 we shall come to the conclusion, that the appli- 
 cation of charitable funds to purposes of educa- 
 tion merely, will be the best means of expending 
 them on a large scale, and that next to this, 
 such donations are to be preferred as directly 
 encourage independence, for example, a pro- 
 vision for the old age of persons who never re- 
 ceived alms in any shape 5 and for defraying the 
 first cost of erecting saving banks. The employ- 
 ment of these resources in helping industry by 
 the supply of tools is a more doubtful application 
 of them, but far more harmless than the me- 
 thods generally in use. Perhaps, after the uses 
 now mentioned, no expenditure of eleemosynary 
 revenues can be devised more safe than reserving 
 them rigorously for periods of extraordinary 
 distress, and then bestowing them upon per- 
 sons above the lowest classes, so as to prevent 
 the ruin of householders. 
 
 I am very far, however, from asserting that any 
 such strict limitation of the charitable funds already
 
 64 
 
 existing ought to be attempted. I only state the 
 principle upon which the Legislature should 
 proceed, wherever it is justified in interfering. 
 What circumstances may authorize that inter- 
 ference, cannot be, with any advantage to the sub- 
 ject, described in general terms. But that norights 
 are in reality infringed by taking a fund destined 
 to support the poor in a way likely to increase 
 their numbers, and using it so as to perform some 
 act of charity without increasing the numbers 
 of charitable objects, seems abundantly evident. 
 No man can be supposed to have desired the 
 existence of paupers; every donor assumed that 
 independently of his bounty, there were such 
 needy persons in being, and he intended to re- 
 lieve them. Could he have foreseen that an al- 
 teration in the form of his gift, must reduce their 
 numbers, he would have adopted it. In like 
 manner, the poor are not, with reference to this 
 point, an existing body of persons, like the 
 Church or any other Corporation, who have 
 rights of property. They form a class into 
 which no man enters voluntarily, and whatever 
 diminishes their numbers, benefits the commu- 
 nity. So that no violation of property would 
 be committed by using any fund given to the 
 poor, in a manner different from its original desti- 
 nation, provided the result were infallibly to lessen 
 their numbers, and still to employ it in works of 
 charity. We both accurately and conveniently
 
 65 
 
 speak of the poor as a body having rights, 
 when we complain of those who have misapplied 
 their property by converting it to their own use. 
 But they cannot with any correctness of speech 
 be said to be defrauded by an act which lessens 
 their numbers. This injury can only be done 
 to persons who were manifestly never in the 
 donor's view, persons voluntarily making them- 
 selves paupers, to take advantage of the gift. 
 
 But let it not be imagined that the general 
 recovery of charitable funds from the hands by 
 which they are mismanaged, would afford no 
 direct relief to the Country. Even if applied 
 rigorously, according to the principles which 
 I have stated, they would produce an almost im- 
 mediate diminution in the numbers of the poor, 
 and would support many who at present are left 
 to parochial relief. The effects of a course of 
 treatment tending to raise the character of the 
 lowest classes, are very generally underrated. 
 The experiments which have been made in 
 Switzerland, and of which an account will be 
 found in. my evidence before the Committee, 
 sufficiently shew how much may be expected 
 from a system at once rational and benevolent. 
 There is no necessity for carrying it so far as 
 has there been done, but the principles are the 
 same in every degree to which they may be 
 adopted. We have also uniformly found in the 
 Committee, that the improvement of children, 
 
 K
 
 66 
 
 produces an immediate effect upon the parents 
 who have been brought up in rude and disso- 
 lute habits, inspiring them with better senti- 
 ments, and gradually meliorating their con- 
 dition.* If all the proper measures were adopted 
 for thus striking at the root of the evil, it would 
 obviously be much safer than it now is to apply 
 part of the funds already disposable, or which 
 may be regained, to the ordinary purposes of 
 charity j and they might thus afford an im- 
 portant relief to the land-owner during the period 
 that must be consumed in the transition from 
 the present unnatural state of the system, to a 
 more healthful and happy condition. 
 
 I must, however, forbear to enter further into 
 this wide field of discussion. Our subject is 
 confined within narrower limits. The point to 
 which the attention of the Country should first 
 be directed, is the rescue of charitable funds 
 from mismanagement, and their restoration to 
 the purposes for which they were created. Upon 
 the justice of this course, there can exist no 
 difference of opinion. Upon its expediency 
 as compared with the abandonment of them to 
 thriftless or selfish hands, the decision seems 
 equally clear. What further steps may be ad- 
 viseable, is a question that may be reserved for 
 a later stage of the inquiry. But I should have 
 
 * Report, 1818.
 
 67 
 
 acted unfairly if I had omitted here to bring 
 forward, though very generally and imperfectly, 
 the principles which in my humble opinion 
 should guide us in resolving that question also, 
 because false expectations might have been 
 raised on the one hand, or equally groundless 
 despondence been produced on the other. 
 
 I ever am, 
 
 Most faithfully your's, 
 
 H. BROUGHAM. 
 
 Temple, Aug. 20, 1818.
 
 N. B. The Evidence taken before the Committee, 
 referred to in this Letter, will be published 
 in a form to bind up with it, and arranged 
 under the heads of the different cases, in a 
 few days.
 
 APPENDIX 
 
 TO 
 
 MR. BROUGHAM'S LETTER : 
 
 CONTAINING 
 
 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE 
 
 TAKEN BEFOR1 
 
 THE EDUCATION COMMITTEE. 
 
 Eotnron : 
 
 PRINTED FOR LONGMAN, HURST, REES, ORME, AND BROWHT, 
 PATERNOSTER-ROW; J. RIDGEWAY, PICCADILLY? AND 
 A, CONSTABLE AND CO., EDINBURGH. 
 
 1818,
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 1 List of the Select Committee on the Education of the Poor - 5 
 
 2 List of the Commissioners, &c. ---------- 7 
 
 3 Reading School Charities ------------ g 
 
 4 StBeesSchool 13 
 
 5 Pocklinglon School -------------- 4* 
 
 6 Mere Charity - - 55 
 
 7 Spital Charity - - 64 
 
 8 Yeovil Charities --------------- 65 
 
 9 Croydon Charities -------------- 81 
 
 10 Wellingborough Charities ----------. 90 
 
 11 Huntingdon School ------- ------ 92 
 
 It Mr. Brougham's Account of an Establishment in Switzerland - 99
 
 
 j . i
 
 1818. 
 
 (IT H -K; 
 
 SELECT COMMITTEE ON TJJE EDUCA- 
 TION OF THE POOR. 
 
 Mr, BROUGHAM. 
 Sir JAMES MACKINTOSH. Sir SAMUEL ROMILLY. 
 
 Mr. ROBERT GORDON. 
 
 Mr. BUTTERWORTH, 
 
 Mr. JOHN SMITH. 
 
 Mr. LAMB. 
 
 Sir JAMES SHAW. 
 
 Mr. CHARLES CALVERT. 
 
 Lord OSSULSTON. 
 
 Sir HENRY PARNELL. 
 
 The Marquis of TAVISTOC^. 
 
 Mr. Alderman ATKINS. 
 
 Mr. ABEL SMITH. 
 
 Mr. WARRE. 
 
 Mr. SHELDON. 
 
 Mr. Alderman WOOD. 
 
 Mr. GRANT. 
 
 Mr. BENNET. 
 
 Mr. BAB1NGTON. 
 
 JKr. JOHN HENRY SMYTH. 
 
 Mr. WILBERFORCE. 
 
 Sir WILLIAM CURTIS. 
 
 Sir FRANCIS BURDETT. 
 
 Mr. BARCLAY. 
 
 Sir RONALD FERGUSON. 
 
 Mr. HOLFORD. 
 
 Sir THOMAS ACLAND. 
 
 Mr. WROTTESLEY. 
 
 Mr. ABERCROMBIE. 
 
 Mr. FREDERICK DOUGLAS. 
 
 Sir THOMAS BARING. 
 
 Mr. LAMBTON. 
 
 The Lord Advocate of SCOTLAND. Mr. WILLIAM DOUGLAS. 
 Mr. HUNTER BLAIR. " Mr. BOSWELL. 
 
 Sir JAMES GRAHAM. Lord BINNING.
 
 COMMISSIONERS UNDER THE ACT. 
 
 HONORARY. 
 
 Rt. Hon. C. M. BUTTON. 
 
 Rt. Rer. Bishop of ST. ASAPH, (Dr. Luxmoore.) 
 
 Rt. Rev. Bishop of PETERBOROUGH, (Dr. Parsons.) 
 
 Rt. Hou. Sir W. SCOTT. 
 
 Rt. Hon. Sir W. GRANT. 
 
 Rt. Hon. C. YORKE. 
 
 STIPENDIARY. 
 
 T* .-il?i 
 
 3. W. WARREN, Esq. 
 W. ROBERTS, Esq. 
 W. MATHEWS, Esq. 
 J. H. HOLBECH, Esq. 
 W. GRANT, Esq. 
 J. M' MAHON, Esq. 
 T. MARSHAM, Esq. 
 Hon. D FINCH. 

 
 READING SCHOOL CHARITIES. 
 
 HENRY BROUGHAM, Esq. in the Chair. 
 
 May 4. 
 
 Mr. William Andrews^ jun. called in ; and Examined. 
 
 You are town clerk of Readiug ? Yes. 
 
 How lone; have you held that office ? I believe, three years last Mi- 
 chaelmas. 
 
 Did you snccefid your father ? Yes, I did. 
 
 Ha.l you acted with him when lie was town clerk? I had assisted 
 him ; and had been in his office, and no other office. 
 
 What are the principal charitable endowments for education in Read- 
 ing ? There is a school, or grammar school, founded by Henry VII. for 
 educating the boys of the inhabitants of the said borough and others of 
 Reading, in literature. 
 
 What others ? I do not know what the words " and others" mean. 
 
 The Committee mean, what other charities are there, in Reading ? 
 The next is that of Mr. Richard Aldworth. 
 
 State what that bequest is ? The rents and profits of it are applied, 
 amongst other things, for a schoolmaster, to clothe, educate, and main- 
 tain twenty poor boys in the three parishes in Reading ; a Bluecoat 
 school ; it is also to teach thirty poor boys as day scholars; and there 
 is also another object of the charily, which is, that two boys, of sixteeu 
 years of age, are to be put out as apprentices. 
 
 Have you the will ? Yes, here is a copy of the will and codicils. 
 The will is dated the 21st of December 1646, the first codicil is dated 
 the 15th February 1647, the second codicil is dated the llth of March 
 1648, which is a nuncupative codicil. 
 
 Who are the trustees under the will ? The mayor, aldermen and bur- 
 gesses of the borough of Reading, I believe. 
 
 What does the gift consist of ? The gift, I believe, consisted of 4,000/. 
 in trust, to purchase lands, together with real property. 
 
 What is the yearly value of the estates now ? It now consists of a 
 farm and lands at Shawfield, let at 400/. at Michaelmas 181 1, previous 
 to which the rent was only 196/. per annum. 
 
 When was the sura of 4,0001. laid out in the purchase of lands ? I 
 find entries in the books in 1657, as to 2,000/. being laid out for the 
 puuVhase of land ; and in 1660 a like entry as to 1,900/. 
 
 Where are the estates ? They consist of a farm and lands at Shaw- 
 field, in the county of Southampton, to a Mr. William Lanson j I believe 
 it is the whole purchase. 
 
 Is it stated in the entries in the books, what was purchased ? No, it 
 9 not ; I believe the farms consist of lands that are let to that one per- 
 n who I have named.
 
 8 BEADING SCHOOL CHARITIES. 
 
 Is there any other property belonging to this trust ? I see in the re- 
 ceiver's books two entries ; the one " William Pearce, 2/.'' and the 
 other, "John Warren, 12$." 
 
 Is that for rent ? They are put down as rent. 
 
 Are there auy other funds under Mr. Aldworth's will ? Not to my 
 knowledge. 
 
 How long was the last lease, which determined in 1811 ? I cannot 
 ttate that to the Committee. 
 
 Was it the practice to let upon fine hefore 1811? I am not aware 
 that it was. To the best of my recollection it was only a 21 years pre- 
 Tious lease. 
 
 Who was the lessee, <'o yon recollect ; or do the books show you ? 
 The books will show me, [looking at the books;} John Hatwood is men- 
 tioned as renting and paving 108/. j that is for Lance Levy. 
 
 What is the date of the I. ase ? Ir is not stated here. 
 
 That fs a lease that expired in 1811 ? Yes j and I should rather sup- 
 pose, that he wns assignee of the lease. 
 
 Who had the other lauds at that time ? It is put down, " Ditto, Mar- 
 shall, 88/. 
 
 The same tenant ? Yes ; but there were two leases vested by assign- 
 ment in the same pt.rxjn. 
 
 Who was the original lessee ? There is the name of William Tobb, in 
 1795. 
 
 Does any other name appear before William Tubb ? Not from the 
 books that I have now. 
 
 Does any trace of a fine appear ? No trace of a fine appears in these 
 books, that I have brought here, 
 
 Have you a list of the corporation, in the year 1795 ? I have it, but 
 not here. 
 
 Do you know, or have you ever heard, that those lessees were member* 
 of the Corporation ? I have reason to believe not. 
 
 Have you reason to believe, that they were connected in any way with 
 the members of the Corporation ? 1 have no reason to believe it. 
 
 Then how do you account for 4,0001. laid out a hundred and fifty year* 
 before, only fetching 196/. rent ? I expect that they produced as much 
 as lauds in the neighbourhood, when let at a fair rent. 
 
 Do you consider it to be a common case, in that neighbourhood of 
 Hampshire, that hind has not risen in value materially for 150 years 
 past ? Undoubtedly it has. 
 
 Have you any doubt, that it has quadrupled upon an average in 150 
 years ? I should think not; but I am not a farmer, and cannot tell. 
 
 How many acres of land are there in those two farms ? 1 have no do- 
 cuments to show that. 
 
 Has the Corporation in its other or private capacity, and not as trus- 
 tees for the charity, any land in its possession ? They have land and 
 houses. 
 
 In what county ? In Berkshire. 
 
 Have they received no increase of rent for the last 150 years? I 
 should suppose they had. 
 
 Have you any doubt of it? I should snppose they had ; I have no 
 doubt they have. 
 
 Ha^e you any means of stating to the Committee, what rise there haa 
 been in the rent of their other lands, during the last century and half ? 
 I have no means. 
 
 The Committee see, that the rent-roll of 1796 is here stated at 2437. 
 13;. 8d. ; can you tell the Committee what this rent-roll was in former 
 times ? I cannot.
 
 READING SCHOOL CHARITIES. 
 
 What is it now, deducting the charities ? I should beg leave to decline 
 answering that, as I am not acquainted with it. 
 
 What was the total rent of the lands in the management of the Corpo- 
 ration in the year 1796, and 1797? It appears that that part of the 
 lands arid tenements, including in the book what are called " Hall Reve- 
 nues," let in 1796 and 1797 for 1,3287. 6*. 3d. 
 
 What did the same rents amount to in 1813 and 1814? To 2,548/. 
 3s. 9d. ; this includes the private revenues of the corporation, as well as 
 trust funds. 
 
 Have you any means of informing the Committee what the rent-roll 
 was before 1796 and 1797 ? I have not at this time. 
 
 What does this receipt mean in the corporation book, under the head 
 " A further account of Mr. Aldworth's gift," by which it appears, that 
 from 170/1 to ISO/, a year were received upon that charity in the years 
 1671 to 1677 ? I really am at a loss to answer that question ; I should 
 suppose that Mr. Thomas Hanison was a gentleman in the corporation, 
 and that he received that year 137/. I3y. 3d. ; but there can be no doubt 
 it is applicable to the revenue of the charity. 
 
 Do you know where is the book continuing that book which you have 
 brought ? I really cannot state that to the Committee ; of course it is 
 with the corporation, but whether it be with their other documents and 
 papers, I do not know. 
 
 Who is the proper officer with the corporation for the custody of those 
 books ? The town clerk ; all the books are in their town hall, in closets 
 and chests, of which the mayor keeps one key and the town clerk 
 another key ; and therefore it is in the custody of the corporation them- 
 selves, by their mayor and town clerk having the key. 
 
 Who is the present lessee of Aldworth's lands ? Mr. Lanson. 
 
 Is it by lease or assignment ? There is an agreement to grant a lease ; 
 there is an equitable lease. 
 
 To him ? Yes, to him. 
 
 Did he pay a fine in 1811 for this lease? I believe not; I should 
 think not; I should not like to state to the Committee, that at the rent 
 of 400/. a year it is considered as overlet ; I should also state, that I be- 
 lieve the agreement which I did not prepare, and have not seen since the 
 time it was done, or never saw it, but I rather think that after several 
 years, the rent was to increase to 500/. but I believe he has paid only 
 400/. and probably there would be a disposition to relieve him still more. 
 
 Is he connected at all with the Corporation ? No* 
 
 Have the Corporation any rule of not letting their lands to themselves, 
 or any persons connected with them ? They generally do not; there is 
 a strong opposition to their letting them to persons of that description ; 
 but I should say, that generally charitable estates have been put up to 
 the highest bidder, to be let by tender, which has been found disadvan- 
 tageous in general, by inducing needy persons to bid beyond what they 
 ought. They have been generally let by tender. 
 
 How long has that been practised ? For some years past ; I cannot 
 state the time ; but so long as I have been connected with the Corpora- 
 tion, I have always observed that disposition. If I were to look through 
 that book, I believe I should not find the name of any one Corporation 
 man ; I believe that relates to the estates belonging to the Corporation 
 themselves ; I am not aware of a single charitable estate being vested in 
 a member of the Corporation. 
 
 Then how do you account for the rent of Aldworth's lands not having 
 risen between the years 1780 and 1811 ? 1 really am at a loss to ac- 
 count for it ; I should suppose that there had been either a long lease 
 previously, or that a fine had been taken. 
 
 B
 
 JO READING SCHOOL CHAUITIES. 
 
 Turn to Archbishop Laud's gift, and state what was the nature of that 
 gift ? It appears to be a deed-poll enrolled in Chancery, or a deed o 
 gift, dated the 26th of March, in the 15th of Charles, in the year 1640. 
 
 What did he give by that deed? Ee gave lands at Bray in the county 
 of Berks in the manor of Stroud, and others, and I believe nothing else. 
 
 What was the yearly value at that time? He states in his gift that 
 he bad let it at a rent of '2001. 
 
 Can you produce a copy of that deed ? Yes, here it is. 
 
 \Tlie witnea then produced Ike deedofgtft, of Archbishop Laud ; which was 
 read ; 
 
 When was this rent of 200/. increased ? Here is the account itself for 
 every year. It appears to have been increased at Michaelmas 1808, 
 from 200/. to 607/. I should state, that previous to that there appears 
 to be a land tax paid by the tenant of 311. Us. added to the rent. 
 
 What is the present rent ? With regard to that, I know not whether 
 it be 6351. or 625/. but I should rather say 6351. let to Messrs. Hallaway 
 and Stevens. 
 
 Where does the estate lie ? At Bray, in the county of Berks. 
 
 How many acres are there? I cannot state positively; but it is 
 somewhere about 330 acres. 
 
 Is that reckoned the full rent ? Yes; it is undoubtedly; a very large 
 rent, and probably it is as good a farm as any in Berkshire. 
 
 How did it happen that the rent continued without rising from Arch- 
 bishop Laud's death till 1808 ? Because it was so provided in the gift. 
 
 How was it increased in 1808, notwithstanding that provision in the 
 gift ? The tenant having suffered the property to be dilapidated, they 
 threatened to proceed against him, and he was induced to surrender his 
 estate and interest in the premises. 
 
 How did that give the corporation a right to let it for a higher rent to 
 another tenant, when the deed says expressly, it is never to be raised ? 
 The succession of tenants, which the donor had provided for, had ceased, 
 and the corporation were entitled to re-enter, and to let it at a higher 
 rent ; they did not re-enter, because the tenant surrendered. 
 
 Who was to choose the tenant ? He had demised it to the tenant 
 himself, and it amounted to almost a renewal. 
 
 What was the nature of Sir Thomas Rich's charity ? I believe it was 
 a gift of 1 ,000/. to be laid out in the purchase of lands. 
 
 When ? Upon the 16th of May 1666. It was a will. 
 
 What was the value of the lands at the time they were purchased ? 
 1,000^. appeared to have been given for them; they were the lands of 
 Straightley. 
 
 What year was the purchase made ? In 1670. 
 
 What was the rent of those lands in 1796 and 1797 ? The rent up to 
 1810 was only 54/. 
 
 Where are those lands situated ? At Straightley, in Berkshire. 
 
 How many acres are there ? I have not got down what it consisted 
 of previous to the late inclosure ; it now consists of 110 acres and 38 
 poles. 
 
 What is the present rent of it ? 260/. a year. 
 
 How do you account for the rent having continued so low as 54J. a 
 year for nearly a century and a half after the original purchase ? The 
 lands are at present by 60/. overlet, which reduces the rent to 200/. and 
 I am aware that when the last lease expired in 1811, there had been a 
 long term previously of 50 or 60 years duration. 
 
 What were they let for, previous to that term ? I cannot say.
 
 READING SCHOOL CHARITIES. 11 
 
 Snppose they were then let for 40J. there had been a fall of rent ? 
 Yes. 
 
 How many acres were there before the inclosure ? I believe by the 
 fnclosure the estate has been diminished 30 acres. It is exonerated of 
 great and small tythes; and if the Committee please, I will state the 
 whole circumstances : it is exonerated by the late inelosure of the great 
 and small tithes. The rates under the inclosure amounted to610/. 3s. 9d. 
 although the trustees could only raise 540/. under the Act, for the pur- 
 pose of paying those rates ; the consequence of which is, that the lands 
 have been in the hands of the commissioners for the last two or three 
 years past, and we could not borrow money, to pay what, the charity was 
 indebted to the trustees. 
 
 What is the nature of Malthus's charity ? It is a rent-charge, 
 arising out of Blewberry, of 91/. 
 
 What is West's chaiity ? It was originally 1,200.'. orphan stock; ft 
 is vested in the Clothworkers Company in London ; I believe it is upon 
 trust to purchase lands. 
 
 Where were they bought ? I do not believe they have ever been 
 bought ; I believe now they consist of 1,078'. 8;. <W. in the 4 per cents, 
 and 613/. 65. in the 3 per cents. 
 
 What have the corporation of Reading to do with this fund ? They 
 were entitled to the rents of it, for the purpose of providing for the main- 
 tenance and education of six poor boys in Reading, and they also con- 
 sisted of a parcel of fee-farm rents in the county of Northampton, 
 amounting to 61. 5s. 6d. 
 
 How is the 400/. a-year, arising out of Aldworth's charity, bestowed ? 
 It is directed to be bestowed for a schoolmaster, to clothe, educate and 
 maintain 20 poor boys, of the three parishes, in Reading, in the Blue- 
 coat school, ami to teach 30 boys, as day scholars, yearly ; and for two 
 boys, of 1 6 years of age, to be put out apprentices. 
 
 Does the income of Aldworth's charity do more than maintain those 
 20 boys, and educate the 30 day scholars? It has not done that; the 
 charity is indebted to the trustees. 
 
 In what state is the fund of Archbishop's Laud's charity; is it in- 
 debted to the trustees ? No ; at the time of the visitation of this charity, 
 in 1814, there were 879/. as a balance in favour of the charity. 
 
 For what purpose does that accumulate ? It has not accumulated, 
 but is appropriated under the deed of the charity. 
 
 How has the surplus rent been appropriated ? Under an order of the 
 Court of Chancery. 
 
 What is the purpose of Rich's charity ? The rents and profits are ap- 
 plied for the purpose of maintaining six poor boys in the Bluecoat school 
 in Mr. Aldworth's hospital, there to be made choice of by the landholders 
 of the town and parish of Sonning, Berks, and Oxon. 
 
 Does the 260/. per year do nothing more than maintain those six 
 Bluecoat boys? It would maintain r six boys now, but the whole rent has 
 not maintained those six boys, so that the charity is indebted to the 
 Corporation. 
 
 How much is it indebted to the trustees ? I cannot state the amount. 
 
 What is the expense of maintaining the six poor boys ? I believe it is 
 calculated, that the boys at an average cost the trustees 22/. a piece. 
 
 How is the 128/. yearly of overplus to be appropriated after the debt 
 is discharged? I am not aware that the will provides for it; of course 
 the charity would be augmented, as to the number of boys. 
 
 Have you any idea of the amount of the debt ? No, I cannot state it ; 
 I have beard of 1 ,500/.; but till the account is made up, it is impossible 
 
 B 2
 
 READING SCHOOL CHARITIES. 
 
 to speak ; they have kept up the six boys, with the fluctuation of boys 
 going out of school. 
 
 What is Malthus's charity ? It is for the maintenance of eleven boys. 
 
 Are these eleven hoys maintained with it ? Eleven boys have been 
 maintained, but at this time the charity is not full. 
 
 How many are there now? I see there are seven boys upon the 
 charity BOW ; and I should state also, that they have been very recently 
 elected. 
 
 What is the estimated cost of maintaining those seven boys? From 
 20/. to 2'2/. I should s-uppose, upon an average. 
 
 How is the surplus of 30/. a year bestowed ? There is no surplus at 
 present j tvery charity connected with the school is indebted to the cor- 
 poration. The committee are aware, that up to some short time since, 
 the estate only produced 91/. but now it is 191/. ; I should except Arch- 
 bishop Laud's charity. 
 
 Is there a balance in favour or against the corporation, upon the whole 
 of the charities, including Laud's, namely, Archbishop Laud's, Aid- 
 worth's, Rich's, West's, Malthus's ? Excepting Laud's, but as to the 
 other lour there is a balance against the charities. 
 
 By taking the whole five together, is there a balance for or against the 
 corporation ? Taking them in a mass, there is a balance in favour of the 
 corporation. 
 
 To what amount you cannot tell? I cannot tell ; I have nothing to 
 do with the management of these charities j I have only the partial cus- 
 tody of some of the papers. 
 
 What balance does it appear that there is in the treasurer's hands in 
 September 1815, upon his whole transactions ? I cannot state the ba- 
 lance ; this account, although it be passed, referred to and examined, as 
 up to Michaelmas 1815, is only up to Michaelmas 1814. 
 
 What is the foundation of Hall's school ? Among other things, there 
 is a house for the schoolmaster, to maintain and teach three poor boys 
 one year, to clothe them, to furnish a bible for each boy, to pay for the 
 master's salary, and 18/. a year for each boy, besides 6/. to each boy, to 
 apprentice them. 
 
 What is the revenue of the charity ? I make it amount to 951. 2i. 6rf. j 
 I should state, that there has been some additions to that charity. 
 
 What is the date of Hall's gift ? I believe it was dated the 31st of De- 
 cember 1696. 
 
 Have the lands risen in rents since that time ? I should suppose they 
 have ; but I have not got documents to answer that question. 
 
 Are they low let now ? They were let at 40/. exclusive of land tax, 
 4/. 13*. 4</. which makes the amount 44/. 13*. 4rf. 
 
 How many acres are there ? The farm which I am speaking of before 
 the inclosure, was 27 acres of inclosed land, and 23 acres of commonable 
 land j it has been lately inclosed ; I do not know the amount now. 
 
 Do you understand it now to be let at a fair rent ? It was let upon 
 lease to a Mr. Benyon, which is within a few years of expiration 5 he is 
 under treaty with the corporation to surrender that lease, and there is 
 likely to be a considerable increase. 
 
 Do you know what the purchase money originally was ? I believe it 
 was originally devised by the donor. 
 
 Has any further gift been made to this charity lately ? Yes, there 
 have been; there is also a messuage and lauds at Lychester in Hants, irt 
 the possession of John Keith. 
 
 And in the possession of John Stevens ? Yes j a yearly rent charge 
 of ~jl. subject to some abatement for land-tax.
 
 ST. BEES SCHOOL. 13 
 
 What has been added to the charity lately ? There has been an ad- 
 dition by the residuary estate of Mr. Hand Norwood, amounting to 
 1,741/. in the 3 per Cents. Reduced Annuities, and a dividend of \ ill. 
 odd. 
 
 How is this money bestowed ? Upon five poor people resident in some 
 almshouses mentioned in the will ; the maintenance and education of 
 three poor boys in the Bluecoat school, and a salary to the ma&ter, 51. j 
 and 40i. for every boy each year, fora cloth coat, and 6/. for apprenticing 
 each boy, and 18/. a-year for the maintenance of the boys ; that was 
 provided for under the will, but they cost more than that. 
 
 D.>es the 14"'. odd a year do no more than maintain those five poor 
 people, and three poor boys ? There are some other objects of the 
 charity. For some years past 101. have been paid, for apprenticing 
 those boys, and within a year or two 20/. and besides, there is firing and 
 clothing for the five alms people. 
 
 Is the charity indebted to the trustees ? I believe the account is clear 
 at present, but it is impossible to state it exactly ; the account is pie- 
 paring to be passed by the visitors next Monday. 
 
 Is there a schoolhonse belonging to Hall's charity ? There was a 
 schoolhouse given under the will ; but that is now let to a char'tv called 
 the Dispensary, at Reading; and the boys are removed to the Bluecoat 
 school, in crdcr that theie should be one master, and the boys be to- 
 gether. 
 
 What is done with the schoolhonse ? It is let to the Dispensary for 
 seven guineas a year ; it is a very small tenement. There is clothing for 
 these boys also provided for, under the will. 
 
 Are there any other charities at Reading ? There are some other less 
 considerable charities. 
 
 CASE OF ST. BEES SCHOOL. 
 
 May 20. 
 
 James Sheffield Brooks, Esq. called in ; and Examined. 
 
 ARE you a Solicitor in London ? I am. 
 
 Have you had occasion to make any inquiries with respect to the foun* 
 dation of the school of St. Bees, in the county of Cumberland ? I have 
 for the last few months had occasion to attend to the subject very much 
 at large. I was origina-lly applied to by some gentlemen in that neigh- 
 bourhood, to see whether proceedings ought not to be instituted of a Ifgal 
 nature, to obtain the property which they understood had originally be- 
 longed to the school, but which had been for m<tny years in the possession, 
 whether rightly or wrongly, of the Lonsdale family. 
 
 For how many years ? Since the year 1742. In consequence of their 
 application, I desired to see the late master of this school on liis coming 
 to town, which 1 understood he was about to do, within a month or two 
 after the time I was applied to. 
 
 Was his name Wilson ? Yes. 
 
 Is he tutor in the family of Viscount Galway ? He is, or lately was ; 
 but is at Oxford at present. I took down in writing the substance of the 
 examinations, which I had repeatedly, of this gentleman ; and 1 als
 
 14 ST. BEES SCHOOL. 
 
 saw the provost (Doctor Collinson) of Queen's College, at Oxford, who 
 is one of the official governors of the school ; with regard to Mr. Wilson, 
 I found reason to believe, that he had been turned out of the school a few 
 years since, under circumstances which appeared to me of a harsh kind, 
 and as it seemed in consequence of having pushed certain inquiries relating 
 to the rights of this school to an inconvenient extent. 
 
 What communications did he make ? That the manor of Saint Bees, 
 otherwise Kirkby Beacock, together with some adjoining propery in Sand- 
 with, altogether of a very considerable extent, formed, as he believed, the 
 original endowment of Saint Bees School ; that about the year 1742, an 
 ancestor of the present Lord Lonsdale, had obtained a lease at a small 
 rent; 1 believe at 31. 10s. or 31. 16s. but certainly under 4/. of the whole 
 of the royalties of these manors. I also found reason to believe, that there 
 were very extensive coal mines, which had been wrought either from that 
 period, or certainly for many years past, and that the product of those 
 mines had amounted to some thousands per annum. 
 
 Since that period ? Yes. 
 
 For how long a time did you understand that lease to be granted? 
 For 867 years. 
 
 D;d you understand that the person of the Lowther family, who obtained 
 the lease, was a trustee of St. Bees School? Yes, at the time of the 
 granting the lease, undoubtedly ; but I beg to be understood, that I am 
 stating the result of information and inquiries, which hitherto have been 
 totally exparte. 
 
 Did you understand by royalties, the whole property in those manors 
 of Saint Bees school ? No, I meant the right of getting coal chiefly. 
 ' Did you understand, that the right of the soil had not been departed 
 with, beyond the right of digging for coal? Certainly; I understood 
 that the right of the soil remained in the governors ; but that the right of 
 getting the coal had been leased to the Lonsdale family. 
 
 Had coal ever been worked there before ? That I do not know ; I 
 should think, probably not in St. Bees, before the lease was obtained ; but 
 I am speaking merely conjecturally. 
 
 Have you had any communication upon this subject with the provost 
 of Queen's Oxford ? Yes, I saw the provost about a month since. 
 
 Did his information confirm that which you had previously obtained ? 
 It certainly did; and I saw in the provost's possession, a letter from a 
 Mr. Hodgin, whom I believe is now the legal agent of my Lord Lonsdale ; 
 and in that letter, which is dated several years since (I think in 1807,) 
 he stares expressly to the provost, that at that time, coals were being got 
 in the manor of Saint Bees, otherwise Kirkby Beacock, by Lord Lonsdale. 
 Since the date of that letter, Mr. Hodgin has become my Lord Lonsdale's 
 agent, as 1 understand ; indeed, it must have been subsequent, because I 
 conclude, he would not have written that letter, if he had been Lord Lons- 
 dale's agent at the time. 
 
 What was the purport of that letter, besides the statement respecting 
 the coal ? To call the provost's attention to the subject, as being one of 
 the governors who had a right to interfere. 
 
 Do you recollect any thing further stated in the letter, as a ground for 
 calling the attention of the provost to that subject ? Nothing, but that 
 the provost ought particularly to look into the subject, as being a gover- 
 nor, particularly entitled to attention from his official situation. 
 
 Did he state any thing with respect to the annual value of the pro- 
 perty under lease ? No ; except that in general terms 1 understood him 
 to speak of it as if he thought it very valuable. 
 
 Did the provost interfere in consequence of this application ? The 
 provost (as 1 understood from him) did afterwards see Lord Lonsdale;
 
 ST. BEES SCHOOI* 15 
 
 but he had taken no proceedings upon the subject himself; peither was 
 he, I think, perfectly satisfied with the explanation given by Lord 
 Lonsdale. 
 
 Are you aware of any reason which prevented the provost from inter- 
 fering in the subject ? He is a very old man ; but he expressed himself, 
 on parting with me, desirous to have the subject inquired into, and said, 
 that he was ready to produce the letter of Hodgin's, and other documents, 
 when he should be regularly requested so to do. 
 
 Did he state any thing as to his apprehension of the amount of arrears 
 now due? Nothing. 
 
 Do you know in whose custody the records or other written evidence 
 belonging to the school are ? They are kept in a chest, I understand, at 
 the school house in Saint Bees, to which chests there are three locks and 
 three keys, which keys are in the possession, as I understand, of some of 
 the governors ; Lord Lonsdale has one. 
 
 Who are the present governors ? Doctor Collinson, officially, I sup- 
 pose ; Mr. Armitstead, a clergyman in the neighbourhood ; Lord Lons- 
 dale himself; Doctor Satterthwaite, and one or two others, whose names 
 I do not recollect. 
 
 Is Mr. Flemming, rector of Bootle, one ? I do not recollect. 
 
 Is Mr. Senhouse ? Mr. Senhouse is one. 
 
 Is the rector for the time being of Egremont, one ? Yes, I believe he 
 is one ; but there is one subject of complaint which I think right to men- 
 tion to the Committee, namely, that some of these governors are under 
 the influence of Lord Lonsdale. 
 
 Did you understand any thing to have been done at any time with re- 
 spect to the custody of the documents ? Yes, I understood from Mr. 
 Wilson, indeed I took it down in his examination, which I can produce, 
 that an application was made to him by Mr. Armitstead and a person 
 who is dead, who was then the solicitor of Lord Lonsdale, requiring to 
 have possession of the deeds in the chest, or at least to look at some of 
 those deeds then in the chest, being at that time in the custody of the 
 head master (Mr. Wilson,) they are kept at the school house, as I men- 
 tioned before, and Mr. Wilson refused to permit them either to take any 
 of the deeds out of the chest, or even to inspect them, except in his pre- 
 sence ; the reason he assigned for objecting was, that he thought by the 
 statutes the head master was himself entitled to have the care of the 
 deeds ; and consequently that the chest ought not to be opened, except 
 in his presence; that they persisted in looking, at least, at those deeds; 
 and that he accompanied them in the room ; that they took out a lease, 
 which lease he understood to be a counterpart of the lease in question ; 
 that they kept it for some time, he having previously remonstrated against 
 their taking it; and that it was afterwards brought back, and when he 
 left the situation, was again in the chest, where it ought to be now. 
 
 Had any thing been done to the deed which had been taken away ? 
 It was said, that some erasure had been made in the deed j but when 
 made, Mr. Wilson could not tell. 
 
 Did you hear of any other attempts made to get possession of the re- 
 cords ? I do not recollect any other. 
 
 In what year was this said to have taken place ? It was about a year 
 or two before Mr. Wilson left ; but the particular year I cannot tell, 
 without turning to the papers. 
 
 What was the alleged ground of Mr. Wilson's dismissal ? The alleged 
 ground I understood to be, that he gave too many holydays to the boys. 
 Who was appointed his successor ? I do not know the gentleman's 
 name who is now the master of the school.
 
 16 ST. BEES SCHOOL. 
 
 Has the school any solicitor, or any other agent, in London ? None 
 that I am aware of. 
 
 Who is its attorney in the country ? I do not know that any one looks 
 after it, except my Lord Lonsdale's agent, Mr. Hodgin. 
 
 Were you informed of any other leases having been granted, of a simi- 
 lar kind, belonging to the school ? I heard, that about a century since, 
 several of the lands were granted to the tenants, at very inadequate 
 rents. 
 
 For what terms ? For very long terms indeed ; perhaps two or three 
 hundred years at least. 
 
 Have any of the other trustees leases under the school ? I am not 
 aware that any of the other trustees have leases, and I do not think they 
 have. 
 
 Did you hear of any other very long leases, of a very beneficial nature ? 
 None but these I have mentioned. 
 
 Are you aware, who has the enjoyment of the soil so leased? As 
 to the soil, I believe, it is now in the possession of the tenants under those 
 Jeases, which I have last mentioned. 
 
 Do you understand, any of the trustees to have any lease of the soil ? 
 No ; I think not the present trustees ; whether any of those who got the 
 leases in former times, were upon the trust or not, I do not know j they 
 seem to have had very good interest with the trust, and I have no doubt 
 that those leases are exceedingly beneficial. 
 
 Have you ever heard, what the revenue of the school is, altogether ? 
 Not exactly; unfortunately, not having any access to the documents 
 which would give that information, they having been inaccessible to me 
 hitherto ; it is very difficult to get that information; but, I believe, the 
 present revenue, to be exceedingly trifling ; I believe the master has not 
 above 50/. a year ; they reduced Mr. Wilson's salary before they turned 
 him out, because it was alleged that the funds would not afford to give so 
 much as he formerly enjoyed. 
 
 Do you know any thing about the constitution of the school ? I have 
 copies of some papers. 
 
 What prevented an information from being filed, upon this matter ? 
 Lord Lonsdale's great influence, appeared to me to have had very much 
 the effect of deterring people, in general, from wading into this subject, 
 and they might also think the proceeds in the Court of Chancery, an ex- 
 pensive and somewhat dilatory process ; these are supposed, by those I 
 have conversed with, to be the reasons ; but, I think also, that if it had 
 not been known that this inquiry had been going forward, it is probable, 
 from this being considered so gross a case, that some individuals would 
 have come forward, to have done what they could. 
 
 How long have you been in possession of this information ? 1 have 
 been constantly inquiring into the subject, for the last six months, or 
 more. 
 
 But in point of fact, Dr. Collinson was in possession of this information, 
 as far back as the year 1807? Yes, at least ; he had that letter, to 
 which I have referred.
 
 ST. BEES SCHOOL. 17 
 
 May 22. 
 
 The Reverend William Wilson, called in ; and Examined. 
 
 You area fellow of Queen's College, Oxford? Yes. 
 
 Were you master of St. Bees School ? I was. 
 
 When were you appointed ? I was appointed in JS11. 
 How long did you continue master? Till the year 1817; till the 
 month of June in that year. 
 
 During the time that you were schoolmaster, did you attend any of 
 the meetings of the governors of the school ? I always attended at the 
 annual meetings, in the governor's room, which are held according to 
 the statutes, soon after Easter. 
 
 At these meetings, are the accounts audited ? They were never 
 regularly produced, and I never had a sight of the accounts, except for 
 a few moments, once. 
 
 Who kept the accounts ? Mr. Younger, the attorney, of White- 
 haven, who is now dead. 
 
 Was Mr. Younger one of the governors ? No. 
 
 What office did he hold in the charity that he kept the accounts ? 
 He acted as the deputy receiver, and steward of the court ; the court of 
 the manor of St. Bees. 
 
 Who are the lords of the manor of St. Bees ? I suppose, the go- 
 vernors of the school. 
 
 Who was the principal receiver, while Mr. Younger was deputy ? 
 Mr. Ponsonby, of Hale Hall j and after his death, the Rev. Mr. Ar- 
 mitstead. 
 
 What audit did those accounts, to your knowledge, undergo ? 
 They never appeared to me to pass through any regular audit, that I 
 was aware of. 
 
 Who were the governors that attended the meetings, generally ; name 
 those that generally attended, and took an active part ? Mr. Pon- 
 sonby, while alive ; Mr. Humphrey Sr-nhouse, of Nether Hall ; the 
 Rev. Doctor Satterthwaite, then rector of Rootle, but now of Lowther, 
 I believe; ami the Rev. Mr. Scott, of Egremont, since he became 
 rector of Egreraont. 
 
 Are these all the governors ? There are seven ; I have mentioned 
 five ; the provost of Queen's College, is another, but he never attended ; 
 and the Rev. Mr. Fleming, now rector of Bootlej and the Rev. Mr. 
 Mr, Arm tstead, of Whitehaven, were appointed during my residence at 
 St. Bees, after which they generally attended. 
 
 Are these all the governors you ever saw attend ? The Earl of Lons- 
 dale is a governor, and attended at one special meeting only, 
 
 Who succeeded Mr. Ponsonby ? Mr. Armitstead. 
 
 What business was usually transacted at the meetings of the go- 
 vernors ? Any business relating to the school ; business relating to 
 the revenues of the school, or the management of it. 
 
 Did you ever see any business transacted respecting the granting of 
 leases ? No. 
 
 When were such leases considered and granted ? I do not recollect 
 that any were granted in my time. 
 
 According to the course of business adopted by the governors, do you 
 know bow it is usual for them to transact business wjth respect to graut- 
 ing leases ? I should suppose, in the governors' room. 
 
 C
 
 18 ST. BEES SCHOOL. 
 
 Is a special meeting called when a lease is to be granted ? I am not 
 aware of that ; it does not fall within my knowledge. 
 
 Do you know who executes the leases, on the part of the lessors ? 
 I am not aware that any leases have been granted lately. 
 
 When they are granted, do you know what the course of the go- 
 vernors is ; which of them Ixecutes leases ?^ It is required by the sta- 
 tutes, that the common seal of the school be affixed to the leases in the 
 presence of the schoolmaster. 
 
 Is any regulation laid down, respecting the signing of leases, on the 
 part of the lessors ? Not that I am aware of. 
 
 Do you know auy thing respecting the boundaries of the manor of 
 St. Bees ? Not certainly ; only by reputation. 
 
 Do you know any thing hy reputation ? Yes j I know some part, but 
 not the whole of the boundaries. 
 
 What are the reputed boundaries, as far as you know ? On the side 
 next to Whitehaven, near to the collieries ; I have always understood 
 that Sandwath-Iane is the boundary of the manor on that side ; I do 
 riot know any thing of the other boundaries ; but I should suppose, 
 that there is no difficulty whatever in ascertaining them from the 
 tenants under the school, who know exactly what lands they pay rent 
 for. 
 
 How many tenants are there under the school ? I am not aware of the 
 number at all. 
 
 Do you know about how many acres the school has on lease i I am 
 not aware of that ; the original grant by King James, specifies se- 
 venty tenements as given to the school of the manor of Sandwath and 
 St Bees. 
 
 Were those part of the estate of Sir Thomas Chaloner ? Yes. 
 
 What has become of those tenements ? I believe they were leased 
 for a thousand years, in the year 1608 ; I think I am correct. 
 
 Are those leases still subsisting ? I have seen one, which was in the 
 possession of Mr. Barnes, when he was master at St. Bees ; and it was 
 given to me by his widow when I took possession of the school. It was 
 a lease of an estate called Seacote. 
 
 What was the rent reserved ? About fifteen shillings, or fifteen and 
 eight-pence. 
 
 What was about the extent of the land leased ? I think about 30 
 acres, but I do not recollect that the number of acres was specified in 
 the lease. 
 
 Who was the tenant ? The present tenant is Mr. James Hale ; a 
 person named Hardness was the original tenant, to whom the lease was 
 granted. 
 
 Were those 30 acres in the neighbourhood of Whitehaven ? They 
 are in the. neighbourhood of St. Bees. 
 
 How far from Whitehaven ? Between four and five miles. 
 What may be the yearly value of that estate now, as far as you can 
 guess? I cannot form any judgment. 
 
 It is worth more than 15s. per acre ? Yes, of course; it is con- 
 idered as a very good estate. 
 
 Do you know of any other of these leases of the year 1608 ? I have 
 not seeu any other. 
 
 Do you know of any other having been granted of a larger extent of 
 laud, uiul to whom ? It is understood, that all these seventy tene- 
 ments were granted under leases of the same description. 
 
 Do any of these tenements go near Whitehaven ? Those la Sandwath 
 are not far from Whitehaven. 
 How far from it ? Two miles.
 
 ST. BEES SCHOOL. 19 
 
 Then is two miles the nearest point to Whitehaven, that any of the 
 property of the school goes ? Yes ; 1 think so. 
 
 Do you know of any leases having been granted in the year 1742, by 
 the St. Bets governors ? Yes, one. 
 
 For what i.crin ? For 8fi7 years. 
 
 At what r-n' ? Tnrre pounds ten a veaf. 
 
 To what pen-on ? To Sir James Lowtber. 
 
 Do you know who *etv !hn the governors ? No, I do not know all ; 
 except that Dr. A<roy was then provost of Queen's College, and I know 
 that Sir Jatnps Lowther himself was another governor at that time ; 
 and to ascertain that point, I have myself consulted the registry, 
 an account of which I gave to the provost in one of the letters in my 
 possession. 
 
 Of what was thi lease? Of the coals belonging to the school. There 
 are two manors belonging to St. Bees school, as 1 believe, called the 
 manor- uf St. Bee< and Sandwath. 
 
 Of which manor was this a lease ? I believe of both. 
 
 Are the coals worked under this lease now ? There is no pit sunk 
 within the manor; but it is generally understood, that two, or at least 
 one, of the pits are wrought into the manor of Sandwath. 
 
 Wa any lease granted, at the same time, of the surface? Not that 
 1 k>'w of. 
 
 Who, in point of fact, occupies the surface? The tenants. The 
 governors -iave stone quarries within the manor, which they let to dif- 
 ferent person* ; th>.y have also an alabaster quarry, which is also let. 
 
 To different tenants from the tenants of the collieries ? Yes. 
 
 Then, u po^nt ot fact, the lessee of the coals does not occupy the 
 surface ? No. The surface I suppose to have been leased in the year 
 1608, fur a thou.-and years, and the lease of the coal was made for 
 a term of 867 yeais, that it might end as it should seem at the same 
 time. 
 
 1603 - AD. - 1742 
 1000 - A.D. - 867 
 
 2608 2609 
 
 The difference of one year may arise from the idea, that the first 
 leases wore only for 999 years, as some have supposed. 
 
 You say there are no pits sunk within the manor ? I believe not. 
 
 Were there ever any pits sunk within the manor? There is a letter 
 in the bursary of Queen's College, addressed to the provost, on the sub- 
 ject of renting the collieries belonging to the school. 
 
 From whom is that letter ? From a person who had rented the col- 
 lieries before. 
 
 What is the date of it ? I do not recollect the date. 
 
 Is it before 1742? Yes. 
 
 What offer does he make? I do not recollect that any sum is spe- 
 cified ; he only requests that he might be allowed to rent them again as 
 be had before. 
 
 Is there any answer, or any draft of any answer kept ? Not that I 
 have seen. 
 
 Then rt does not appear whether he was or was not allowed to treat ? 
 No. 
 
 Do yon recollect the names of any other trustee besides those of Sir 
 James Lowthfr's lease in 1742 ? f am mot certain. 
 
 Was not Mr. James Spedding the agent of Sir James Lowther in that 
 transaction; and i* he not so designated in the papers relating to the 
 lease ? I do not know. 
 
 C 2
 
 20 ST. BEES SCHOOL. 
 
 Do you know, in point of fact, that he was Sir James Lowther's 
 agent ? Yes, I believe he was. It wa? said that he was. 
 
 Do you recollect the name of any other governor who was a lessee of 
 any other part of the school property? No, I cannot say that I do. 
 
 Are there remains of an old pit having been sunk within the manor ? 
 I have never seen any. 
 
 Was the lease only of the coals, or of the coals and royalties ? I am 
 not aware whether the royalties were included. 
 
 Were the pits which you describe in the neighbourhood of the manor, 
 near the boundaries of the manor ? Yes. 
 
 How far from the boundaries of the manor ? I should suppose, within 
 a quarter of a mile, or less. 
 
 To whom did they then belong at the time of the granting the lease ? 
 I am not aware of that.* 
 
 Are you aware that they ever belonged to any other persons than the 
 present lessee and his family ? No, t cannot say. 
 
 When you were schoolmaster, had you the custody of the muniments 
 of the school ? No. 
 
 Who had ? They were in a chest locked with three locks, of which 
 the keys were in the possession of three governors, and one of those 
 keys was in the hands of the receiver for the time being. 
 
 In whose custody was the box or chest? In the governor's room, 
 which room is now used as a bed room. 
 
 What control has the schoolmaster over the locks, by the statutes ? 
 By the statutes, he is required to have one key of the door of the room 
 in which the box is kept, and the other key of the door is to be in the 
 hands of one of the governors; but I believe the receiver is excepted 
 by the statutes from having the possession of the other key of the 
 door. 
 
 Are there two locks to the door, or only one lock with two keys ? 
 When I went to the school there was no lock ; by the statutes there are 
 to be two ; by the statutes, the schoolmaster is required to have a key of 
 the seal, which ought to be kept in a casket, and that casket to be 
 locked in the chest. 
 
 Are there any other locks to be to the casket but one ? Only one 
 lock is required, and that has never been fit for use in my residence at 
 St. Bees. 
 
 Are there any other keys of the casket allowed by the statutes, ex- 
 cept that kept by the master ? No. 
 
 Is it by the force of the statutes that the master's intervention is re- 
 quired for use of the sea! ? The statutes require, that the seal shall 
 not be used excepting in his presence. 
 
 Was any application made to you by any persons while you were there, 
 for the inspection of the papers ? Yes. 
 
 Relate the circumstances of that application ? Mr. Armitstead, one 
 of the governors, and Mr. Younger, tb deputy receiver, who was at 
 that time agent to Lord Lonsdale, made the application. 
 
 Give us a date ? Easter, 1814, 
 
 Was any body else with them ? No; they came to the school and 
 asked to go into the governor's room ; I said, " that I should show them 
 the way." They said, " they knew where the room was, and they 
 " could find the way themselves." But I went with them into the 
 room : they had the possession of the three keys ; Mr. Armitstead had 
 
 * It would appear from Strype's Life of Archbishop Grindall, that the 
 Collieries belonged to Sir Thomas Chalouer.
 
 ST. BEES SCHOOL. 21 
 
 one, and Mr. Younger had two of the keys. They proceeded to open 
 the chest, and Mr. Armitstead began to search the papers in the chest. 
 After some time, Mr. Armitstead said, " I believe Mr. Younger, this is 
 the paper we want." 
 
 Did you see what paper it was ? I shall proceed to state how I came 
 to see it, Mr. Younger looked at it, and said, " that is it : put it into your 
 pocket." I then remonstrated with Mr. Younger, observing that it was 
 contrary to the statutes, to take any paper out of that room ; and he 
 said, " that Mr. Armitstead was a governor, and had a right to do what 
 he pleased ; and it was no business of mine." I said that I felt in- 
 terested for the welfare of the school ; that I could not allow papers to 
 to be taken out, without remonstrating. He still appeared very un- 
 willing to give me the paper, and was proceeding to fold it up, and was 
 ottering it to Mr. Armitstead, desiring him to put into his pocket, and 
 I snatched the paper out of his hand. 1 said, " you will excuse the 
 liberty that I am taking ; but if you are determined to take it, I ana 
 determined to see what it is." It appeared to be the lease granted 
 to Sir James Lowther, which I before mentioned. 
 
 Had you then an opportunity of seeing the date, and the term of 
 years ? Yes ; 1 took a memorandum of the endorsement upon it. 
 
 Have you that memorandum now ? No, I have not at present; they 
 then took it away, but returned with it in about an hour's time, and said, 
 "that on second thoughts they considered it better to return it to the 
 chest ; that they had taken what memorandums they wished from it, and 
 that if I chose to do the same thing, they would give me the opportunity." 
 It was then that I took the endorsement on the back of it. 
 
 Where had they gone during the time they carried it away ? They 
 went to visit the part of the common that bad been allotted to the school. 
 
 Were they walking, or on horseback ? On horseback ; but I suppose 
 they went to the inn before they visited the common ; but I did not see 
 them from the time they left the house, 'till the time they returned. 
 
 Was the chest then locked ? When they returned the lease, they 
 opened the box again, and put the lease in again, and the box remained 
 in the room as before. It w $ some time after that, that a special 
 meeting of the governors was called, and I was requested to leave the 
 room, which I declined to do, stating, that I conceived it was my duty to 
 remain in the room. Lord Lonsdale, who was a governor, attended the 
 meeting. 
 
 State who were present ? The Earl of Lonsdale, the Rev. Mr. Scott, 
 the Rev. Mr. Armitstead, the Rev. Mr. Fleming, Mr. Senhouse of Nether 
 Hall, and Dr. Satterthwaite, and Mr. Younger, with a Mr. Hobson, at 
 that time a clerk of Mr. Younger's; the latter was desired to leave the 
 room, during the discussion about my remaining, but whether he was 
 admitted after I left, I do not know; I believe that was all. I was desired 
 to leave the room, which I declined, stating, that I conceived it my duty 
 to remain there. His Lordship said, " Do the statutes require you to 
 be present." I said, " It was implied in the statutes that I ought to be 
 present." He said, " We do not want your interpretation of the statutes, 
 Sir." I replied, that that was the interpretation my conscience dictated 
 me to put on the statutes, and that I must be guided by it. He then 
 turned to the rest of the governors and asked, what should be done in 
 this case. They said, " Mr. Wilson ought certainly to leave the room, 
 as he has been requested to do." 1 said, that, " if I was compelled to 
 leave it, I should, but not otherwise." 
 
 In whose gift is Mr. Armitstead's living ? In the gift of Lord Lonsdale. 
 
 In whose gift is Dr. Satterthwaite's ? Lord Lonsdale's.
 
 22 ST. BEES SCHOOL. 
 
 In whose is Mr. Fleming's ? Lord Lonsdale's j the living Mr. Fleming; 
 has now. 
 
 Do you mean testate, that Mr. Fleming's living, at that time, was in 
 Lord Lonsdale's gift ? 1 mean to say, that the living he now holds is. 
 
 What answer did you make, when the governor said, you must leave 
 the room ? That I should not leave it, unless I was compelled to leave it. 
 The observation was, that I had been desired to leave it, and they con- 
 ceived that I ought to do so, at their request. I then observed, that I 
 certainly should not leave the room, except upon this condition. His 
 Lordship replied, " No condition, Sir." I said, ' I cannot consent to 
 leave the room without the custody of the seal," observing, that the 
 statutes required that the seal should be under lock and key, and in a 
 casket, and that casket locked up in a chest ; that I never had any key 
 of the casket given to me ; and I requested that I might either have it 
 put under a lock and key, or else that the seal should be consigned to my 
 care, whilst I was out of the room. The reply was, that there is no lock 
 to the casket, and that I had no right to take the seal out of the room 
 any more than any body else had to take any thing else out. The 
 question was then put to me, whether I meant to leave the room or not, 
 I said, that as I considered myself compelled to do so, and as the custody 
 of the seal was refused to me, I should then withdraw. 
 
 Did you accordingly withdraw ? Yes. 
 
 How long did you continue absent ? Nearly two hours, as well as I 
 recollect, but I am not certain as to the time. 
 
 Do you know what was transacted in your absence ? No, I do not, 
 except that a minute was read to me, on being called in again, stating, 
 that in consequence of the expenses they had been at in inclosing the 
 common, it was necessary to take '201. from my salary, which was then 
 reduced from 70/. to 50/. a year. 
 
 Have you any means of estimating the value of the coals leased at 
 31. \0s. the yearly rent? 1 have no means of estimating the value. I 
 did once make inquiry what coals were taken out of that pit next to the 
 manor of Sandwatb, but I do not recollect the quantity. 
 
 Do you recollect, generally, what might be the quantity ? I cannot 
 say at all, at present. 
 
 Do you know the name of the pit ? Wilson Pit. 
 
 Is it a very large colliery ? Yes, I believe it is. 
 
 Is it a great concern ? 1 was present, with a friend, when he made the 
 inquiry. 
 
 Do you recollect the result of the inquiry, at all ? No, I do not, to a 
 certainty. 
 
 Do you recollect if your friend formed an estimate? Yes, he did form 
 an estimate at the time. 
 
 And what did he estimate it at? At several thousands a yearj but I 
 am not certain as to the sum. 
 
 How soon after the occurrence that you describe, were you dismissed 
 from your situation of schoolmaster ? I was not dismissed, I resigned it. 
 
 State the circumstances, that led to your resignation ? The immediate 
 circumstance was, the offer of a situation in my Lord Galway's family; 
 but among the reasons of my resigning, one was, that I could not get 
 licensed to the school. 
 
 State to the Committee, all the particulars respecting the application 
 for the licence, and its refusal ? I applied to the bishop of Chester, the 
 diocesan, for a licence, which he promised to grant me, as soon as I 
 procured testimonials. I applied to Mr. Armitstead, for his signature, 
 which at first he promised to give me, but afterwards returned me the 
 testimonials without his signature, stating, that he conceived, as go*
 
 ST. BEES SCHOOL. 23 
 
 rernor, he ought not to do any thing towards fixing me in a situation 
 from which it might be the wish of the governors to remove me. 
 
 Was tnis refusal of Mr. Armitstead before or after the meeting of the 
 governors you have described ? I believe it was after. 
 
 Try to recollect ? I am not certain, it might be before. 
 
 Was it before or after the occurrence which you have related respect- 
 ing the visit of Mr. Aruiitstead and Mr. Younger to the chest ? It was 
 certainly subsequent to that, and, I believe, also to the special meeting 
 of the governors mentioned above. 
 
 Had you ever had, before the refusal of Mr. Armitstead, any difference 
 with the governors upon any subject ? No j I do not recollect that any 
 thing of the kind had taken place between us. 
 
 Go on to relate the circumstances respecting the refusal of the licence ? 
 I then procured the signatures of four other clergymen, and I For- 
 warded the testimonials to the bishop of Chester, expecting to have my 
 licence granted to me. 
 
 Was it to bishop Law that you forwarded them ? I forwarded them 
 to Dr. Law, bishop of Chester; his Lordship returned for answer, that 
 he understood that my conduct was not satisfactory to the governors, 
 and that until he was satisfied of that he could not grant me a licence. 
 
 What was the date of the bishop's answer ? I have not got bis letter 
 in my possession at present. 
 
 Do you recollect about what time it was returned ? I cannot say; my 
 papers have not been in my possession since I left Lord Galway's family. 
 
 Was the bishop's answer before or after the meeting of the trustees 
 that you have described ? I think it was after. 
 
 What time, as near as you can recollect, was the visit of Mr. Armit- 
 stead and Mr. Younger to the chest ? Itwas in Easter week, in 1814. 
 
 What time was the meeting of the governors, as nearly as you can 
 recollect? It was some time between July and October, 1814. 
 
 As nearly as you can recollect, what time did you receive bishop Law's 
 answer to your application ? I cannot say more, than that I believe it 
 was after that time. 
 
 How did they allow you to remain so long without the bishop's licence? 
 The bishop said, that if he found my conduct was satisfactory to the 
 governors, he would license me at some future time. 
 
 He said that in the letter he wrote to you ? Yes. 
 
 Have you the bishop's answer to your first letter ? Yes. 
 
 Where are your papers? They are on the road from Lord Galway's. 
 
 Previous to this discussion with the two governors, and also the meeting 
 afterwards, had you ever made any inquiries with respect to the manage- 
 ment of the school, generally of the school, into the administration of 
 the school affairs ? I had made inquiries with respect to the thousand 
 years leases of the school property, and the lease of the coals. I was 
 anxious to know the state of the question with respect to these things; 
 because a good deal was said about them in the country, especially about 
 the lease of the coals. 
 
 About what time had you made these inquiries? As soon as 1 went 
 to the school. 
 
 Then you had made these inquiries before the meeting of the gover- 
 nors : Yes. 
 
 And before the refusal of Mr. Armitstead to grant your testimonials ? 
 -Yes. 
 
 And before the refusal of the bishop to grant you the licence ? Yes. 
 
 At what time did you goto the school ? In February, 1811. 
 
 Hag any thing passed since the letter of the bishop, that you have last 
 spoken of, upon the subject of your licence ? The letler I spoke of, was
 
 24 ST. BEES SCHOOL. 
 
 that in which he declined granting my licence, because the governor* 
 were dissatisfied with my conduct. 
 
 Have you had any communication with him on the subject since 
 that? About that time the bishop wrote to the governors, and a 
 meeting took place in consequence ; in which they stated that they 
 had met for the purpose of inquiring into my conduct, in consequence 
 of an application from the bishop. The meeting was opened by Mr. 
 Armitstead. 
 
 Who attended the meeting ? Mr. Armitstead, Mr. Fleming, and Mr. 
 Senhouse; I believe those were all. Mr. Yonnger was present, the 
 deputy receiver j Mr. Armitstead opened* the meeting, by stating, that 
 I had absented myself from the school during the year, to the amount 
 of at least 80 days j I conceived that he meant single days, and I ex- 
 pressed my surprise at the statement; and [ begged that he would allow 
 me to take an account of what minutes he had made, for they ob- 
 served that they had been very watchful as to the number of holidays 
 kept ; but my request was not granted ; and upon further urging an 
 explanation of the statement, it appeared that more than 80 days had 
 always been granted by the schoolmaster in holidays, in the recollection 
 of every person acquainted with the school j and that they had no par- 
 ticular statement of extra holidays to bring forward in support of the 
 charge, except that I had absented myself, as they said, for five days, 
 upon a visit to Allanby, which I said was not correct ; and I observed, 
 that I had only left the school after school hours on the Saturday, and 
 returned on Tuesday morning; and that that was after nt having given 
 a single holiday to the boys for ten weeks. They then charged me with 
 being absent on another occasion, on a visit to Penrith, which I explained, 
 by stating that I had reserved a holiday for some time for that purpose. 
 They then allowed that there was nothing particularly blameable as to 
 my being absent en those occasions ; but that, report had said a great deal 
 of my having absented myself from the school ; and it was agreed, that 
 I should not leave St. Bees for more than a day, without asking their 
 leave ; and here I supposed the business had been closed, but a minute 
 was drawn up without any further observation, stating that they had 
 found it necessary to reprimand me for neglect of duty. That minute 
 was sent to the bishop, and upon this was grounded the bishop's refusal. 
 
 Did this take place before or after the visit of Mr. Armitstead, to Mr. 
 Younger, to get the lease out of the chest ? It was after. 
 
 About what time did this meeting take place ? It was in 1815. 
 
 It was after Bishop Law's first refusal to licence ? It was called in 
 consequence of the bishop's application at the time of the refusal. 
 
 State again the order of your applications for a licence? When I 
 first applied, the bishop promised that he would grant me a licence upon 
 sending the testimonials ; but when the testimonials were sent, together 
 with a certificate of my nomination, he declined, stating, that the gover- 
 nors were not satisfied with my conduct ; that he understood they were 
 not ; and he made application to know, whether that was the case ; and 
 upon that application, the meeting already mentioned was called ; and 
 some time after that, a friend of mine interceded with the bLhop, and 
 the bishop consented to grant me the licence, and as the certificate of 
 my nomination had never been returned, I concluded it would be accepted. 
 The bishop, however, then stated, that the nomination must be given in 
 upon a stamp ; and the provost of Queen's College, in whom the nomina- 
 tion rests, conceived that he could not nominate me afresh, as the time 
 allowed for that nomination had elapsed. On one occasion, the bishop 
 had consented to accept of a certificate from the provost, that 1 was 
 nominated regularly at the time required by the statutes ; but afterwards
 
 ST. BEES SCHOOL. 25 
 
 lie expressed himself dissatisfied with such certificate ; and on account 
 of that difficulty I was not able to procure a licence. 
 
 How long did you continue to officiate as schoolmaster from the last 
 refusal of the bishop ? I do not exactly recollect the dates of my ap- 
 plications. 
 
 Yon can ascertain these dates? I could ascertain them, if I were ia 
 possession of my papers. 
 
 Was it one year or two years ? Between one and two j about a year 
 and a half. 
 
 And then you resigned of your own accord ? Yes. 
 
 Was the provost of Queen's College ever present, at any meeting of 
 the governors, in your time ? No. 
 
 How old is the provost of Queen's College ? About 80. 
 
 You read the lease of the coal mines granted to Sir James Lowther ia 
 1744? Yes. 
 
 Can you state the paiticular names of the manors mentioned in that 
 lease ? ^1 do not know whether it included the whole under the name of 
 the manor of St. Hers, or with the manor of Sandwath ; 1 do not know 
 how it wa- expressed. 
 
 You are sun it was not described by any other name? Yes. 
 
 Have you ever known any courts held for the manor of St. Bees and 
 Saniiiv. !. ? No. 
 
 Have you never known any courts held for the manor of St. Bees by 
 the agenU of Lord Lonsdale, and as acting for him ? i have known no 
 COUPS held but t ho-e in the names of the governors of the school-house. 
 
 And were these courts held as lords of the manor of St. Bees ? 1 con- 
 ceive so. 
 
 D.d yon ever see the style and title of the manor ; becanse the whole 
 of the town of Wbitehaven is in the manor of St. Bees, and a great deal 
 farther ? i never saw any written document of the style and title of the 
 manor. 
 
 But you say you saw that lease, and you are sure that the manor of 
 Saudwath and St. Bees so described by the specilic title of the manor of 
 SU Bees ? I cannot say exactly the words made use of in the lease, but 
 I am ceitain it was a lease of the coals, granted by the governors of the 
 time, to Sir James Lowther. 
 
 But the coals of what ? Of the manor belonging to the school. 
 
 But you said it was the manor of St. Bees; that is impossible ; the 
 Committee wish you to recollect yourself ; you have seen the lease, and. 
 read it ? I only read it once. 
 
 You know that there is a manor of St. Bees, and that it extends over the 
 whole country round ? I do not know the real extent of it 
 
 The town of Whitehaven is in the manor ? I am not aware of that. 
 
 Did you ever hear of any perambulation of the manor belonging to, 
 or supposed to belong to, the school of St. Bees ? I never heard of any 
 perambulation ; a survey was made at the time the common of St. Bees 
 was divided; and the school at that time received, as I understood, as 
 lords of the manor, a certain number of acres. 
 
 As lords of the manor of St. Bees ? Yes, as I understood. 
 
 Hate you had any information, that you could at all rely upon, that 
 any coals have ever been worked from any manor or any lands belonging' 
 to this school ot St. Bees, or to the trustees of the school ? It is commonly 
 reported, that the works of the coal mines proceed as far under ground as 
 to one estate called Byersteads, which formerly belonged to Mr. Younger, 
 and is a part of what are generally called school lands. 
 
 And the works extend under that ? Yes ; it is so reported. 
 
 It was called school lands ? Yes. 
 D
 
 26 ST. BEES SCHOOL. 
 
 How far is that from Sandwath-lane ? I should find it difficult to state 
 the exact distance. 
 
 Perhaps you can state it generally; is it a quarter of a mile? I 
 should think it a quarter of a mile at least. 
 
 As you are stating rumours and reports, did you never hear it stated, 
 by the general understanding of the country, that it was almost impos- 
 sible to ascertain the boundary of any manor belonging to the school of 
 St. Bees ? I have understood that Mr. Younger stated, in a letter to the 
 provost, that the boundaries of the manor were so well known, that not a 
 foot of land could be lost ; there is one letter from the provost to me, 
 which contains an expression of that kind. 
 
 How near are the stone and alabaster quarries to Sandwath-lane ? 
 They are a considerable distance from Sandwath-lane. 
 
 How near are they to the abbey of St. Bees, the school, or whatever 
 you call it ? I never was at the quarry itself, but I should think, about 
 three miles. 
 
 In what direction ? They are on the heads next the sea ; St. Bees 
 Heads. 
 
 And how many miles from Whitehaven ? I should think, about two 
 miles. 
 
 Has any improvement been made to the school-house and school-room 
 since 1811? No, not much since 1811; but very considerable im- 
 provements were made before that time. 
 
 You mentioned 70 tenements which extended near Sandwath-lane; do 
 you know whether there is any coal, in- point of fact, worked under any of 
 those tenements which are let upon land leases ? It is said that the coal 
 works go as far as Byersteads. In a letter from Mr. P. Hodson to the 
 provost of Queeu's, mention is made of an intention, on the part of Lord 
 Lonsdale, to sink a pit within the school lands, and that the tenants were 
 disposed to dispute the right. The letter is among the papers sent by the 
 provost to the Committee. 
 
 Is Byersteads within those tenements ; is it one of those seventy tene- 
 ments ? I think it is. 
 
 State what improvements have been made, with respect to buildings, at 
 St. Bees school ? Very considerable improvements, and considerable al- 
 terations. 
 
 To what amount of expense do you suppose ? It is said, between 
 100L and 800/. 
 
 Do you know who paid that ? I have understood that Lord Lonsdale 
 did. 
 
 Have there not been other improvements made since you left the school? 
 I do not know of any. 
 
 Do you know whether Lord Lonsdale is in possession of any of those 
 seventy tenements ? I do not know that he isj I never understood that 
 he is. 
 
 Did you never hear of the manor of Kirkby Beacock ? The village 
 is called St. Bees, or Kirkby Beacock. 
 
 Did you never hear of the manor of Kirkby Beacock ? Never, as a 
 distinct manor from that of St. Bees. 
 
 Are you aware, that in the old leases of the seventy tenements, the 
 coals are reserved ? All minerals and coals are mentioned as referred. 
 
 You have seen one of the leases ? Yes, of Sea Cote.
 
 ST. BEES SCHOOL. 27 
 
 May 23. 
 
 The Reverend William Wilson, again called in ; and Ex- 
 mined. 
 
 HAD you a copy of the statutes delivered to you soon after you were 
 appointed master of St. Bees school ? Not immediately ; I borrowed 
 one of Mr. Armitstead. 
 
 You have had a copy in your possession ? Yes. 
 
 You know the particular rules respecting the master ? Yes. 
 
 Are not they very exact with respect to residence ? Yes, the number 
 of days is specified. 
 
 Did you strictly observe those rules ? They never had been observed 
 for a length of tme ; the statutes only allow twelve days at Midsummer, 
 and twelve at Christmas, and twelve at Easter ; it had always been usual 
 for the school to have five weeks at Midsummer, and five at Christmas, 
 and one at Easter; those were the holidays which bad been regularly 
 given. 
 
 You did not observe those rules with respect to residence ? No, I did 
 not know that it was required of me ; and in dismissing the scholars 
 at the vacations, I merely observed, " You will -return at the usual time." 
 
 Did not the statutes require it ? Yes, but it never bad been attended 
 loin the recollection of any person; nor did the governors ever think 
 proper to notice the length of the holidays, till they found it necessary to 
 make out a charge against me. The statutes also require, that the 
 schoolmaster should be admonished, not reprimanded, in the first in- 
 stance ; and in this view only it ought to have been represented to the 
 bishop. 
 
 Had not the school, previous to your succeeding to it, been very 
 much neglected ? It was said so, I was not acquainted with the school 
 myself. 
 
 Who was your predecessor ? Mr. Barnes. 
 
 You found it had been very much neglected ? It was in a low state. 
 
 What was the number of boys when you entered ? I think about 50 j 
 but some of these had entered after my appointment. 
 
 How many were there when you left it ? I believe about the same 
 number; I am not certain. 
 
 During the time you held the school, there were more, were they not ? 
 Yes, there were eighty ; but a report was raised, I do not know by 
 whom, that the school was very much diminished, at the very time that 
 the number was the greatest. 
 
 Was that diminution from 80 to 50 owing to any inattention to your 
 duty ? No, 1 believe not; but I consider it as owing, in some measure, 
 to the terms on which I stood with the governors, and chiefly to the es- 
 tablishment of a clerical institution at St. Bees, by Lord Lonsdale, under 
 the sanction of the bishop. 
 
 Did not the governors, upon the death of Mr. Barnes, exert themselves 
 to restore the credit of the school ? I do not know that any particular 
 means were used ; that rested with myself, I conceive. 
 
 From the time of your succeeding to the school, had the governors 
 regular annual meetings ? Yes. 
 
 Do you know whether such regular meetings were previously held ? 
 I believe they were. I have understood that some alteration was made 
 with respect to the annual meetings, which implies that they were re- 
 fular before. 
 
 D2
 
 2$ ST. BEES SCHOOI* 
 
 Were you ever admonished by the governors for any neglect, or any 
 supposed neglect of duty ? Yes, I related an instance in yesterday's ex- 
 amination, of a meeting being called, as it appeared, for that purpose ; 
 the charge brought against me was, that I had absented myself from the 
 school. 
 
 Was there any other instance ? No ; it was allowed that I had suf- 
 ficiently attended to the progress of the boys in the school ; that they had 
 no fault to find with that. 
 
 When you first went to the school, did you ascertain what holidays 
 Jiad been allowed by your predecessor ? Yes. 
 
 Did you allow the same, and no more ? Yes ; and I expressly ob- 
 served, when I came, that the holidays were io be the same as usual. 
 
 Did you apply to Mr. Scott, of Egremont, for testimonial* ? I did not, 
 because he had not been resident a sufficient time to aliow of his signa- 
 ture to be gi ven. 
 
 Did yon apply to Mr. Armitstead : I did ; he declined it on the ground* 
 I stated yesterday. 
 
 Did you apply to any other ? To Mr. Harrison. 
 
 Upon what ground did he decline ? He stated, that he and I did not 
 exactly agree in doctrine ; that though he could willingly sign my tes- 
 timonials as to conduct, he did not know that we agreed as to doctrine ; 
 that he had rather not sign ; but, if absolutely necessary, he would nut 
 refuse. Those were the only two that I applied to besides the four who 
 did sign. 
 
 Do you consider Mr. Scott as at all connected with Lord Lonsdale ? 
 I do not know that there is any necessary connection. 
 
 Did you see the lease granted in 1742 to Sir James Lowthe ? Yes. 
 
 When, and on what occasion ? On the occa-ion stated in yesterday's 
 examination. 
 
 Can you recollect the name of the manor, as described in that lease ?- 
 I cannot, nor whether any manor was stated. 
 
 Did you ever hear that it was called the manor of Kirk by Beacock ? 
 No, I never heard of such a manor as the manor of Kirkby Beacock. i 
 have seen a paper written by Mr. Younger, which lie calls an abstract of 
 the Arrant of the manor of St. Bees, Sandwath, Sh*;ep;iate, &c. 
 
 Where did you see that paper ? It was given to me by the widow of 
 the late master. 
 
 Where is that copy now ? I believe at St. Bees, at the school-house j 
 I left it there. 
 
 Did you ever introduce Mr. Bates to Lord Lonsdale, and on what oc- 
 casion ? At Mr. Bates' request, to solicit his patronage for the bible 
 society. 
 
 Had you an interview with Lord Lonsdale, in the presence of Mr. Bates I 
 Yes. 
 
 Have you ever expressed yourself satisfied or dissatisfied with that in- 
 terview ? I cannot at present recal to my mind what I may have said 
 about it ; all that passed between me and Lord Lonsdale on that occa- 
 sion was, when he taxed the friends of the bible society with being jaco- 
 bins:, I begged leave to state, that I supported the society as a sincere 
 friend to church and state. 
 
 Did not you, soon after leaving his presence, state, that yon were satis- 
 fied with what had passed on that occasion ? I do not recollect any thing 
 of the kind. 
 
 Did you ever express any dissatisfaction at the result of the interview > 
 If 1 am called to state what 1 have said, 1 cannot recollect the words I 
 may have made use of. 
 
 Do you recollect that you have expressed any dissatisfaction ? Yes, J
 
 ST. BEES SCHOOL. 29 
 
 may have said, though I certainly have not spoken in public, that hu 
 Lordship did not behave with his usual politeness, and that he did not 
 speak of the Dean of Carlisle and the Bishop of Durham in very respect- 
 ful terms. I have never spoken upon these subjects in public, nor do I 
 wish to go further into the particulars than is necessary. 
 
 Have you had any correspondence or conversation with the bishop of 
 Chester, on these subjects ? I think not particularly about the bible 
 society. 
 
 Do any of his Lordship's letters refer to that subject ? I believe not 
 to the bible society. 
 
 Has the bishop ever expressed any dissatisfaction with your conduct, 
 as a clergyman ? Yes. 
 
 Might not that be partly the cause of the bishop's refusing his licence ? 
 His refusing me the licence, was certainly owing to representations that 
 were made to him, and I do not take upon me to state by whom, but I 
 certainly consider the interference of the governors, as the hindrance to 
 my obtaining a licence. As th< re was some confusion, as 10 the order of 
 my correspondence with the ii.shop, on the subject of my licence, I should 
 wish to explain, that I did not come yesterday with the expectation that 
 I should have to bring forward those circumstances, and had not at alt 
 prepaied myself to speak upon the subjects that were put to me ; it was 
 the latter part of the year 1813, or early in 1814,* that I first applied te 
 the bishop for a licence, which the bishop unconditionally promised te 
 give me, as soon as the proper papers were sent; some discussion, in the 
 mean time, took place, with respect to my nomination to the school, 
 which had been made out; and the bishop required it to be made out 
 efresh, which the provost of Queen's conceived he was not authorized to 
 do, as he had already given the nomination, and the grant of the licence 
 was in consequence delayed, till a disclosure was made of my desire of 
 investigating the rights of the school. 
 
 How did this disclosure take place ? It was then in contemplation to 
 bring the matter before the Court of Chancery, and I was requested to 
 procure the promise of some gentleman's signature to the petition, as 
 soon a* possible ; 1 applied, for this purpose, to Mr. Irton, of Irton Hall, 
 stating, that I was come upon some very particular business, if he would 
 allow me to speak confidentially to him ; he took me into his study, and 
 I opened to him the nature of our plans, with respect to bringing the 
 matter before Chancery ; he seemed very much interested in the busi- 
 ness, and at first, promised me his signature, but a little after, requested 
 I would allow him a few days to consider of it, and he would give me a 
 decisive answer; in the course of conversation, he stated, that he meant 
 to call on Mr. Younger the day following ; that he wished to see his pa- 
 pers, and to examine them, whether the land which he held in St. Bees, 
 was school land, and likely to be affected by this inquiry. I said, that I 
 believed that it was not school 1-ind, and it it were, -the first object of a 
 suit in Chancery would be, to inquire with respect to the validity of the 
 lease granted to the Lonsdale family, in the year 1742 ; upon his stating 
 that he intended to call upon Mr. Younger, I requested of him, that he 
 would not allow any thing to pass which might lead Mr. Younger to sup- 
 pose what his object was, and that he would still recollect, that the mat- 
 ter had been laid before him in confidence ; be assented to this, and we 
 separated ; but the next day, he revealed the whole to Mr. Younger that 
 I had related to him, and all my plans, and this was the way by which 
 
 * (The dates of his lordship's letters to me are 13 December 1812, 31 
 March 1814, 7 March, 23 April, 2 and 11 May, and 1 June 1815, 
 9 March, 23 August, and 5 September 1816.)
 
 ST. BEES SCHOOL. 
 
 it was brought to the ears of the governors, that I had intended the bring- 
 ing the matter before the Court of Chancery ; this took place a short 
 time previous to Easter 1814, at which time, it was before stated, that 
 Mr. Armitstead and Mr. Younger came to examine the chest, and at- 
 tempted to take away the least: ; about Midsummer, in the same year, 
 I had an interview with the bishop, with respect to tny licence ; his lord- 
 ship then agreed to grant me a licence, upon my pro.luc ; ng a stampt 
 certificate of having been nominated by the provost of Queen's, and 
 sending him letters testimonial ; a good deal of conversation took place, 
 at that time, with respect to the bishop's dissatisfaction with my con- 
 duct, which seemed to rest upon reports which were brought to him, as 
 I considered, at the time, unfounded ; it had been stated, that I was in 
 the habit of going about the country preaching in other people's churches, 
 to which, the only reply that I could make, and all that was necessary 
 to make, was, that I was in the habit of preaching for my friends, when 
 from home, during vacations; an examination of the churchwardens by 
 the bishop took place; at the same time, the bishop was informed, that 
 the churchwardens had expressed a desire to come before him, to state 
 what they were dissatisfied with in me as their minister; it was at my 
 own request the churchwardens were brought forward, as I was assured 
 by them afterwards, they had never made such request, nor communi- 
 cated any such intention to any person whatever ; the bishop would not 
 give up the authority, or inform me who was the person that had told 
 him the churchwardens had desired to attend upon his lordship. 
 
 Was there anything else the bishop alleged against you? He did 
 allege against me, that I read the prayers in distant parts of the parish ; 
 what I bad done in this respect, was under his own sanction ; he had 
 given me liberty, when I first went to the parish, to read prayers and a 
 sermon to any family or families that I thought proper ; 1 had certainly 
 in this respect, made use of his liberty, in doinsr it during the afternoon's 
 service, which I did not know, at that time, was required of rne, I con- 
 sidered my having done it before as voluntary; and as my health would not 
 allow of my exerting myself in the church, I had, during that time, em- 
 ployed myself in reading to private families, at a d stance from the 
 church, for a few months in the year, while I was in a state of ill health. 
 
 Did the bishop ever find fault with any of your principles, or that you 
 were not perfectly orthodox ? He frequently put the question lo me, 
 whether I was a Calvinist, to which I answered, " that 1 subscribed the 
 articles, that I acknowledged no other standard of doctrine ; and I was 
 not conscious of going beyond that standard in my preaching ; he said 
 that he understood 1 was a Calvinist, and asked if I was in the habit of 
 preaching what was generally called Calvinism. I said, " that I was not 
 aware that such a specific construction ought to be put upon my preach- 
 ing." 
 
 Did the bishop allege any other objection ? He asked whether I 
 preached extempore or not; I told him that I preached from notes, hav- 
 ing so many duties to attend to in the school ; I was in the habit of pre- 
 paring my sermons without writing them at length, winch I could not 
 find time to do. He expressed himself perfectly satisfied. 
 
 Were you ever in the habit of reading prayers, and preaching to open 
 congregations in the school-house, or any other part of the school pro- 
 perty? I have read the prayers in the school during the winter even- 
 ings, and explained a chapter in the Bibls. 
 
 Was the bishop aware of this; and did he make any comments upon 
 it ? No ; I never heard him speak of that particular. 
 
 You stated in your examination yesterday, that your salary was reduced 
 from 70/. to JO.'. ; can you state what was the occasion of that; was it
 
 ST. BEES SCHOOL. 81 
 
 From a reduction or a failure of rents ? No, it was stated in the minute- 
 entered in the register's book on that occasion, that it was in consequence 
 of the expense that the receiver had been at, in inclosing the common ; 
 but I was given to understand some time before, by Mr. Armitstead, 
 that Lord Lonsdale himself had promised to advance the money on the 
 credit of the school, and to take it back by instalments ; and that it was 
 on the ground of this promise, that the receiver was at the expense of in- 
 closing the common himself, which the trustees might have let before it 
 was inclosed, and the tenant would have taken the burthen of it on him- 
 self, and thus HO diminution would have been necessary in my salary. 
 
 During your correspondence with the bishop, which you mentioned 
 yesterday, on the subject of granting you a licence as schoolmaster, did 
 the bishop make any objection to you as a clergyman ? Not on my first 
 application for a license. 
 
 Did he afterwards make any objection to you as a clergyman ? Yes j 
 when the testimonials were sent to him according to his request, he then 
 objected, not only that the governors were dissatisfied with my conduct, 
 as stated in yesterday's examination, but also, that he had been given to 
 understand, that I collected a congregation at Allonby in a private house, 
 and preached to them ; the truth of which was, that I had merely been 
 engaged in a religious exercise in a private party ; in consequence of his 
 understanding that dissatisfaction existed in the minds of the governors, 
 he requested them to call a meeting, which they did, and the charges 
 were brought forward, as was explained in yesterday's examination ; it 
 was in consequence of that meeting, that the bishop finally declined 
 granting me the licence, as he had been informed by the governors, as 
 his lordship expressed it, that they bad found it necessary to reprimand 
 roe for neglect of duty, with respect to which I think it right to observe, 
 that no neglect of duty was made out; and that the occasion of the 
 charges, independent of the length of the vacation, had taken place at 
 least half a year before, in which a general meeting had intervened, and 
 at which the alleged neglect might have been noticed, had they then 
 considered it as such. Some time subsequent to this, in the year 1815, 
 a particular friend undertook to intercede with the bishop, to grant me 
 the licence, which he consented to do, if the governors were then satisfied 
 with my conduct, by communication with them, he learnt that they 
 had been so subsequent to that meeting on which he promised. to grant 
 the licence, which I expected he would have done, on the ground of that 
 certificate which he had before admitted in the place of the nomination ; 
 but nevertheless, the bishop still objected to grant the licence till a no- 
 mination was produced on a stamp, and in the discussion of this difficulty, 
 the matter rested till I resigned the school. 
 - Have you a clerical cure at present ? Not at present. 
 
 Have you had one since you resigned the school ? No, I have only 
 officiated in Lord Galway's chapel. 
 
 When you left the diocese of the Bishop of Chester, to go into the 
 family of Lord Galway, in the diocese of the Archbishop of York, did the 
 Bishop of Chester countersign your testimonials ? Yes. 
 
 Have you been in the habit of doing duty in churches and chapels in 
 tbf establishment, since you left St. Beesr Yes, I have assisted my 
 frit nd in tht ir churrhes, at various places where I have been. 
 
 Have you had access to all the papers and records belonging to the 
 school at St. Bees ? Only when the chest was opened, in the presence of 
 the governors. 
 
 Were yuu, upon those occasions, allowed to examine and take extracts 
 from them ? I did on one occasion, examine the register book, in order
 
 32 St. BEES SCHOOL. 
 
 to ascertain whether Sir James Lowther was governor at the time the 
 lease was granted to him, and whether he continued to act as governor, 
 by his signature to the minutes entered in that book, which 1 found to be 
 the case, but I took no extracts. 
 
 Have you, or any person on your behalf, ever taken any stops, by any 
 proceeding or advising with counsel respecting the lease of 1742, or any 
 other part of the school property ? I have had the opinions of counsel 
 upon the subject. 
 
 In consequence of those opinions, have you taken any legal or equitable 
 proceedings towards setting aside that lease? No; the opinions of 
 counsel, referred to above, were sent to Lord Lonsdale, at the time of Mr. 
 Irton disclosing the business. 
 
 Was the tenor of those opinions adverse to the validity of the lease, or 
 in favour of its validity ? Against its validity. 
 
 Was any thing further done by you upon the subject of the lease, in the 
 way of taking legal opinions, after you had communicated the opinions 
 you have referred to to Lord Lonsdale ? I think there was one opinion 
 taken after that. 
 
 Was that sent to Lord Lonsdale ? No, I believe not. 
 
 Was that of a similar tenor with the former opinions ? It did not ap 
 pear to rae so satisfactory as the former ; it was certainly against the va- 
 lidity of the lease. 
 
 To whom does the Seacote estate now belong ? To Mr. James Hayne. 
 
 How long ago is it since he purchased it ? I cannot specify particu- 
 larly, but some time before I went to St. Bees. 
 
 How far is that from Whitehaven r It is about five miles. 
 
 How near to St. Bees school ? Within a mile of the school. 
 
 Do you know, or did you ever hear, that previous to the sale of that 
 property, borings were made in different parts, to try whether there waa 
 any coal under it ? No, I never heard of that. 
 
 Have yon ever heard, that the reasons given for Sir James Lowthef? 
 taking the lease of 174t, were more for the purpose of benefiting the 
 school property than himself, on account of the doubt whether there was 
 any such manor or manorial right* as Kirkby Beacock, and if there 
 even was, whether there was any coal within that manor? I have 
 not heard of any such representation. I think it right to state, 
 that there appears to be an informality in the election of the go- 
 vernors, according to the statutes, particularly in the election of Mr. 
 Armitstc ad and Mr. Fleming, which I suspect extends to most, if 
 not to all the rest. I believe the provost was never informed of it ; 
 no previous notroe was given to him of the election; 1 believe that to 
 be required by the statutes. I wish to observe, that on the occasion of 
 my salary being diminished, I was given to understand, that Dr. Sat- 
 terthwaite had made use of this expression on his return to White- 
 haven ; "We have now dipt his wings;'* and I think that I may be 
 allowed also to state, that 1 never received any recompence for the last 
 year'* education of Dr. SatterthwaJte** nephew, though I hate more than 
 nce made application for it.
 
 ST. BEES SCHOOL. 33 
 
 May 25. 
 
 The Rev. William Wilson, again called in ; and Examined. 
 
 HAVE you any circumstances which you wish to add to your former 
 evidence? Yes; I forgot to mention a circumstance with regard to an 
 estate near Croydon, in Surrey, called Palmer's Fields, which was pur- 
 chased by the executors of Archbishop Grindall, about the year 1GOO, 
 as a part of the foundation of the school; it was afterwards leased to 
 two of the servants of a Mr. Scott, one of the executors of Archbishop 
 Grindall, for 99 years, and in reversion to Pembroke College, Cambridge, 
 for 999 years. This information I procured from papers in the bursary 
 of Queen's. The estate consists of 70 acres j it was leased at a rent 
 of 20/. per annum. The governors know nothing of this>state at pre- 
 sent ; but it appears to have been leased to the college in lieu of '201. a 
 year which is due to the college by the statutes of the school. 
 
 To Pembroke College ? Yes. 
 
 You said it was leased by the executors for 99 years to two indivi- 
 duals, and in reversion to Pembroke College for 999 years; were those 
 executors governors of St. Bees school ? I am noi certain whether one 
 of them was not a governor. 
 
 Then the governors of St Bees school have had nothing to do with 
 that estate? No, never, as it appears from the papers. 
 
 How then does this estate stand in the place of 20/. a year, payable 
 by the governors of the school to Pembroke College ? The statutes re- 
 quire, that 20/, a year should be paid to Pembroke College; but it 
 never has been paid, according to any accounts possessed by the school, 
 which I have se n ; and it is not claimed, so that it is supposed that 
 this estate stands in lieu of that 201. 
 
 Is there any other circumstance which you wish to mention ? I wish 
 to observe, with respect to the lease of the collieries to Sir James 
 Lowther; when I saw it taken out of the chest, I observed an erasure 
 in the lease, where the term of years had been o.-iginally placed, 
 and the term of 867 years was inserted, as it appeared to me, in fresh 
 ink; and it appeared to have been very difficult to include it in that' 
 space which w >s originally allotted to the term of years in the lease. 
 At the same time I should stale, that on the indorsement of it the term 
 of 867 years appeared to he written in old ink. 
 
 IB an indorsement for some consideration received for the lease ? It 
 was an indorsement on the back of the lease, stating what it was. 
 
 Did you look at the witnessing of the lease, to see if that erasure was 
 noticed ? I did not see any notice of it on any other part of the 
 lease. 
 
 Is there any other circumstance which you wish to mention ? I have . 
 understood, from the widow of the late master, that on one occasion a 
 meeting of the governors was called, when he (Mr. Barnes) was re- 
 quested to leave the room ; he did so ; and, after the meeting, was in- 
 vitftl to dine at Whitehaven Castle. 
 
 About what time was this ; can you give the Committee the date ? 
 I am not < ertain of the time, having had it only from the information 
 of the widow of the late master, and that in the evening this lease was 
 produced ; the governors having previously stated there was such lease, 
 but they did not know whether it could be found or not; but they had 
 searched the chest for it and discovered. Mr, Barnes, the late master, 
 
 E
 
 ST. BEES SCHOOL. 
 
 observed the erasure at this time, and took notice of it, and mentioned 
 it to some of his friends afterwards. 
 
 Did he mention it at the time to the persons assembled at Wliitehaven 
 Castle ? 1 do not know that he did ; but he mentioned it to Mrs. 
 Barnes when he returned home. 
 
 Is Whitehaven Castle the residence of the Lowther family ? Yes. 
 
 Is there any other circumstance you would wish to mention to the 
 Committee ? No, I do not know that there is. 
 
 Are the two pits sunk in the neighbourhood of the 70 tenements near 
 each other ? Yes. 
 
 How far asundvr ? Not a quarter of a mile. 
 
 In what direction ? In the same line, or nearly, with the boundaries. 
 
 Then do you take the two pits to be equally distant from the boun- 
 daries ? Yes, I think so. 
 
 Have you any, and what reason to believe, that they work those pits 
 tinder the manor ? It is generally spoken of by the inhabitants, of that 
 part. If you ask the farmers, they will say, that they conceive that 
 the workings of the coal proceed to such a distance. 
 
 What place do you allude to ? To Byersteads, which is one of the 
 tenements of school land. 
 
 How far is that within the boundaries ? A considerable way ; I should 
 think above a quarter of a mile. 
 
 Are they known to work in other directions from these pils ? I be- 
 lieve so. 
 
 Did you ever know of any observation having been made to the gover- 
 nors, respecting the grant of this long term of years, before you made 
 your own inquiries ? No, it was scarcely known that there was such a 
 lease. 
 
 How long have the present governors known of the existence of this 
 long lease ? They were certain of its existence at the time that Mr. 
 Barnes was schoolmaster, when the chest was searched. 
 
 What reason have you to know, that from that period they were aware 
 of the existence of that lease ? Mr. Younger immediately recognized 
 it, at the time that Mr. Armhstead and he searched the chest, in a 
 way that showed he had seen it and knew of it before. 
 
 Do you consider that they were aware of it from that time ? I should 
 think so. 
 
 What are the grounds of your belief, that they knew of the existence 
 of the lease from that time ? I never heard any observation made by 
 them respecting it. 
 
 Then what other ground have you for believing that they knew of it ? 
 No other reason but that it was produced at that meeting of the gover- 
 nors, and in consequence of what the widow of the late master had 
 said. I took an opportunity, when the chest was opened, to see if I 
 eould find it ; I think it was in the year 1813; I did find it, but I did 
 not examine it particularly at that time. 
 
 Since that period, did you ever hear of any of the governors who had 
 said, that they knew of the existence of it ? No, not till the time that 
 they knew what inquiries I had made respecting it. 
 
 What is the earliest time, that you are certain, of your own know- 
 ledge, that they knew of the existence of that lease ? Early in 1814. 
 
 Have they ever taken any steps, since that time, to have that lease 
 set aside by a court of equity ? No, they did not ; they understood 
 that I meant to do so, and Mr. Armitsteud observed, in the name of Lord 
 Lonsdale, that he would allow the law to take its course j when it was 
 first brought forward, Mr. Armitstead said, that he had no doubt that 
 Lord Lousdale would generously give up the lease, if he understood tbat
 
 ST. BEES SCHOOL. 35 
 
 it was for the good of the school ; but afterwards, when they had seen 
 Lord Lonsdale, the message from him was, that he would allow the law 
 to tike its course. 
 
 Did tbe governors assign any reason for not proceeding according to 
 their duty, to set this lease aside, when they knew the same existed ? 
 1 1wy made observation, 1 hat it was worth little or nothing to any body 
 else, though worth much to Lord Lonsdale; it was worth little to any 
 body e!se, because they could not so easily work the coals. 
 
 Did they not consider, that because it was worth more to him than to 
 any body else, that he ought to pay a higher price than any body else ? 
 They said, that they thought he would do so, before any interview 
 took place ; but afterwards, they observed, that he had nothing to do 
 with the lease, excepting in receiving, as it came into his possession. 
 
 You have said, that the trustees observed, that no one could work 
 the coal but Lord Lonsdale ? No one so easily ; one reason given was, 
 that it would not be, perhaps, so easy to ship them at the port of 
 Whitehaven, or to procure a railway for the conveyance of them. 
 
 May 23. 
 
 The Reverend James Satterthivaite, D. D. called in; and 
 Examined. 
 
 ARE you rector of Lowther, in Westmorland ? I am. 
 
 Have you made a return to tbe circular of this Committee? I have. 
 
 State to the Committee wha: you know respecting a school in your 
 parish, which is mentioned as endowed in the will of Viscount Lonsdale 
 in 1700 ? I was not aware that there had been any such will till within, 
 the last fortnight, when information to that effect appeared in the county 
 newspaper} in consequence of that intimation, having already made out 
 my answer to give to this Committee, I withheld my hand to make further 
 inquiries; in consequence of which I was informed by common report, 
 that there had b< en a school at Lowtber early in the last century, but of 
 its origin, or why it was discontinued, or when it was discontinued, I have 
 been able to obtain no information whatever; I have further heard, that 
 several scholars, gentlemen from Scotland and gentlemen from Yorkshire, 
 were educated at it; so that there certainly was a school. 
 
 Since you bave known that part of the country, there has been none ? 
 No, there has been none; that there was a school, seems to be known 
 only by tradition ; I can find no one who remembers the school in ex- 
 istence. 
 
 Or when they had died ont, could you lern any thing about the trus- 
 tees?! never could make it out that there had been any trustees, or 
 that they had died out, or how it had ceased ; I saw, in a provincial news- 
 paper, an extract of a will ; I was in bad health at that time, and I sent 
 to my curate, who teaches the village school, and is much in communica- 
 tion with the parishioners, and requested him to make inquiries, (the Re- 
 verend J. Holmes ; ) he did ; and he reported to me, that he could get no 
 information respecting such a testamentary endowment. There is a 
 large building in the new town of Lowther, still known by the name of the 
 Cohere, but I could not trace the origin of its name ; itii not an ancient 
 looking building; it is a building, from its appearance, that might veiy 
 well refer to tbe time stated. 
 
 E2
 
 36 ST. BEES SCHOOL. 
 
 Do you happen to know in whose possession the estates in Yorkshire 
 are, which appear to have been charged with the support of the school ? 
 The name mentioned in the newspaper extract from the will is Dam- 
 brook, and I have understood it was bought by, and is now in possession 
 of Lord Ribblesdale. 
 
 Do you happen to know at what period Lord Ribblesdale purchased 
 the Da m brook estate ? I cannot speak with precision; certainly after 
 the year 1802; and I should say, perhaps, about 1806 or 1808. 
 
 Do you happen to know in whose hands the tithes of Haile and of Brisco 
 are ? I do not know any thing about Brisco ; I believe the tithes of 
 Haile were by act of parliament exonerated a few years ago by an ex- 
 change for lands upon the common, upon the indosure. 
 
 Do you know in whose hands the land given in lieu of the tithe is?- 
 Lord Lonsdale's. 
 
 Is it an impropriate rectory ? I believe it is, but I am not quite cer- 
 tain; it is in fact a perpetual curacy as to the ministerial duties. 
 
 What may the value of the tithe, or the land now given in lieu, amount 
 to ? I have not the least knowledge. 
 
 Do you know any thing of the tithe of Brisco ? I do not. 
 
 You are a trustee of the St. Bees school ? A governor or warden. 
 
 How long have you been a governor ? Ten or eleven years, I should 
 think. 
 
 Have you attended many of the meetings of the governors ? Very 
 often ; generally. 
 
 In what way are the accounts of that school audited ? They are au- 
 dited once a year, at a meeting very soon after Easter; the accounts are 
 regularly kept in a book, debtor and creditor, and signed by the governors 
 present. 
 
 Who is the receiver ? The present receiver is the Rev. Mr. Armit- 
 stead. 
 
 Who succeeded Mr. Younger as deputy receiver ? Mr, Peter Hodgson, 
 a solicitor, at Whitehaven. 
 
 Can you give the Committee any guess of the annual revenue of the 
 school ? Not with any great precision ; it arises partly from the letting 
 of an alabaster quarry ; the rent of that has varied considerably, it has 
 let as high as 98/, a year, and I think latterly has been let for 60/. ; it 
 rose from 81. to 10/. a year, to about 16/. a year, when there was a great 
 demand for alabaster at Liverpool, and the quarry was let for 98/. a year 
 or thereabouts ; the revenue amounts to about 1301. or 140/. a year in 
 all. I may be somewhat incorrect as to the exact sums, as I speak only 
 from general recollection. 
 
 Have you had occasion to be present when any leases were granted by 
 the governors ? Never, tbatl remember. 
 
 Have any been granted in your time? Not that lam aware of; I 
 have not signed any. 
 
 Are all the lands of the school let on long leases at present ? I am not 
 aware that there is any land belonging to it, except a field and garths 
 adjoining it, and the allotment lately made. 
 
 What has been done with that allotment? It has been improved, sub- 
 divided, let, and the proceeds carried to account. 
 
 Upon what length of lease has it been let ? Perhaps three or seven 
 years ; it is not a long lease ; it was only let for the purpose of getting it 
 into cultivation ; it was let at public sale, if I recollect aright. 
 
 Were not the 70 tenements in the reign of James the First, let on long 
 leases ? There is a long lease I believe in the school chest, which was 
 looked into sometime ago, but I am not competent to speak to the leases 
 to the tenants.
 
 ST. BEES SCHOOL. 37 
 
 Are you acquainted with the lease granted in 1742, to Sir James 
 Lowther ? I have seen it. 
 
 What is it a lease of? I believe of the coal mines the manor may 
 contain. 
 
 How is the manor described in that lease, as far as you recollect? I 
 think it is described by the name of Kirkby Beacock. 
 
 Do you understand Kirkby Beacock to be a different manor from St. 
 Bees ? Certainly, I have always understood Kirkby Beacock to be a 
 manor within a manor. 
 
 Are you aware of the bounds of the manor of Kirkby Beacock? Not 
 the least ; I know no other particulars respecting the lease than those I 
 have stated. 
 
 The Committee understand there are no shafts upon the pits sunk 
 within the manor of Kirkby Beacock ? I do not know that there are. 
 
 Do you happen to know whether there are any coals worked within that 
 manor from pits sunk out of the manor ? I believe not. 
 
 What are the nearest pits out of the manor ? I know Wilson pit is 
 not far from it. 
 
 Do you happen to know how near that is? I know precisely where 
 that pit is situated, but I do not know the bounds of the manor. 
 
 Do you understand that all the workings from Wilson pit are carried in 
 all other directions, but so as to avoid the side where Kirkby Beacock is ? 
 No, I do not. 
 
 Have you any reason to believe, that a pit is sunk close by a particular 
 seam of coal, and the working carried in all other directions, so as to 
 avoid that seam of coal ? No, not the least ; not unless there happened 
 to have been old workings in that direction which would have exhausted 
 it ; but I have no mining knowledge whatever, and know nothing more 
 than I have heard in conversation some time ago, when Mr. Wilson, the 
 master of St. Bees, made inquiries respecting the coal property; I then 
 inquired of Mr, Peele, Lord Lonsdale's coal steward, whether he knew 
 that there were any workings by which they were procuring coal out of 
 the manor of St. Bees ; his answer to me was, that he believed they were 
 not. 
 
 Do you happen to know, whether any coals were ever raised under the 
 lease ? I do not. 
 
 Were you present at any meeting of the governors, when Mr. Wilson, 
 the master, was present ? More than once, frequently, more especially 
 at one special meeting I was present. 
 
 Did he claim to be entitled to be present at all meetings of the trustees ? 
 I do not know whether he claimed to be present at all meetings, but he 
 claimed to be present then of right. 
 
 Do you recollect what passed upon that occasion ? I can recollect 
 perfectly, that it was thought by the governors that he had no right to be 
 so ; that they were met, as a deliberative body, to decide upon matters in 
 which he was involved ; and, from our interpretation of the statutes, we 
 considered tbat he had no right, and insisted upon his absenting himself. 
 
 Are you acquainted with the statutes ? Yes, very generally. 
 
 Have the statutes been in the possession, or copies of them, of the 
 governors and of the schoolmaster ? Lately they have, but they were 
 not ro when I was first made a governor ; there was only one copy, and 
 it was scarcely known where it was ; there was then an order issued that 
 there should be a copy put into the hands of every governor, and one 
 sent to Queen's college, Oxford, and one to the bishop of Chester ; there 
 was a complete set of the statutes made out by order of the governors, 
 and distributed, with an order that whenever a governor succeeded to
 
 38 ST, BEES SCHOOL. 
 
 the office, the copy of tbe statutes held by his predecessor should pass 
 over to him. 
 
 Do you know whether the schoolmaster had a copy of these statutes ? 
 I am not quite certain whether he had or not; he spoke of them as 
 familiar with them, but whether from a copy given to him, or shown 
 to him, I cannot tell. 
 
 Were you ever present when the schoolmaster had a full inspection of 
 all ttoe muniments and documents belonging to the school ? I was. 
 
 You saw him inspect them ? I did. 
 
 And he was not refused by any governor ? By no means ; the chest 
 was open, and Mr. Wilson might search as much as he pleased. 
 
 And did ? fie did ; the books were open, and we were searching to- 
 gether ; we were anxious to ascertain the grounds on which we under- 
 stood some property might be recovered for the school ; each person 
 present searched ; Mr. Wilson as much as any other person. 
 
 Do you know anything about Wilson pit ? I know of repute that it 
 is one of the oldest pits about Whitehaveu j it has been worked these 
 sixty or seventy years. 
 
 Is there any repute as to the coal under Kirkby Beacock manor ever 
 having been worked put ? No, I have never heard any repute of that 
 kind. 
 
 There is no repute as to Wilson pit having had collateral working 
 into that manor? No. 
 
 Is not Wilson pit one of the farthest working collieries from the 
 harbour of Whitchaven ? I should suppose a good deal the farthest; 
 there are one or two other pits near it, but it is one of those farthest 
 removed. 
 
 Therefore the least pro6table for working 'That I cannot tell ; it 
 will depend upon the produce. 
 
 [The following copy of lite will of John Viscount Lansdale rsat delivered in, 
 and read;] 
 
 Extracted from the Registry of the Prerogative Court of Canterbury. 
 
 IN THE NAME OF GOD, AMEN. I, John Lord Lowther Viscount 
 Lonsdale, in the county of Westmorland, being now, blessed be God 
 for the same, in perfect health and sound memory, and well considering 
 the uncertainty of human life, doth think fit, whilst it pleases God to 
 spare me, so to dispose of the estate which God has given me, as may in 
 my judgment consist with reason and ray particular gratitude; and 
 therefore do make this my last will and testament in manner and form 
 following. And in the first place, &c. Also I give and devise to my 
 executors hereinafter named, their heirs and assigns, the manor and 
 lordship of Dainbrook in the county of York, with the appurtenances, 
 together with my capital messuage and tenement of and in Dainbrook 
 aforesaid, and all other my messuages, houses, lands, tenements and 
 hereditaments of and in Dambrook aforesaid, with the appurtenances, 
 (the mynes of leed, coale, and all other minerals royalties and franchises 
 within the same, always excepted and reserved;) and also all that my 
 rectory and parsonage of the parish of Hale, in the said county of Cum- 
 berland, together with the glebe lands there, and all manner of tythes 
 or tenths, oblations, obventions, profits, advantages, emoluments and 
 hereditaments whatsoever to the said rectory parsonage and glebe lands 
 belonging, and all my 'proportion, part or share of the tythes, tenths and 
 other profits yearly coming, growing, renewing and increasing within the 
 territories, village or hamlet of Brisco, within the parish of Saint John,
 
 ST. BEES SCHOOL. 39 
 
 in the said county of Cumberland, heretofore had and enjoyed together 
 with the rectory of Hale aforesaid, in trust nevertheless to be a fund, or 
 to employ and dispose the rents and profits thereof, for the maintenance 
 and salary of the schoolmaster or schoolmasters of the free school, for 
 which I hare erected a house at Lowther aforesaid, and for the manage- 
 ment of the same, and upon such trust and for such purpo.-e to settle 
 the aforesaid manor or lordship of Dambrook aforesaid, and the afore- 
 said rectory and parsonage, glebe lands, tythes and premises, with the 
 appurtenances, upon trustees, in such manner, and under such laws 
 statutes and constitutions, as to my said executors shall seem meet aad 
 expedient, or otherwise upon such other trusts, and for such other pur- 
 poses, as my said executors shall think most conducing to the good of 
 the county of Westmorland, and especially of the parish of Lowther 
 aforesaid. 
 
 May 28. 
 
 Rev. James Satterthtuaite, D. D. requested to be again called 
 in ; and Examined. 
 
 Ma. WILSON, in his examination, on a former day, made the following 
 observation, at the close of his evidence, " I would wish to observe, that 
 on my salary being diminished, I was given to understand, that Doctor 
 Satterthwaite had made use of this expression, on his return to White- 
 haven, 'We have now dipt his wings,' (meaning Mr. Wilson;) and I 
 think that I may be allowed also to state, that I never received any re- 
 compence for the last year's education of Dr. Satterthvvaite's nephew, 
 though I have more than once made application for it;' have you any 
 observation to make upon this answer ? 1 have to request of the Com- 
 mittee, that they will permit me to see Mr. Wilson here, to confront 
 him upon these allegations, which certainly convey a very unpleasant 
 charge, and which may have a tendency to injure my reputation with 
 the Committee, and with other gentlemen. With the permission of the 
 Committee, I will state what 1 think of the business; it is this ; I have 
 not the slightest recollection of having made use of such an expression, 
 and if 1 did, certainly it was not under any 'pirit of ill-will or taunt 
 towards Mr. Wilson ; about that time, Mr. Wi'son was frequently ab- 
 senting himself from the school, upon business not connected with it, 
 according to reports which reached me ; my nephew was under his 
 tuition, and several persons who had children, pupils under him, com- 
 plained of a supposed neglect ; a common colloquial phrase in that 
 county, is to say of a person who is frequently absenting himself from 
 his home, that he is always flying about the country; it is not impos- 
 sible, that I might have adopted that phrase, and in reference to keep- 
 ing Mr. Wilson in the school, I might make use of some such expression, 
 but I have no recollection whatever of it. With respect to the second 
 allegation, I beg leave to state to the Committee, that there is a certain 
 gratuitous recompence given to the master of St. Bees school, called a 
 Cockpenny, which is always paid, I believe, at Shrovetide ; the sum is 
 ad libitum, according to the means and disposition of the persons giving 
 it ; my nephew was at the school three years ; I paid by myself or my 
 agent, three Cockpennies, as they are called, and I believe, to the full 
 extent, as far as I can understand, of the most liberal remuneration
 
 40 ST. BEES SCHOOL. 
 
 that was given to him. I have to remark, further, that Mr. Wilson, to 
 my knowledge, has not made any application to me for that remunera- 
 tion which he states to have been due, or applied for it. I have under- 
 stood, that he applied to my sister, the mother of the young man, and 
 the answer was, that as I had paid all the expences of this boy's educa- 
 tion, from h s infancy, that Mr. Wilson might apply directly to me : I 
 believe I have seen Mr. Wilson since, and he has made no applica- 
 tion. 
 He never made any application to you ? No, he never did. 
 
 May 30. 
 The Rev. William Wilson, again called in ; and Examined. 
 
 Have you read Dr. Sattertkwaite's evidence ? Yes. 
 
 Have you any observations to make upon it ? As to the first parti- 
 cular, the explanation given by Dr. Satterlhwaite does not appear to 
 agree with the occasion when the expression was used, which was im- 
 mediately aftei the meeting when my salary was reduced, at which 
 nothing was said about my absenting myself from home. With, respect 
 to the second particular, it may be necessary to observe, that the only 
 remuneration which I received as head master of St. Bees school, besides 
 a salary of 50/. to which it was reduced as before-mentioned, was a 
 gratuity paid by each scholar at entrance, and the same yearly at 
 Shrovetide, in many cases amounting only to a few shillings, and in 
 very few exceeding two or three guineas. This gratuity was always 
 considered as due in proportion to the time spent at school after Shrove- 
 tide before leaving it. Those who left at Cnristmas in general paid 
 voluntarily the usual gratuity offered at Shrovetide. On this ground 
 application was twice made to I3r. Satterthwaite's friends, first by letter, 
 to which no answer was given, and aftei wards by myself personally; 
 to which the reply was, it would be mentioned to Dr. Satei'thwahe, who 
 undertook the expense of his nephew's educa ion, and 1 should hear in 
 a short time. From what passed on the occasion, I supposed the 
 amount, would have been settled, but I heard nothing more of it. I was 
 never told to make application to Dr. Satterthwaite, and as the two 
 former were not attended to, it was not my wish to have renewed so un- 
 pleasant a task. I conceived it necessary to mention these instances, 
 for no other reason than to show the discouraging circumstances under 
 which I must have retained the school, and that the Committee may 
 judge for themselves, from the whole of the evidence before them, how far 
 it is likely the credit and prosperity of the institution, independent of 
 my own comfort, under much bodily indisposition, could be supported. 
 
 f The following Letter was delivered in t and read.'] 
 
 SIR, St. Bees, 15th June 1818. 
 
 Ou Thursday evening last, I had the honour of receiving your letter, 
 and would have immediately complied with your request, had I not 
 mislaid the papers of which you require copies. After a diligent search^ 
 I at last discovered them, and they are to the following effect $
 
 ST. BEES SCHOOL. 41 
 
 [Copy of my Letter to the Earl of Lonsdale.] 
 
 MY LORD; 
 
 The occasion on which I am compelled to address your Lordship will, 
 I trust, plead my excuse tor the great liberty I have taken. 
 
 On Saturday evening (23d May) I received from Mr. Brougham, on 
 the subject of St. Bees school, two separate papers, a copy of which I 
 have the honour of submitting to your Lordship's inspection. 
 
 \_Here I copied verbatim the Order of the Select Committee, 
 as well as the letter which accompanied it.'] 
 
 Your Lordship from these transcripts will readily perceive the reason 
 and the object of my present address. These orders of the S.'lect 
 Committee of the Honourable House of Commons compel me to apply 
 unto your Lordship, as one of the three governors who possess keys to the 
 chest where the documents relating to the school are deposited, to 
 enable me to comply immediately with the requisition of the Com- 
 mittee. 
 
 By the same post I make application to Dr. Satterthwaite on the 
 same subject ; and have already seen Mr. Armitstead. 1 have also 
 written to Mr. Brougham, explaining the cause of the delay which has 
 now occurred, and expressing my readiness to obey the order of the 
 House of Commons, as soon as the documents required are committed 
 to my care. 
 
 Trusting that your Lordship will pardon the freedom now taken, 
 which can only be justified by the urgency of the occasion, 1 beg leave 
 to assure your Lordship, that 1 am, &c. &c. 
 
 [Hw Lordship's Answer.] 
 SIR, 28th May 1818. 
 
 The presence of three governors is necessary to open the chest where 
 the documents relating to St. Bees school are kept. So the statutes 
 direct. I can only speak for myself; but I am ready when required so 
 to do, to attend myself, or to depute some other governor to attend for 
 me to open the chest, and to deliver such papers as may be required, 
 so far as we are, in conformity to our duty, authorized so to do, to 
 such person as may be directed to receive them. I am, Sir, &c. &c. 
 
 Lontdale. 
 
 The Rev. Thomas Bradley. 
 
 Dr. Satterthwaite and Mr. Armitstead have since expressed an equal 
 willingness to deliver up the documents when required so to do. 
 
 I have only to add my mite of approbation to that which a discern- 
 ing public will not fail to confer on you, for your noble exertions in the 
 cause of public charities for the purposes of education; and the honour 
 to subscribe myself, with the highest consideration, 
 
 Sir, your most obedient humble Servant, 
 
 Titomat Bradley. 
 To Henry Brougham, Esq.
 
 
 POCKLINGTON SCHOOL. 
 
 May 30. 
 
 The Rev. James Wood, D. D. called in ; and Examined. 
 
 You are master of St. John's College, Cambridge ?-^-I am. 
 
 Is St. John's College visitors of Pocklington school in Yorkshire ? 
 I can hardly answer that question j I will tell the Committee what I 
 conceive to be the authority ; it is said, if the master should happen to 
 be in the neighbourhood of Pocklington, or should send any fellows of 
 the college thither, they might go to the school, and examine the master, 
 and see whether he is doing his duty or not, as master ; if he is not, 
 then the original power was to remove him, and the master of the gild 
 or fraternity which was established at that time, was to look out for 
 another j that I conceive is the whole visitatorial power of the master of 
 St. John's. 
 
 Has St. John's College, .in fact, exercised a visitatorial power ? In the 
 course of the last summer, I believe j 1 do not exactly recollect the time j 
 the master and seniors of the college desired these two gentlemen, now 
 in the room, Mr. Calvert and Mr. Hornbuckle, to go down and examine 
 into the state of the school. 
 
 Did they make a report of that state to the college ? They con- 
 sequently did go in October last, and they made a report to the college. 
 
 Have you that report ? The gentlemen are now present, and we 
 have the questions put to the master at that time, and to the parishioners 
 relating to the school, and the answers given; they were fortunately 
 put down in writing, and 1 will now state them to the Committee if they 
 wish it. 
 
 Have you the report ? It is not a formal report ; they gave us the 
 questions and the answers received thereto. 
 
 Has, in your recollection, the visitatorial power ever been exercised 
 by St. John's on any former occasion ? I do not know that it has j not 
 to my knowledge. 
 
 You have only been a short time master of St. John's ? Only three 
 years. 
 
 Before your mastership are you aware of that power being exercised ? 
 ~I am not. 
 
 Had any information of abuses existed in the management of Pockling. 
 ton school, ever reached St. John's before the last yepr ? No represen- 
 tation of that kind has ever been made to the college at all ; no com- 
 plaint was ever made to the college. 
 
 Had any hint or communication reached the college? 1 have heard 
 incidentally, by gentlemen emp'.oytd on colLge business, that the school 
 was not properly u.anaged. 
 
 Had this been commonly talked of before this period in St. John's ? 
 I do not recollect that it had ; nothing had bten said that suggested to 
 me the necessity of a visitation. 
 
 Has St. John's any other property or house in the neighbourhood of 
 Pocklington ? We have some property in that part of Yorkshiie. 
 
 Hive you agents ? We have a grn;l< man there who does manage 
 our business, and occasionally surveys for us. 
 
 Have you always had some such person there ? I think not.
 
 JPOCKLINGTON SCHOOL. 43 
 
 How many years ? I do not recollect. 
 
 Ten years ? 1 cannot say ; I do not remember the circumstance of 
 his being first employed, nor do I recollect how the property was ma- 
 naged there before his appointment. 
 
 Have you any other property, or connexions, or agents there ? I be- 
 lieve not. 
 
 Do any of the St. Join's men come from that neighbourhood ? 
 1 do not recollect any. 
 
 Are any of the St. John's men in the habit of' going there ? Not that 
 I am aware of. 
 
 Have you any livings there ? One, not very far from it. 
 
 How far ? It is near Market VWighton. 
 
 Is not Market Weighton the post town of Pocklington ? No; Pock- 
 lington is a post town itself; our living is, I suppose, about twelve miles 
 from Pocklington. 
 
 Have you any other livings there? I think not; we -bare the living of 
 Bran i.sburton, about twenty mile~> from Pocklington. 
 
 Are there auy other Cambridge College livings in the neighbourhood ? 
 That I do not know. 
 
 Is the appointment of the ranster in St. John's College? Yes. 
 
 The appointment of the usher ? No; we have not!) in, to do with that. 
 
 Who appoints the usher ? I believe the master of the school, and the 
 two churchwardens of Pocklington parish. 
 
 In whose gift is the living of Pocklington ?-^I do not know. 
 
 Not in St. John's College ? No. 
 
 Do no! the master and usher of this school form a corporation oC 
 themselves ? They do. 
 
 Have you the ileed of endowment? I have a copy of the act of par- 
 liament 5th Edwar.l VI. 
 
 Have you any ropy of the endowment of the school ? There was an 
 original gild endowed. 
 
 A gild of what ? A fraternity or gild in tl<e 6th Henry VIII. endowed 
 by Dr. Dowman. 
 
 Is this the only deed of endowment you are aware of previous to the 
 act of parliament ? There was an endowment of five scholarships pre- 
 vious to the act of parliament. 
 
 But no other genera! endowment of the corporation ? None what- 
 ever, that I know of; This is the licence to John Dowman, to endow a 
 gild and grammar school in Pocklington, dated 6th Henry VIII. 
 [It was delivered in and read.] 
 
 Does not this endowment require the master to be *' in scientia gram- 
 matical! sufficienter doctum ad instruend. & erudiend. omnes , sin- 
 gulos scolare.s ad villam de Poklyngton predict, causa erudiendi cou- 
 fluentes juxta ordinacSes & statuta del Johls in hac parte fiend. ? Yes, 
 it does. 
 
 Is Pocklington a considerable place? I hardly know what to sayj it 
 is not a very large town ; I do not know the number of inhabitants. 
 
 Have you any conjecture ? No. 
 
 Are there a thousand inhabitants ? I cannot tell. 
 
 Does the parish extend beyond the town ? That I do not know. 
 
 What are the yearly revenues of the land belonging to this school ? 
 As visitors from St. John's, we have nothing to do with the revenues ; 
 they ere in the corporation entirely. 
 
 Independent of any concern with the revenues, have you any know- 
 ledge of what the amount is ? I cannot pretend to say exactly what the 
 amount is. 
 
 Can you say near about f I rather think the estates are in Chancery ; 
 F 2
 
 44 POCKLINGTON SCHOOL. 
 
 there is some. Chancery suit going on ; and I do not know that tfi 
 corporation are in possession of all the estates. 
 
 You mean some parts of 'their rights are disputed ? I think they have 
 been in .Chancery ever sinoe this master has been appointed. 
 
 As near as you can tell, without beinfr accurate to a pound or two, 
 what do you estimate the revenues at ? They may now perhaps be 900/. 
 a year. 
 
 Have they ever been greater ? : I do not know ; I have never particu- 
 larly examined into them. 
 
 Does that include all the revenues of every kind ? I should suppose 
 so. 
 
 How many scholars are taught in this school ? At present there are 
 eight. 
 
 Has that number been diminished or increased latterly ? Increased : 
 when the gentlemen row present, to whom I before alluded, first went to 
 visit the school, there was only one. 
 
 How long ago was that? It was in October. 
 
 Was there ever none, as far as you know ? Not that I know of. 
 
 When this school was visited, in what state wjs the school-room 
 found to be ? The school-room was dilapidated, certainly. 
 
 Was it used as a carpenter's shop and saw-pit ?- Not when I saw it ; I 
 have just come from it 
 
 The Reverend Thomas Waldron Hornbuckle, B.D. Fellow 
 of St. John's College, Cambridge, and the Reverend 
 Thomas Calrert, B.D. Feljow of St. John's College, Cam- 
 bridge ; called in, and Examined. 
 
 WHEN did you go to visit Pockliiigton school ? In the month of Oc- 
 tober la>t. 
 
 Is that the first visitation of the school, with which you are acquainted ? 
 It ;s. 
 
 in what stnte did you find the school when you went there ? It was in 
 a di'apidattd state. 
 
 Jn what manner was it dilapidated? There are two rooms; I am 
 speaking particularly of the lower roum; the floor was up, and the win- 
 dows broken. 
 
 Had it all the appearance of not being used as a school ? Yes. 
 
 To what other use was it applied ? That I cannot say ; things were 
 lyinsc about; we understood it was going to be put into repair; ma- 
 terials wrre collected indeed for repair. 
 
 Was any part of the school premises used as a saw-pit? I saw nothing 
 of it. 
 
 Did you ever understand it had been so used ? It was mentioned. 
 
 Did you find any scholars there ? There was one boy, I think, at that 
 time. 
 
 How was that boy occupied ? He was in the master's house. 
 
 In what state was the room above ? In a much better state than the 
 room below ; not in a very eood state, but in a habitable state. 
 
 What, was the boy doing ? I can hardly say what he was doing ; he 
 was in the course of school studies , we inquired what he had been doing j 
 he was not actually employed at that moment. 
 
 Were the two masters occupied diligently in teaching this boy ? Not 
 at the time we were there; we were there but a short time, -and there, 
 were a great many other people present, who came to inquire about the 
 school-
 
 POCKLINGTON SCHOOL. 45 
 
 Did the master and usher appear to be diligently employed in the in- 
 struction of this fortunate youth? We had not opportunities of learning 
 sufficiently what his course of education was. 
 
 Did you see, in point of fact, either the master or usher occupied in 
 teaching him at all ? No, 1 did not hear him say bis lessons. 
 
 Is the youth a relation of the master ? That I do not know. 
 
 Does the master live at Pocklington ?f believe so. 
 
 Does the usher ? Yes, the usher di:l at that time. 
 
 What was the name of the usher and master? The master's name is 
 Thomas Shield, and the usher's name is Brown. I believe he was curate 
 of the parish. 
 
 Did you understand there had ever been more scholars at any former 
 time than that one ? Yes, from the time of this inu-tt-r entering upon 
 the school, we understood from him, I think, that there had been about 
 thirteen or fourteen ; we put the following questions to the master, and 
 he gave the following answer*. 
 
 [ They tvere delivered in and read, as follows :] 
 
 "I. Have you the original charter in your possession, or what paper 
 relating to the school ? The charter is in the possession of the master, 
 and a deed of endowerrt of five scholarships, called Dow man's scholar- 
 ships; the latter is now in the hands of Messrs. Marriott and BUmire, 
 Gray's-Inn Square, solicitors of the master, in h's suit in Chancery. 
 
 " 2. Query; the number of scholars; are any entitled to free ad- 
 mission ? Ac present one ; on the whole, sixteen since the residence of 
 the present master, in 1809; at one time, about ten, previous to which 
 time there were none for eleven years, an f l only three or four for twenty 
 years. The master considers the school as free, i. e. as not confined to 
 the parish cf Pocklington. 
 
 " 3. Have you made any objections to the admissions of any boys, 
 claiming to be received as free boys ; and on what were they founded ? 
 r The master pever refused adinLssiqn to any boy claiming education at 
 the school. 
 
 " 4. Have you a register of the admissions of the boys, and time of 
 their leaving the school ? No register regularly kept. 
 
 " 5. What holidays are there, and what vacation* ? Stints' days are 
 holidays; Tuesday and Satuiday half holidays. Five' or six weeks 
 vacat on at Christmas and Midst. mmer each. 
 
 " 0. At what hour does ><-hoo| begin and close, and with what inter- 
 missions? At eight o'c'ork a repetition lesson, at nine a writing. ,, 
 
 " 7. Are you present, or vour usher, iluriujj the aoove time ? Master, 
 for an hour ; at ten the husine-s of the school ajiain begins, and <s con- 
 tinued till twelve; durinsr which time the master or uher attends to the 
 business of the school. This took place whilst any number of boys at- 
 tended; at twelve a writing master till one; from three to n've m the 
 school. 
 
 " 8. Query; the system of teaching f The Eton grammars and plan, 
 of education. 
 
 " 9. Are the boys examined, and classed according to their merits ? 
 This plan would be adopted were the number sufficient. 
 
 *' 10. Who keeps the school i repair ? The master and usher keep 
 the school in repair. 
 
 " 11. Are the school revennes at all under the management of Ui 
 trustees ? The revenues exclusively under the management ut the mas- 
 ter and usher, as a corporation, with the exception of the master's house 
 and two closes which belong exclusively to him.
 
 46 POCKLINGTON SCHOOL,. 
 
 . " 12. Do you employ a competent usher ? The usher, the Rev, 
 Thomas Brown, who had been accustomed to the business of instruction, 
 I conceive to be perfectly competent, with the exception of an infirmity, 
 that of deafness, under which he has lately laboured. 
 
 " T. Shield." 
 
 We have to add, that, when we were there, we called the parishioners 
 together, and the school-room was the place where they met, of course; 
 the master could not at that time be employed in the school in teaching 
 the young man. 
 
 What did you do at this time of the meeting of the parishioners ? We 
 had prepared certain questions which we wished to ask. 
 
 Have you got them here? We have; these are the questions and 
 those are the answers, as far as they have any answers returned to 
 them. 
 
 They txiere delivered in and ready as follow :] 
 
 " Questions proposed to the Parishioners of Pocklington 
 School. 
 
 ** 1. Is the original charter or endowment in your possession > 
 
 " 2. Are any statutes or regulations for the government of the 
 school ? 
 
 ' 3. Where are they usually lodged ? 
 
 " 4. Hag the master regularly taught school since his appointment, 
 if not, to what has it been owing, and during what period has the school 
 been neglected ? 
 
 " 5. What number of scholars has he at present, and what number 
 has he had ; the greatest number since his appointment ? 
 
 " 6. Are there any scholars peculiarly called free, i. e. who claim 
 particular privileges ? 
 
 " 7. Is a register of their admission and departure from the school re- 
 gularly kept ? 
 
 " 8. What number of hours is the school opened during the day; are 
 the master and usher, or either, present during that time ? 
 
 " 9. What holidays are usually allowed, daily ; what vacations ? 
 
 " 10. Under the existing circumstances of the school, are the parenti 
 desirous to send thuir children ? 
 
 " 11. Does the master refuse to admit them, and if he does refuse, 
 .does he assign any reason for that refusal ? 
 
 " 12. Is the general conduct of the master satisfactory towards those 
 who are admitted ; or what complaints have you to make ? 
 
 " 13. What is the state of the school funds ? 
 
 " 14. On whose recommendation was the usher elected; were his 
 qualifications ascertained by previous examination or satisfactory tes- 
 timonials. 
 
 " 15. Had he acquitted himself properly ? 
 
 " 16. Do you know on what terms the usher is engaged ? 
 October 27, 1817. 
 
 " To question 4th. Mr. Kettlewell, who attended the school, states, 
 that Mr. Shield did not attend the school regularly during the year and 
 half he was a scholar. Frequently not there after breakfast, and no per- 
 son deputed to attend for him ; the number then at school, was about 8 
 or 10. The nominal hours were one hour before breakfast, from 1 to 
 12, and from 3 to 5.
 
 POCKLINGTON SCHOOL. , 47 
 
 " Mr. James Powell has a boy under Mr. Newby ; he would have sent 
 him to this school had it been properly conducted. Mr. Richard Bell, 3 ; 
 Mi 1 . Loftus, 1 ; Mr. Linwood, 1 ; Mr. T. Scaife, 2; Mr. Bagley, 2; Mr. 
 Hornby, 1 ; his brother Mr. H. was himself refused admission, as stated 
 in the memorial. Some of the above parishioners have sent their sons 
 to other grammar schools, for want of proper instruction here. It is the 
 opinion of the inhabitants, that the town and neighbourhood would send 
 a large number to the school, were it properly conducted. 
 
 " A question has been started, whether the school be opened as a free 
 school to any other than the residents in the parish of Pocklington. 
 
 " 15. The usher is stated to have been subject to a great degree of 
 deafness at the time of his appointment, and a strong objection was made 
 to him on that ground by a great number of parishioners, including one 
 of the churchwardens. On this point see a petition from the parishioner! 
 to the churchwardens. 
 
 " The letter here referred to was produced, and contains in substance 
 what is here stated. 
 
 " No other complaint is made of Mr. Shield's severity, besides that of 
 Mr. Hornby. 
 
 " Certified by Mr. Hugh Ibbetson, from information of bis nephew 
 and son. The Reverend Kingsman Basket, Charter House Hail, will give 
 any information relative to the usher's salary, or any other matter 
 respecting the school." 
 
 There were some questions also put to the usher, and the answers to 
 them; the questions were put to the different parties separately, not in 
 the presence of each other. 
 
 [They were delivered In and ready as follow."] 
 Questions for the Usher. 
 
 " 1. When were you appointed, and by whom ? 
 
 " 2. What salary do you receive as usher ; to what are you entitled 
 by the endowment j has this been regularly paid ? 
 
 " 3. During what portion of the day are you expected to attend the 
 school ? 
 
 " 4. What classes of boys do you attend to ? 
 
 " 5. What grammars are used, and books read, and exercises per- 
 formed, in your classes ? 
 
 " 6. What hours do you attend in the school ; do you reside in Pock- 
 lington ? 
 
 " 7. Have you the privilege of taking boarders in your house ? 
 Oct. 27, 1817. 
 
 jfcw/i.'io-rjoj r'^^,% oJj wi 21." 
 Answer to the Queries proposed to the Usher. 
 
 " 1. The usher's appointment took place Oct. 28, 1811, by an election 
 of the master and churchwardens. 
 
 " 2. The salary received amounts to one-third of the rents f the 
 estate on a valuation of the land at that time, which was about 700/. a 
 year. Mr. Brown took 200/- a year as a fair equivalent, free of all de- 
 ductions. The salary has been regularly paid. 
 
 " 3. Times of attendance when any number of scholars are at school, 
 were 8 o'clock (7 in summer) quarter past 10 and 3. The usher has 
 the privilege of taking boarders, but his house is too small to accommo- 
 date them. 
 
 " Thot. Brown."
 
 48 POCKLINGTON SCHOOI/. 
 
 Did you learn any thing further respecting the management of this 
 school ? The parishioners made their complaint, and we submitted 
 questions to them ; and the substance of the information we obtained is 
 given in the answers. 
 
 Did you bear of other complaints, besides those adverted to ? No, we 
 did not. 
 
 What order did you make after this visitation ? It was our duty to 
 report to the head of our house, and for him to make his order ; and we 
 had nothing further to do with it. 
 
 D'd you learn any thing at Pocklington, respecting the revenues of the 
 school ? We understood from the master himself, that he had succeeded 
 in many of his Chancery suits, but that he still was in Chancery;' and I 
 am not aware that we heard the amount of the revenues ; no precise sum 
 was stated ; the parishioners stated it at a very large Sum, but the mas- 
 ter said they had considerably over- rated it. 
 
 What was the sum you heard rumoured in the parish ? They men- 
 tioned about 1,200/. or more. 
 
 What did the master say to that statement ? He said it was over- 
 rated. 
 
 Did he toll you what they really were ? I think he mentioned, that 
 from 800/. to,900/. a year he had at present made. 
 
 Did he include under that the amount of fines taken under the leases - 
 He did not specify the nature of the property. 
 
 Do you know how the lands are let? They were let, we understood, 
 when he came to them, and had been let on long leases. 
 
 For huw long ? I cannot say. 
 
 Did you understand he had set aside any of those leases, on account 
 of the length of the term ? We understood so from his statement, by a 
 suit in equity. 
 
 Does he let now upon lease ? That I cannot say. 
 
 Did you understand that a rise of rents was expected by the master 
 from the present time ? From the estates he had recovered. (We wish 
 to speak very guardedly on these points, because we did not examine 
 into them.) 
 
 To Dr. WoodJ\ When the visitors had made their report to you, what 
 order did you make in consequence ? I wrote to the master, stating to 
 him certain suggestions for the regulation of Pocklington school ; with 
 the permission of the Committee, I will deliver in both the letter and the 
 regulations. 
 
 [They tvere read, as follow:] 
 Suggestions for the Regulation of Pocklington School. 
 
 That prayers be read at seven o'clock in the morning from Lady-day 
 to Michaelmas, and at eight from Michaelmas to Lady-day, after which 
 the business of the school shall continue till nine o'clock ; in each case 
 it shall be resumed at ten, and continue till twelve; at two in the after- 
 noon it shall re-commence, and continue till four o'clock from Mi- 
 chaelmas to Lady-day, and till five o'clock from Lady-day to Michael- 
 mas ; and at the close of the whole prayers shall be read. 
 
 The master or the usher, or both, shall attend during these hours. 
 
 That a register shall be kept of the time when each boy enters the 
 school, and when he leaves it, bis age at admission, and the place of his 
 birtb.
 
 POCKLINGTON SCHOOL. 49 
 
 That if any boy sHall absent himself from the business of the school 
 at one time, or at separate times, more than three weeks in one year, 
 unless from illness, or with the approbation and consent of the 
 master, he shall be considered as having left the school, and the circum- 
 stances of the case shall be entered in the register ; this however 
 shall not prevent the re-admission of the boy, if the master thinks it 
 proper. 
 
 That an efficient usher shall be appointed without delay. 
 St. John's, January 6, 1818. 
 
 Dear Sir, 
 
 In the preceding pages you have the regulations which appear to me 
 to be absolutely necessary for the proper management of Pocklington 
 school. In drawing* them up, 1 have had the assistance of the seniors, 
 who tell me, however, that the superintendance of the school rests 
 wholly with myself. 
 
 If you have any observations to make upon them, or any others to 
 suggest, I shall consider your suggestions with the utmost attention ; in 
 the meantime, 1 trust these will be put in force, and immediately. 
 Believe me, my dear Sir, 
 
 Your faithful humble Servant, 
 St. John's, January 6, 1S18. J. WOOD. 
 
 Have you given any order for admitting boys free without expense ? 
 He has never refused any, except in one particular case. 
 
 Do you state this from your own knowledge, r from the represen- 
 tation of the master himself? His representation, and the representation 
 of the parishioners. 
 
 What is the case to which you allude ? The case of a boy, which I 
 examined into, when I was down there ; he had been at the school some 
 time ago, and was punished for his neglect and inattention, and the 
 father removed him from the school in consequence; that happened 
 about five years ago. On Monday last he applied to be re-admitted 
 into the school ; he is now between eighteen and nineteen. I could not 
 exactly learn where he had been ; he had been at some other school 
 in the interval; but, on examination, I found he had also been a me- 
 thodist preacher, and. 1 presume, is so now. The master refused to 
 admit him, and I thought it a reasonable ground of refusal. 
 
 To what do you ascribe there being so few scholars, if he refused none 
 who applied ? I rather think that it was awing to the circumstance 
 that appears in one of those questions, that the usher became deaf, and 
 was therefore not capable of teaching. 
 
 Does the master not teach himsell ? Yes. 
 
 Was there any impediment to prevent him from teaching more than 
 one ? Not that I know of. 
 
 How did he account for not having more than one boy at the school 
 himself? That I do not know. 
 
 To Mr. Hornbuckle and Mr. Calv.ert.'} How did the master account 
 to you for not having more than one boy in the school ? Partly from 
 his other engagements, and from his long absences in town on account 
 of his lawsuits. 
 
 How many inhabitants do you apprehend there are in Pocklington ? 
 Speaking merely from the size of the town, I should suppose about 2000 j 
 it is a small market town. 
 
 Did you understand, that though he never positively refused a boy, 
 that he, by his conduct, so acted as to prevent boys from being put 
 to the school ? -There was one complaint, which has been alluded 
 
 O
 
 50 POCKLINGTON SCHOOL. 
 
 to by Dr. Wood, of his having flogged a boy, and his father had taken 
 him away. 
 
 Was it compla'ned, ,that that flogging which had been given was 
 jn consequence of some inquiries made by the father as to the mis- 
 management of the schol ? That was not the statement of the 
 master himself; his statement was, that it was for the misconduct of 
 the boy. 
 
 Did you hear any other statement ? I believe another statement ap- 
 pears in the answers to the questions. 
 
 Mr. Culvert.] I recollect it was insinuated at the time, that he was 
 flogged severely in consequence ot his father having taken some measures 
 respecting the management of the school. 
 
 Mr. Hornbuckle.'} The father brought him back in about a fortnight, 
 and tendered him again ; but the master refused to receive him, as the 
 father had taken him away. 
 
 Did you two gentlemen go the other day with Dr. Wood ? -No. 
 
 To Dr. Wwd.~\ Your orders having been given last January, when 
 you went to Pocklington, did you find they had been complied with ? 
 I did. 
 
 In all respects ? Yes, as far as I could observe. 
 
 The scholars have increased from one to eight ? Yei. 
 
 Was the uslier.a competent persou ? The usher is a part of the cor- 
 poration ; they have got an assistant who is a proper person 
 
 Was the other usher not capable of being removed ? I fancy not. 
 
 To what do you ascribe there being only eight children at an ex- 
 cellent free school, in so considerable a place as Pocklington ? 1 really 
 do not know j one person told me he had two sons, whom he would 
 send directly to the school ; but I do not know how it happens there ar 
 so few. 
 
 Is the master of the school the parson of the parish of Pocklington ? 
 No. 
 
 Who is the parson ? I do not know who is in the possession of the 
 living. 
 
 Is it a college living ? It is not ours ; Pocklington is a grammar 
 school by the foundation, and it is possible the parents of the children 
 may not be desirous of having their children so instructed. 
 
 Is, by the foundation, nothing to be taught but grammar ? I believe 
 so ; it is a grammar school only. 
 
 Does that preclude the master from leaching reading, writing, and 
 arithmetic ? I do not know that it precludes him ; but 1 shall insist upon 
 his attending to the other. 
 
 Were writing and arithmetic ever taught at the school, as far as 
 you can learn ? I believe it was, by an assistant, out of the regular 
 school hours. 
 
 Did the visitor, or supposed visitor, ever interfere to prevent his 
 teaching reading, writing, &c. as being inconsistent with the- foun- 
 dation ? 1 believe not; l>ut I can only answer for myself. 
 
 Do you understand, by scientia gramatiralis, instruction confined 
 purely to grammar? To the learned languages, I do. 
 
 Is not English grammar a part of scientia gramaticalis; and is not 
 the circumstance of this b< ing in Latin a mere accident, from the prac- 
 tice of the times? I conceive from the practice of the times, it is 
 grammar and the learned languages. 
 
 Upon what is that construction of words founded ? I cannot pretend 
 to say, but that is the impressicn upon my mind ; and 1 think there is 
 another reason, that these scholars are to come properly instructed i* 
 grammar aud the learned languages, to St. John's College.
 
 POCKLTNGTON SCHOOL. 5j 
 
 Supposing scientia gramaticalis to comprehend grammar and the 
 learned languages, as well as English grammar, would not then the 
 requisition be complied with, in respect to the scholarship* ? If they 
 were sufficiently instructed in the learned languages, no doubt. 
 
 Would they be worse instructed in the learned languages for having 
 been instructed to read English also ? There can be no doubt as to the 
 answer to that question ; but I suppose they are to come so far prepared 
 to Pocklington school. 
 
 At the time of the foundation of Pocklington school, was there any 
 other school for teaching English ? I do not know. 
 
 Did you ever hear of any ? It was founded in the time of Henry VIII. 
 and I do not recollect that I have. 
 
 Is there any limit to the age of the boys when they come ? Not that 
 I know of. 
 
 What are the scholarships worth at St. John's r That depends upon 
 the scholar's residence. 
 
 If he resides ? That depends also upon the number of scholars. 
 
 How many are there at present? I cannot tell; I believe five OB 
 Dr. Dowman's foundation. 
 
 Are they paid out of the revenues of Pocklington scheol ? No, not at 
 all; they are paid out of the college revenues; we have nothing to do 
 with the Pocklington school revenues. 
 
 Do you know of any other outgoing from Pocklington, except the 
 master and usher's salary ? No. 
 
 Is there any salary fixed for the master or usher ? I believe not, as far 
 as I know. 
 
 Has the master the rest, after paying the usher and the expenses of 
 the school? I understood from the master, that the usher has one- 
 third, and he two-thirds ; that that has been the rule, though I do net 
 find it on the deeds. 
 
 How many fellowships are there of St. John's, Cambridge? Fifty* 
 three foundation fellowships, and about eight or nine bye-fellowships; 
 but I do not know tvhether they are all filled ; I understand there are 
 seven. 
 
 What is the fellowship commimibus annis worth ? That I cannot say, 
 the value depends upon such a variety of circumstances. 
 
 What is the most you have known them worth in anyone year? 
 That depends upon a man's commons, so that it is impossible for me to 
 say ; the sen or fellowships are worth more than the others. 
 
 Confine your attention to the senior fellowships, and to the part 
 which consists in money payments ; what have you known any senior 
 fellow receive in money in any one year? 140?. I think, is the highest 
 dividend, in money, I ever remember; and the half of 140/. making 
 in all 2IO/ that is the highest 1 ever remember to a senior fellow. 
 
 Are the college leases let upon tines ? Some are, and some are not. 
 
 Are the fines divided to increase the fellowships ? They are made part 
 of the college fund". 
 
 Aits fellowships increased according to the amount of the fines in, 
 any one year ? I believe our dividends depend upon the residue, after> 
 all expenses are paid. 
 
 Are not the fellowships increased according to the amount of the. 
 fines? If the fines are greater, the fellowships must be greater. 
 
 Besides the fellowships, suppose a man resides, what advantages has 
 he? He has his commons; his rooms he has whether he resides or 
 not ; he has either the rooms, or the value of them. 
 
 Suppose he does not reside, and has a commutation for bis rooms, 
 G 2
 
 52 POCKL1NGTON SCHOOL. 
 
 what are they worth ? The highest value is 13/. a year, and the lowest 
 about 4 '. or 5/. 
 
 The master has a double senior fellowship ? Yes ; three junior fellow- 
 ships, or two senior fellowships. 
 
 Has he any other emoluments ? Yes. 
 
 State them ? I enjoy an estate, which was left to the master, of 
 about 100/. a year, and some other emoluments which I cannot enume- 
 rate now. 
 
 . Are there many livings in the gift of St. John's ? A considerahle 
 number. 
 
 Can they be hoi Jon with fellowships any of them ? Not one j the 
 statutes forbid it. 
 
 Are there not livings in the gift of other patrons, to which fellows of 
 St. John's might be presented ? There are five livings in the gift of the 
 Duke of .Norfolk, or his executors or assigns, which he devised to be 
 sold. 
 
 Which might be given to persons who are at the moment of presenta- 
 tion, fellows of St. John's ? Yes. 
 
 Are those valuable livings ? They are good livings, I believe. 
 
 What is the greatest amount ? I cannot say exactly. 
 
 Have you heard ? They talk of one being worth about 1000/. a year. 
 
 Who elect the fellows of St. John's ? The master and eight seniors. 
 
 Has any instance been known, of a person nearly connected with the 
 patron of any of those five livings, being elected a fellow of St. John's ? 
 Yes, several. 
 
 In those eases, were the persons elected fellows, known to be connected 
 with the patron of the livings? I conceive so; there was one fellow, I 
 recollect very well, who was a relation, and I dare say there are other 
 instances. 
 
 Was he a near relation ? I do not know. 
 
 Does he hold one of the livings now ? Yes. 
 
 Suppose a person was likely to be elected a fellow, and that any 
 relation- of his became the purchaser of one of these valuable advowsons, 
 do you take upon you to represent to this Committee, that that circum- 
 stance would make no difference whatsoever, in his chance of obtaining a 
 fellowship ? Not the least. 
 
 If any reports of a contrary tendency have been circulated, are they 
 utterly devoid of foundation? I believe them to be totally devoid of 
 foundation, and entirely slanderous. 
 
 How long have you been connected with the college ? Nearly 40 
 years, and I have never known an instance to justify such an insinua- 
 tion. 
 
 Are there any other livings in the gift of private patrons, to which th 
 fellows of St. John's must be elected, besides those ? None. 
 
 The college livings go according to seniority, as usual? Yes. 
 
 Have the statutes of St. John's ever been printed ? No, never, I 
 believe, but there are plenty of copies. 
 
 Ta Mr. HornhuckleandMr.Calvert.'] Have you heard the last questions 
 that have been put to the reverend master ? Yes. 
 
 Do you entirely concur in the answers given, according to your expe- 
 rience and knowledge ? Yes, perfectly. 
 
 Did you ever happen to hear rumours to the effect to which those 
 questions referred ? I cannot say I ever did. 
 
 Were the questions put today, the first intimation you ever had of 
 suspicion being entertained in any quarter whatever, respecting the ru- 
 mours of such a practice ? Yes; it is the first time I ever beard it 
 mentioned.
 
 POCKLINGTON SCHOOL. 53 
 
 But if such rumours had been propagated, do you entirely concur with 
 the reverend master, that they have no foundation in truth ? Entirely, 
 as far as our experience goes. 
 
 How long has the muster of the school at Pocklington, been absent at 
 a time ? I really cannot take upon myself to say, unless it appears by 
 the papers given in. 
 
 To Mr. Calvert.} Did you make any inquiry, when you were at Pock- 
 lington, as to the attendance of the master? That was a part of the 
 questions ; we refer to the papers ; I beg to state, in consequence of some 
 statements made by the parishioners, we thought it right to put an 
 additional number of questions to the master, which comprised in our 
 view, all the subjects of complaint. 
 
 " Question 1. Have you been lately absent nearly 12 months ? 
 " 2. Did you take any papers from the church chest, and have you 
 " returned them ? 
 
 " 3. What stipend do you pay the usher j was he appointed uncon- 
 " ditionally ? 
 
 ' 4. Did you ever refuse re-admission to Mr. Hornby's son, and to 
 " admit another son of his ? 
 
 " 5. Was the school room ever used as a carpeater's shop for any 
 * length of time ? 
 
 " 6. Did Mr. Shield promise Mr. Bagley to provide an able and 
 " sufficient person, before Christmas 1816, in the stead of Mr. Brown* 
 
 7. What sum was paid for dilapidations by the representatives of 
 *' the late master, and bow was it applied ?" 
 
 " Ans. 1. With the most painful feelings I have to state, in reply to 
 the first question, that in consequence of the very extraordinary pressure 
 of the times, and the losses 1 sustained last year, I was unable to fulfil 
 iny pecuniary engagements. The subsequent rigorous proceedings of 
 the Pocklington Canal company, and another creditor, have compelled 
 me, much against my inclination, to be absent a great deal from borne 
 during the last 10 months; and I should certainly have appointed a 
 iubstitute to attend the school, if there had been any scholars to be 
 taught; but I had been constantly resident for many months before 
 that time, and no one either then or since applied for admission. 
 
 ** 2. Soon after my appointment to the mastership, I procured from 
 the college treasury, the copy of a schedule of writings relating to 
 Pocklington school, stated to be deposited in a chest in the vestry ; I 
 ent to the persons possessing the keys, and in their presence the chest 
 was opened, wherein I found a number of small wooden boxes, in which 
 the deeds of the several estates seemed to have been separately kept, 
 but which then contained only their reliques, the greater part of them 
 Slaving been eaten or reduced to powder by the worms. Out of the 
 whole number I found only two that were sufficiently perfect to be 
 legible; these were small deeds (dated in Hen. VIII.) relating to an 
 estate at York, which I brought away, and had them repaired ; they 
 are now kept in my possession with the other writings belonging to the 
 school, and were exhibited to the visitors ; had I returned them to the 
 chest, they must very soon have shared the fate of the others. I think 
 much blame imputable to the persons in whose care these writings were 
 deposited, which after being preserved for some centuries, have through 
 negligence been lately destroyed. 
 
 " 3. The usher was appointed unconditionally; his stipend since the 
 leases were set aside, has been 200/. a year, which sum when the very 
 great and continued expenses that have been incurred sice my appoint- 
 ment are taken into consideration, will I think appear to be equal to a 
 third part of the clear income of the estates, which share I understand
 
 54 POOKLTNGTON SCHOOfc. 
 
 the usher used to receive in the time of the late master, but I have not 
 yet seen any document by which it appears that the usher is intitled to 
 that share. 
 
 " 4. Mr. Hornby took away his son from the school, because I punished 
 him for repeated carelessness and idleness; I therefore refused to re- 
 admit, but I never refused to admit any other son of his. 
 
 " 5. The room which has always bepn used as the school since my 
 residence here, has never to my knowledge, been used for any other 
 purpose. The room which was formerly used as the school, I found to 
 be very damp, having a brick floor, considerably below the surface of the 
 adjacent ground, and a small fire place insufficient for so large a room ; 
 I therefore thought, it would be conducive to the health and comfort of 
 the scholars, to make use of a room over the old school, which is much 
 more convenient for a small number. The room formerly used as the 
 school, has been used occasionally for the purpose of preparing timber 
 and other materials for repairing the school and the master's house, and 
 doing other repairs about the premises. 
 
 " 6. In a conversation with Mr. Bagley a little before last Christmas, 
 I assured him that if he would send his sons to school, I would take care 
 that they should be properly instructed ; and if I found that Mr. Brown 
 was, through the impediment in his hearing, incapable of teaching, I 
 would see that a proper person should be employed to attend the school 
 for him ; there were at that time no scholars, and Mr. Bagley never 
 applied to have his sons admitted. 
 
 " 7. I received 100/. for dilapidations from the representatives of the 
 late master, part of which sum has been expended in repairing that part 
 of the master's house which is not intended to be altered, and the re- 
 mainder in the purchase of materials (which are now upon the premises,) 
 for repairing the school and the master's house ; I have also expended 
 a considerable sum in converting an old barn near the master's house, 
 into a chaise house, saddle house arid granary, and large sums in build- 
 ings and improvements on the farms, which will appear in my report. 
 
 Mr. Richard Bayne Blamire, called in ; and Examined. 
 
 Do you know what the revenues of Pocklington school are ? I do not. 
 
 Are the lands at Pocklington let upon lease ? Some of them were let 
 upon lease, and those leases were avoided ; whether they are let on lease 
 now I do not know. 
 
 Were they avoided on account of the length ? I believe not j I think 
 there was an informality. 
 
 Were they very long leases ? No, merely husbandry leases. 
 
 Are the lands usually let upon fine ? I believe not; some of them 
 have been formerly, but not now. 
 
 Do you know the extent of the estates ? It cannot be ascertained 
 how many acres there are, in consequence of a dispute about part of 
 the estate. 
 
 How long has it been in dispute?: About four years j the dispute is 
 very near concluded, I believe. 
 
 Do you mean by that that the counsel have concluded their argu- 
 ment, and that it waits for the court's judgment ? The court has 
 directed a commission to issue for setting out the lauds, and it has been 
 suspended in consequence of a communication with the parties, for the 
 last twelve months. 
 
 Have you ever known a cause, after having been finally heard in the
 
 MERE CHARITY. 65 
 
 Court of Chancery, set down for judgment, and the court not give its 
 judgment on the day appointed ? Very frequently. 
 
 Is it usual for a cause to be set down fur judgment on a particular 
 day, and the court to give judgment on that day ? There are more 
 frequent disappointments there than in any of the o'.ber courts. 
 
 When a cause is set down for judgment, is there a fee paid of ten 
 shillings upon that attendance to the Solicitor of each party ? Always. 
 
 My lord Erskine's order? Yes; and thirteen and fourpence when 
 the judgment is given. 
 
 Is there any other expense attending these appointments and disap- 
 pointments of the parties? Frequently. 
 
 What are those expenses? Occasionally fees to counsel, in the 
 nature of refreshers. 
 
 Is there any expense of short-hand writers employed to be in attend- 
 ance paid for that, and leaving the court without doing any thing for 
 their money, and obliged to be in attendance upon the same terms with 
 the same result another day? Unquestionably; where the parties 
 employ a short-hand writer for the purpose of taking notes, they are 
 subject to the same disappointments. 
 
 Is it usual in matters of any moment to retain a short-hand writer 
 for that purpose, when his lordship's judgment is expected ? Very 
 commonly, when the case is important. 
 
 Are tUo-e fees and expenses all the same he the amount of the matter 
 in dispute great or small ? The solicitor's fees are. 
 
 And the short-baud writer's fees? Yes; precisely the same in all 
 case?. 
 
 Though there may be some difference as to the fees to counsel, there 
 is none as to short-hand writers ? No, there is not : but the fees to 
 counsel depend upon the exe cUe ot the solicitor's discretion. 
 
 Is there any case of a decision ueh>g expected in a matter relating to 
 a charity, in which those expense* attending snort-hand writers are not 
 gone through ? t have no knowledge of their expenses. 
 
 From the nature of the subject, should not you as a solicitor, yourself, 
 deem it your duty to have a short-band note of the Lord Chancellor's 
 judgment upon a matter relating to a charity ? Not upon all occasions. 
 
 In such case, is it not more usual to consider such a precaution ne- 
 cessary than in cases of private property ? That depends upon the 
 nature of the question. 
 
 In any considerable case, would not that be the course? It would 
 be prudent to do so certainly, but there are many considerations to be 
 weighed before we should adopt that ; tne suit I speak of was before 
 the Vice-Chancellor and not before the Lord Chancellor. 
 
 MERE CHARITY. < 
 
 June 2. 
 
 Mr. Richard Damson, called in ; and Examined. 
 
 Where do you live ? At Bracebridge, in the city of Lincoln. 
 Are you steward of the charity at Mere ? Yes, I have always paid 
 the bedes money. 
 
 Vou are called steward ? Ye.
 
 66 MERE CHARITY. 
 
 [The witness delivered in luoo letters, which were read, as 
 follow .-3 
 
 Sin, Cardington, near Bedford, Augusts, 1811, 
 
 WHEN Mr. Gardner delivered tome your letter, containing the in- 
 formation of the death of Mr. Alderman Gibbison, he accompanied it 
 with a recommendation of you to be appointed his successor in the 
 office of agent to the warden of the hospital of the Mere, near Lincoln, 
 which recommendation has been strengthened since by that of Mr. 
 Burcham likewise; in consequence whereof, I do hereby nominate 
 and appoint you to be my agent in transacting the affairs of that 
 hospital, the principal of which are as follow, viz. to receive of Mr. 
 Manby, the lessee, the annual reserved rents, and pay them to the 
 warden and six brethren, i. e. the snm of eight pounds to the former, 
 and four to each of the latter j aud, upon any vacancy happening, by 
 death of any of the brethren, to recommend a proper person to be by 
 me nominated in his room; the qualifications which I wish to have 
 chiefly regarded in the recommendation of any one, are, his being 
 advanced in age, labouring under his infirmities, of an honest and 
 sober conversation, and a member of the church of England, and 
 not receiving parochial relief. I believe the payments are made half 
 yearly to the brethren at Michaelmas and Ladyday, of two pounds 
 to each ; the payment to the warden you may remit yearly, with an 
 account of the year's receipt, stating the names of the brethren to 
 whom the half yearly payments have been made, taking a receipt of 
 every one of them, to be kept for mine and Mr. Manby's satisfaction, 
 that the payments are regularly made. The agent deducts one 
 pound for his trouble from the annual rent paid to the warden, 
 which leaves seven pounds to be annually remitted to me. These are 
 all the instructions which at present occur to me, to be given for the 
 regulating of your conduct as agent to the warden, to which I have 
 to add a request, that you will satisfy every inquiry made by either 
 Mr. Gardner or Mr. Burcham, whenever they may have occasion to 
 inspect the estate belonging to the hospital. And wishing you health 
 and happiness, 1 remain. Sir, 
 
 Your humble serx'ant, 
 
 F. Cuntmiig. 
 Warden of the Hospital of Mere. 
 
 If you are ignorant of the names of the present brethren, they shall 
 bp made known to you, upon application by letter either to me or 
 Mr. Gardner. 
 To Mr. Daxson. 
 
 SIR, Cardington, May 19, 1817. 
 
 I HAVE just received from Mr. Gardner the sum of seven pounds, 
 which, with one pound allowed for agency, make eight pounds, being 
 a year's reserved rent, due at Ladyday last past, from John Manby, 
 esq. lessee of the hospital of the Mere, near Lincoln, to the master or 
 warden of the said hospital, and for the trouble you have taken in 
 leaving the same with Mr. Gardner, I desire my best thanks may be 
 acceptable, and with wishing you and family the enjoyment of health 
 I remain, Sir, 
 
 Your obedient servant, 
 
 To Mr. Dawson, F. Camming. 
 
 : 
 
 Do you receive all the rents of the Mere charity estate ? There are
 
 MERE CHARITY. 57 
 
 4J2/. paid by Mr. Manby, who is the lessee, and I pay six poor men 4/. 
 each. 
 
 Which makes 24/. a year ? Yes, the warden gets 8/. and he returns 
 me I/, for agency* 
 
 From your situation as steward to the property, you are perhaps well 
 acquainted with its extent and situation ?- I occupy part of it. 
 What part of it.? About 224 acres. 
 
 Do you know the extent of the whole of the charity estate ? I cannot 
 say, to be exact ; had I been aware of the inquiry, I might have seen 
 what the quantity was in Mr. Manby's writings, but I never had any 
 thoughts of its being inquired into. I did not know of my coming up 
 but a few hours before I set off. I think it is 600 acres and upwards. 
 
 HHS the estate been enclosed lately? Yes, iu the year 1790 Mr. 
 Manby spent a great deal of money in fencing it. 
 
 What r.ut do you pay for the part you hold of that property? My 
 Jand is' intermixed with Mr- Manby's freehold, and my rent is estimated 
 at 1 0*. 6d. per acre. 
 
 Then is the committee to understand that you are the lessee, and that 
 Mr. Manby holds the whole of the property ?-- Yes, I rent the free- 
 hold and part of the leasehold of him, for which I give him IQs. 6d. an 
 acre. 
 
 What term have you iu that estate ? I began in the year 1790 at 
 *7*. for eleven years; then in 1802, 1 renewed, two years before my lease 
 was out, at 10$. 6d. per acre. 
 
 Did you, on renewing your lease, pay any fine ? No ; I rent free- 
 hold of Mr. Man''y, at different rents, which are specified. Some land, 
 I rent at 2'. an acre. 
 
 On renewing your lease on the late occasion, at 10*. 6d. per acre, did 
 you pay any pecuniary fine for it? Nothing at all for it. 
 
 Do you know the rent paid by Mr. Manby for the whole of the 
 .estate ? I do not ; I never heard it spoken of; I recollect Mr. Manby 
 saying, that the bishop of Ely was the warden some time back. 
 
 Who is the present warden ? The Rev. Dr. John Prettyman ; he 
 has not been read in long ; he was only read in, as well as I can recollect, 
 the twenty-third of last June. 
 
 How many paupers are there now upon that charity ? Six. 
 
 Was there ever more than six in your recollection ?- -Never; my 
 father was born upon the estate ; and I suppose our whole family has 
 been upwards of 200 years upon the estate. 
 
 You are confident that, within the recollection of your family, there 
 has never been more than six poor men? Yes; there are six poor 
 men who are paid yearly four pounds each. 
 
 It is your duty to distribute the rent in the way you have stated ?- 
 I do. 
 
 Can you tell what becomes of the additional rent, arising from the 
 renewals, because you have stated that you yourself paid 10*. 6d. an 
 acre ? I always thought Mr. Manby was the same as myself, a tenant 
 to the estate; and what accumulation arose from that, he applied to 
 his own purpose ; he renews, as far as 1 know, his lease, which is 21 
 years, every seven years. 
 
 Upon payment of a fine to the warden? Yes, upon payment of a- 
 fine to the warden. 
 
 Is that fine governed by any particular principle ; is it a certain 
 fine ? No ; I never heard that it was such ; I always understood that 
 it was as Mr. Manby and the warden might agree ; just as it may 
 happen. 
 
 You are not acqaafcted with the rent paid by Mr. Manby > 1 am 
 
 H
 
 58 MERE CHARITY. 
 
 not; I believe that at this time the lease is running out; he did net 
 think it worth his notice to renew it ; I think there are six years to go 
 the 4th of next February. 
 
 Can you give the Committee any information what becomes of thoe 
 fines you speak oi ; Mr. Manby, by your statement, pay* a certain 
 fine every seven years ; to whom does he pay it r To the waiden; 
 
 Is any part of the fine, to your knowledge and belief, appropriated 
 towards the uses of th: j charry ? -There has never been a sixpence 
 paid to tlie charity from (he estate, except the six 4/. and the 8/. the 
 warden pets yearly, out of which he pays me M. 
 
 Did you ever see, or did you ever hear, any particulars of the dis- 
 position- of the founder of this charity, as to the application o 1 the 
 funds ? No ; I always understood that it was left by Mi< hael Robed. 
 
 For what purpose did he lea\e it ?--- To these six poor men ; that is 
 what it was left for. 
 
 Left what ? This piece of ground ro these six men, and to this poor 
 warden to read to them as a residentiary. 
 
 How often ? As often as necessary. 
 
 No specific time that you know of ? There has not been, within my 
 recollection, any chapel or any kind of church, nor have I ever heard tell 
 of any one having been up. 
 
 You have seen the foundation of one, have you not ? There are a great 
 many foundations 3 it seems as ii it had once bet-n a town; there is 
 nothing upon the estate, but a farm house and a building or two. 
 
 What was the name of the last warden ? Mr. Cummin&s, of Carding- 
 ton, near Bedford. 
 
 Are you acquainted with his reasons for the resignation of that office ? 
 I am not ; he hardly thought it was worth holding, I suppose; it was 
 only a small fine, and it comes only once in seven years. 
 
 Tliar fine is not an annual payment? No, it is not; bnt, as to the 
 fine, I know nothing of it ; I was quite a stranger to the circumstance 
 that Mr. Prettyman was coming to be rend in. 
 
 The Committee ask you, as a farmer, what is the value of that estate 
 per annum ? Some people will give more than others; but, in the way 
 I farm my land. I do not think that a man could afford to give much 
 more for it than 1 do. 
 
 The Committee understand that this estate is situated upon Lincoln 
 Heath, about five miles from the city of Lincoln, and they ask you, 
 whether that land does not let well? I can hardly speak to that. 
 
 Is it liable to the payment of great tithe? No; it is not liable to 
 great tithe. 
 
 Or poor rates ? No. 
 
 Then do you mean to state to the Committee, as your opinion, that 
 land so situated, and not liable to great tithes or poor rates, is not worth 
 more than 12*. per acre? There is land which is let for more; I give 
 myself 2/. an acre for land, near Lincoln, but that is meadow land; it is 
 very different land from the other ; this is heath land. 
 
 There are about 650 acres of this estate, are there not ? I believe 
 there are. 
 
 Are you sure there are not 700 acres? I cannot speak to that ; there 
 are three different farms intermixed with the freehold. 
 
 Are you not clear in 5 r our own mind that that tithe-free estate is well 
 worth 20f. an acre ? Why, I should think it would be more than a man 
 could pay rent at ; I would not give that myself, that is the best paof I 
 can give. 
 
 Have you very few inhabitants in Mere .'There is only one resident 
 inhabitant at Mere.
 
 MERE CHARITY. 59 
 
 What was the assessment to the property tax for tljat property ? I 
 do not know. 
 
 What did you pay ? I cannot say ; I gave it in along with ray rental. 
 
 Your landlord paid it ? He paid his part, and 1 paid the tenant's tax. 
 
 What was the amount of the tenant's tax which you paid ? I have 
 really 'orgotten, it is so long since. 
 
 You have I ttle or no poor rates in that district? None. 
 
 Nor tithe? No. 
 
 And you are of opinion (the Committee wish to repeat) that under the 
 circumstances of no tithe and no poor rates, that that laud is not worth 
 20*. per acre ? I re i used to take it at that price. :l| ^. - 
 
 Now have the eroodnfss to put a value upon the whole charity estate, in 
 your own form ? I should hardly feel myself at liberty to do thatj I 
 am unly a tenant, not a land valuer. 
 
 Do you not, in the ne ghbourhood of that estate, rent some land that 
 you <.' ve 20*. an acre for ? Yes, of Mr. Manby. 
 
 How far is that distant from where the chapel stood ? There is no 
 chapel. 
 
 The Committee suppose the estate might l>e PS i mated at 500*'. a year ; 
 should you think that to be too much ? I can only tell the Committee 
 that I was offered it at 20*-. per acre, but I refused it. - 
 
 Can you give the Committee any account wlio it is that receives the 
 ftnes t^at are paid every seventh year? I suppose the warden. 
 
 Does he pay any rent to anybody for being warden ? 1 never heard 
 tell anything of that sort, I think not, only my I/. 
 
 Are any of the cottages still remaining ? There never were any to 
 nay knowledge. 
 
 Wiih whom is the selection and nomination of the six poor men? 
 The warden ; upon the death of one, I recommend a poor man to him, 
 a man who is poor, honest and industrious, who is a churchman, and 
 who has brought up Irs family 1 without parochial relief, and he appoints 
 him. 
 
 In point of fact, the whole of the patronage of this little charity lies 
 in yourself? There is nothing done without a certificate from the 
 warden. 
 
 The Committee ask you, whether it is not usual for the warden to 
 pay this little stipend to those whom you recommend ? Yes. 
 
 Are they not people who have been in your employment .'There was 
 only one who ever worked with me ; they are all poor men of good cha- 
 racter ; other people sometimes recommend them, for instance, the Rev. 
 Mr. Deacon, rector of Waddington, recommended a proper person, as he 
 thought, for such a thing when there should be a vacancy, and I thought 
 when there was one, I should recommend him. 
 
 Do you happen to know, whether this 321. a year has been the ancient 
 rent of that land ? As much as my recollection will serve me it 5s, my 
 grandfather was agent to Mr, Manby 80 years ago, Mr. Alderman Gib- 
 bison succeeded him. 
 
 Your understanding of this charity appears to be, that the land was 
 left for the support of a certain number of poor men, and to a man who 
 was to pray and read with them; is that your understanding ? Yes. 
 
 In point of fact those poor men only receive 241. a year ? That is all 
 the money that has been paid them, 4/. each. . 
 
 That is not the value of the property aay way? No. 
 
 Can you give the Committee any idea of the value ? I do not know 
 what Mr. Manby gives to the warden ; I think Mr. Manby gives 80/. or 
 
 nil 
 
 i
 
 60 MERE CHARITY. 
 
 Do you mean that that is the annual rent, or the fine which is paid ? 
 The fine for seven years. 
 
 Do you think he pays any annual rent ? Not to my knowledge. 
 
 Then he has got a pretty good thing of it ? No, I do not know that. 
 You surely do ? He has made it worth his while, I believe. 
 Is the particular farm you hold, arable or grass land, or a mixture of 
 both ? The whole of it is arable, except what they call the home yard ; 
 it is mostly boggy, and foundations, and such as that; but I do not 
 occupy that. 
 
 What is the ommon produce of your farm ; do you grow much 
 tvheat ? No, not much what ; we grow turnips, barley, oats, and 
 seeds. 
 
 Have you pretty good crops? That depends upon the management; 
 there were not good crops last year. 
 
 Are the two other farms cultivated in the same way ? Yes, all the 
 same sort of land ; but it is intermixed with freehold. 
 
 And it produces barley, turnips and oats ? Yes. 
 
 Do you think it is a pretty good sheep country ? We can do nothing 
 without management ; we bone and manure a good deal. 
 
 You are not troubled with the rot on this particular land ? No, we 
 are not. 
 
 Then you look upon it as very good sheep country ? Yes, rather so. 
 
 Do you know where the records of this charity are kept ? No. 
 
 Did you ever bear ? No. 
 
 Could Mr. Prettyman give that information ? Mr. Prettyman knows 
 nothing at all of the charity ; he only came in as residentiary last year ; 
 he would have waited on the Committee, but he thought he could not 
 give more information to the Committee than myself. 
 
 Did you ever act for Mr. Manby in the way of agency ? Yes, I have 
 received rents for him sometimes. 
 
 Did you receive rents for the other farms ? No. 
 
 Can you form any idea of the amount of the rent ? No ; I used iv 
 receive of the last tenant 10*. Gd. per acre, but what the present rental is, 
 1 do not know. 
 
 But, according to your belief, the warden receives those fines every 
 seven years ? 1 believe Mr. Manby renews with the warden, but I do 
 not know the fine. 
 
 There must be a fine, or something of that kind ? Yes, but I do not 
 know what. 
 
 But you are confident that no part of that fine is applied to the support 
 of the poor persons ? No, the warden always gets it for his own benefit ; 
 I consider it like a living to a church. 
 
 Where do the almsmen live ? Three of them live in Lincoln ; there 
 are no houses there, nor ever were any. 
 
 Are you sure of that ? Not in our recollection. 
 
 Are the men ever collected together, to meet the warden ? No, Ida 
 not know that they ever were. 
 
 Previous to your leaving Lincolnshire, you doubtless had some con* 
 versation with the warden ? Yes. 
 
 Did he give you this letter ? [Showing a letter to the witnest.~\ Yes, to 
 introduce myself to Mr. Brougham. 
 
 Did you read it ? Yes. 
 
 Because the Committee observes this letter states, " that it is the wish 
 of the Committee to have the yearly account of the charity and services 
 performed, and the expenses paid out;" now, as you have told the 
 Committee that the 32/. is not the bow Jide rent, or value of the land, 
 they are sorry you can give no distinct account of the fines ? No perso 
 oan tell that, except the lessee or the warden themselves.
 
 HERE CHARITY. 61 
 
 Why did the warden neglect to attend his summons ? He is resi- 
 dentiary! as sub-dean and precentor in the cathedral, and the dean, I be- 
 lieve, would not allow him to come; he is absent at prrsent. 
 
 Who is absent ? The dean ; and he was not furnished wiih half the 
 particulars that I was. 
 
 By your own account, he is furnished with the very particular which 
 the Committee in vain demand of you to explain, namely, the amount of 
 the fines, and the particulars of them ? I have told the Committee that 
 he has not been in possession but one twelvemonth, and is ignorant of it. 
 
 Where does the last warden reside ? At Cardingtori, near Bedford. 
 
 Was that living given him by the Bishop of Lincoln ? Yes, I believe 
 it was. 
 
 He resigned his wardenship upon that occasion ? Mr. Cummings re* 
 signed his wardenship upon that occasion. 
 
 You are fully persuaded, that the warden had no knowledge of what the 
 fines were, previous to his becoming warden ? He told me, he did not 
 know so much of the estate as I did. 
 
 No ? the Committee dare say not ; but you do not mean to tell the 
 Committee, that it is your opinion, that the present warden has no 
 knowledge of the fines, occasionally taken on that estate ? I cannot tell 
 what Mr. Prettyman, or the late warden, might communicate to each 
 other. 
 
 Did the present warden state to you, any thing respecting the fines ? 
 Not the least thing in the world. 
 
 Is land of the same quality as this, in the same situation, and exempt 
 from all poor rates and large tithes, let for no moie than l'2s, an acre ? 
 1 cannot speak to that. 
 
 Are you a farmer ? Yes. 
 
 The Committee must have an answer, yes or no, to the question which 
 has been put ? I told the Committee that that land had become at liberty 
 at Ladyday, and that it was offered to me at 20s. an acre, and I refused 
 it; the old tenant died, and the steward offered it to me along with some 
 good meadow land, worth 3'. an acre, and I refused it. 
 
 In the years 1812 and 1814, what was it let for ? 10*. 6d. per acre. 
 
 The whole estate ? Yes. 
 
 One acre with another; not of that particular farm, but the whole 
 charity estate ? I cannot speak to that, because it was mixed with the 
 freehold ; but my land is specified in my agreement, as far as I know, 
 and this large farm, held by Mr. Littlewood (who occupies the manor 
 house) was at 10j. fid. per acre; I used to take the rent. 
 
 Is the rest of the land intermixed with the freehold part, inferior or 
 superior ? Some a great deal better ; some no better ; some not quite so 
 good. 
 
 What was the value of that freehold land, in 1812 and 18i3 ? The 
 freehold and leasehold were let at 10*-. 6</. an acre, of that farm. 
 
 But the Committee are speaking of the other part? I have a certain 
 part at 10s. 6d.; lam not quite sure whether for what Mr. Gibbison 
 had ; he paid more than 5s. per acre, before it was inclosed. 
 
 Was any part of this charity land, uninclosed land ? Yes, part of it 
 was uninclosed. 
 
 What quantity of it ? 200 acres. 
 
 Was the rest old inclosure ? Yes, all his farm. 
 
 Is the parish of Mere very extensive ? No; I should think, as near 
 as I can guess, there are about 1,500 or 1,600 acres, of leasehold and 
 freehold, together. 
 
 And how many proprietors ? Only one, and. the warden } it is Mr. 
 Manby's own estate, and the charity land.
 
 6t MERE CHARITY. 
 
 - Have you any other parishes adjoining, circumstanced as this estate is, 
 where there are neither great tithes nor poor rates ? No, not exactly ; 
 except tithes. 
 
 Is there any reputation in the parish, that there wore almshouses there ? 
 I do not know ; I never heard talk of them myself. 
 What are those poor men called ? Bedesmen. 
 Notalmshouse men ? No, bedesmen. 
 Do you occupy any land in any other parish but this ? Yes. 
 
 Where ? Branstone. 
 
 What poor rates do you pay there ? One shilling in the pound. 
 
 Any where else ?- Yes, in Bracebridge ; I pay there about one shilling 
 in the pound. 
 
 Are you tithe free in Branstone ? Yes. 
 
 At Bracebridge ? No, there is a tithe upon that ; we pay composition 
 money; I think it is about 7*. per acre. 
 
 What rent do you pay for the meadow land ? Near 31. 
 
 And you pay 7s. tithe ? Wedo, indeed. 
 
 And 1*. poor rates? Yes; it is very good land ; we have it to help 
 the poor land. 
 
 You are well acquainted with the county of Lincoln ? I rent a good 
 deal of land in different parts of it. 
 
 Do you think, that that estate at Mere, can fairly be called poor land ? 
 It is poor land, there is no doubt of it. 
 
 Do you not know much poorer land than that in the county ? Not land 
 poorer than that, under the same circumstances that that is ; it was 
 wild heath land, within the last thirty years, except just the home estate. 
 
 Is the whole estate of Mere, called heath land ? Yes, it is called heath 
 land. 
 
 What part of it has been inclosed many years ? Just the home close, 
 where the foundations are, which we supposed were part of a town some 
 time ago. 
 
 What portion of that estate was inclosed at the time the inclosure took 
 place some years ago? I cannot tell, because all the old which was in- 
 closed is intermingled with Mr. Manby's. 
 
 Are the boundaries of the Mere estate well known ? Yes, t think so ; 
 I think I know more about them than any person in the neighbourhood. 
 
 But nothing about the fines ? No, that was always a bargain between 
 my landlord and the warden. 
 
 What is the general reputation in the neighbourhood of the fine re- 
 ceived ? It always has been settled between the warden and the lessee. 
 
 When was the lease renewed ? I should think about fifteen years ago. 
 
 For what term ? - To make it up far twenty-one years ; it has six yearn 
 to run the 7th of next February. 
 
 Who was then the warden ? Mr. Cummtngs. 
 
 And have you never heard nearly (the Committee do not mean ac- 
 curately) what fine was paid for that renewal ? Never ; it might be one 
 hundred, two hundred, or five hundred pounds ; I never heard M iv 
 Manby speak of it. 
 
 Did you ever hear speak of it ? No; the warden lived at a distance. 
 
 Is it Spital or Mere that you are speaking of ? Spital. 
 
 Charles White, Esquire, called in ; and Examined. 
 
 WHERE do you live? At Branstone. 
 
 Are you landlord to the last witness? He occupies a farm under sa
 
 MERE CHARITY. ? 63 
 
 Do you know how much was taken by way of fine for the renewal of 
 the lease of the estate which you have heard mentioned ? I know 
 jiothintr of the sum of my own knowledge. 
 
 What is the reputation with respect to the fine? The reputation I 
 believe has been one and a half and two years ; I take that to be the 
 usual fine ; but I say this with a great deal of caution, because I am 
 not come here for the oocasi(ti ; it is entirely accidental. 
 
 Wont do you take the value of the land to be that is let ? It is not at 
 all in the most productive state : because it has been ill managed; I should 
 be extremely unwilling to occupy it at 12*. an acre. 
 
 Though exempt from tithe and poor rates ? Yes, though exempt from 
 tithe and poor rates. 
 
 If it was in a good state of management, what would you be willing to 
 pay for the whole of it ? It is difficult to say, it so much depends upon 
 the tenant, *h:tt capital tie can employ, and what manure he lays on ; if 
 it wf re well farmed, I should think it would be worth from fifteen to twenty 
 shillings an acre. . 
 
 Do you think that estate is a very favourable place for sheep? No j 
 I do not think, generally speaking, that it is. 
 
 Is it not very dry? Yes; but it affords very little herbage. 
 But is it not dry ?^Yes, it is dry to a faul'. 
 Do you know any thing further respecting this charity? No. 
 Do you live in the neighbourhood ? My estate joins. 
 Do you know by general reputation of any almsbouse being there ? 
 No; the reputation of the country is, that there are certain pensioners 
 paid from that estate. 
 
 Your tenant has stated, that the lands were left to the bedesmen ; is 
 that your opinion ? I cannot say; I consider that there have been for- 
 merly a very considerable number of charitable institutions on the spot 
 some day or other ; and from the number of foundations of considerable 
 extent, the estate I suppose was left for their support. 
 
 As you do not live far from it, can you give the Committee any infor- 
 mation what becomes of the real rent of the land ? The real real rent is 
 paid in fines, as the Committee have been informed 
 
 Can you say what becomes of those fines, either from your own infor- 
 mation or from general reputation ? The fine and rent I consider to be 
 separate; the fine is paid, according to my idea, on the lease being 
 granted to the superior tenant, who leases it again to his under tenant. 
 Then the superior tenant pays the fine to the warden? Yes. 
 And a rent is reserved, after paying that fine of thirty-twd pounds a 
 year ? Yes. 
 
 The Committee are now speaking of the rent reserved ; to whom is the 
 fine paid when that rent is reserved ? It is paid by the superior tenant 
 to the warden. 
 
 Have you ever heard what the fine was which the superior tenant paid 
 upon the last renewal ? Never ; my idea is that it is on the same scale as 
 church property. 
 
 How many acres are let for 32/. a year ? Six hundred and fifty. 
 You are a landlord the Committee understand, owning and occupying 
 land adjoining to this estate ? I am. 
 
 What is your idea of the reason, why a person having 650 acres, 
 worth, you sa\ , at least twelve shillings an acre, should let a lease for a 
 term of years at about one shilling an acre, and only reserve a fine of from 
 forty-five to sixty pounds ? I have considered it in my own mind as 
 analogous to church and corporation property, and it is let, I believe, 
 according to the same rule upon paying a fine ; how that has arisen, I 
 pretend not to say, but it is perfectly well known, that mch is the pra<> 
 tice in many parts of England.
 
 64 HOSPITAL OF SPITAL. 
 
 Was Mr. Manby connected or unconnected with the former tenant?. 
 The last witness can speak better to that than myself. 
 
 You have stated, that the fines paid to the warden are appropriated, as 
 you conceive, to his own use ? I consider it to be so by practice. 
 
 To Mr. Dawson.~\ Is there any deed or endowment of the foundation ? 
 I should suppose there is in the.court rolls j it was left by Michael 
 Roffell, of ; it was founded by him. 
 
 In what year ? I do not know, I only beard my father speak of it, that 
 it was, many years agoj I should think, that it must be more than a 
 hundred years ago. 
 
 Is there a will in existence ? I should think there is ; I think there 
 is in the court rolls. 
 
 Why do you think so? Because all original writings are there; if I 
 wanted a will, I should go to the court to look at it. 
 
 HOSPITAL OF SPITAL. 
 
 June 1. 
 
 Mr. John May Bromhead y called in ; and Examined. 
 
 You are a solicitor at Lincoln? I am. 
 
 Are you acquainted with the iiffairs of the Hospital of Spital-in-tlie 
 Street, in the county of Lincoln ? Yes, lam. Before answering any 
 further questions, I wish to know whether I am to produce these papers 
 in the absence of the master. 
 
 What is the master's name? The Reverend John Prettyman. 
 
 Where does he reside ? At Charrington, near Newport Paguell. 
 
 What communication have you had with Mr. John Prettyman ? I 
 addressed a letter to the chairman of this Committee, in consequence of 
 receiving a letter directed to the master of Spital hospital, under the 
 mark of the chairman of this Committee j it passed through Lincoln, and 
 came back again to me ; I received it at ten o'clock at night instead of 
 half-past five, by which means I could not save that post by writing to 
 Mr. Prettyman ; I wrote the next day, and sent him a copy of the order, 
 and a copy ol the letter to the chairman, in which I took the liberty of 
 saying it was impossible to get the order to him time enough for him to 
 attend as requested; and I think the probability was, if he was from 
 home, there was no time to communicate with me, and the letters coming 
 round by London, particularly as there is reason to believe he was from 
 home; then I would submit, whether in consequence of the chairman's 
 letter, being concerned professionally in this instance for the master, 
 whether I ought to produce these papers; I have looked over the papers 
 and I can trace them as far back as Richard the First, and I can trace 
 the grants, and the nature of those grants; there is no education what- 
 ever emanates out of this charity ; none whatever, it is for the mainte- 
 nance of the master and certain poor ; there has been already an inquiry 
 gone down with respect to this hospital in the time of Charles. 
 
 Who is the visitor? There is no visitor, except the ma&ter himself. 
 
 The Bishop is not visitor? No. 
 
 Nor the Dean and Chapter ? No. 
 
 Is the Deau and Chapter patron ? Yes.
 
 HOSPITAL OP SP1TA.L. 66 
 
 What is the revenue of the hospital ? 61/. 8*. 8rf. ; I pay the whole of 
 that in pensions, except 27/. 4*. Of/., and sometimes more; it is never 301. 
 clear ; there is no education arising out of it. 
 
 From what lands do those 60/. a year arise ? From lands in the county, 
 and a little place in the city. 
 
 What is the real yearly valueof those estates ? I never saw them. 
 
 How many acres may there be ? There is one part let at 31/. 10;. at 
 a rack rent ; the rest are on lives and leases. 
 
 Are they let upon fine? Not that I know of; I helieve there are fines 
 taken usually upon renewal, but I do not know what they are; there has 
 been one renewal since the present master has been master. 
 
 Do you know what it was? No. 
 
 Can you give no estimate to the Committee of the whole annual value 
 f the estate ? Certainly not. 
 
 Do you apprehend it to be considerably above 60/. a year ? Yes, couii- 
 derably, if let at the rack rent 
 
 Can you give an estimate how much ? No. 
 
 Have you ever heard it said how much ? No. 
 
 Have you ever heard any report of how many acres there are ? No ; 
 either do I know the estates. 
 
 Do you know the part of the estate in the town ? Yes. 
 
 What is the value of it ? It was an old stable, and now converted 
 into a grocer's shop ; and I should think the annual rental of it would not 
 be more than 61. or 7/. a year. 
 
 Do you know any thing about Mere ? I know the place, but nothing 
 more of it. 
 
 June 2. 
 
 The Reverend John Prettyman, called in ; and Examined. 
 
 Are you master of the school of Spital-in-the-Street in the county of 
 Lincoln ? Yes. 
 
 When was it endowed ? It was endowed in the reign of Richard the 
 Second, about tlie year 1339. 
 
 Have you that endowment with you ? I have extracts from it, which 
 are dated in the twenty-second year of the reign of Richard the Second, 
 1339. 
 
 / loos delivered in and read, as folfovos:~] 
 
 41 TERTIA Pars Paten de anno Rm Regis Ricardi secundi vices- 
 siino secundo. Mo 3. 
 
 " D Eulijs ) R. omibz ad qnos de saltm licet, &c. de gracia ta- 
 appropuand. men nostra spiali at pro quadraginta marcis quas di 
 lectus nobis tnagister Thomas de As ten, canonicus ecclesiae cathedralis 
 beata? Marie Lincoln nobis solvitconcessimus et licenciam dedimus pro 
 nob.s et heredibus nostris quamtum in nobis est eidem Thome quod 
 ipse quatuor mesnagia cum ptin in Spittale-o-the-Strete Helrneswell 
 et Herposwell et advocac5es ecclesiar Skeldynghop juxta Lincoln et pane 
 Carlelon dare posset et assignare dilco nobis in xgo magistro sive cus- 
 todi domus sivc Hospitalis de Spittel-o-Strete per ipsum Thomam de
 
 HOSPITAL OP SPlTAL. 
 
 novo fundati habend et tenend eidem magro sive cnstodi et suceeoribus 
 suis magistris sive custodibus donius Sivt hospitalis predict! divina pro 
 salubri slalu noslro dum vixerimus et animn noslra cum ab kac luce inigraverimus 
 necnon animalr omniumjidelium defundorin hospilali p W/ctojuxta ordinac6f tn 
 ipsiua Thome in hac partefaciend celebratur in angmentaconem sustenta- 
 cones sue ac auxilium iuslentaconis quorundem pauperum in eodem hospitali sine 
 domo degencinm imperpetuum et eidem magistro sive custodi quod ipse 
 mesuagia advocacoes predicto a prefato Thoma recipere et tenere et 
 ecclesias predictas appropriare et eas sic appropriatas in proprios usus 
 tenere possit sibi et successoribus suis predictU sicutpredictnm estim- 
 perpm licenciam teriore precencium similcter dedimus specialem sta- 
 tute predicto rion obstante noJantes quod prediotus Thomas vel heredes 
 sui aut prefatus magister sive custos seu successores sui racone pre- 
 missor per nos vel heredes nostros justiciarior escaetores vicecomites 
 aut alios ballivos sou ministros nostros vel beredum nostrorum quos- 
 cunque on5nentur molestentur in aliquo seu graventur salvis tamen 
 capitalibz dominis feodi iilius servicijs iride debitis et consuetis. Ita 
 semper quodquedum compolentet summe argenli de fructibus et projkius ec- 
 clesiarpres diclar per prefatum magistrttm sive custodem pattpertbus paro- 
 chianis eorundem ecclesiarum annualim solvanter et distriluanlur el good vita- 
 rij ecclesiarum predictarum tecundnm valorem eorundem sufficient detentur 
 . juxta ordinaconem loci ittiut diocesan i in kac parle faciend a<5 formam sta- 
 tute itide editi et provisi. In cujus &c. T. R. apud Westm' 20 die 
 Maij." 
 
 This is a true copy of the Record in the Tower of London, and 
 has been examined by me, Henry Rooke, 
 
 Clerk of the Rolls. 
 
 What is the extent of the land annexed to this charity ? Several 
 estates belong to it. 
 
 Can you give the Committee any idea of the total amount of the num- 
 ber of acres ? I cannot give an accurate account. 
 
 Are there five or six hundred acres ? There is nothing like that, be- 
 longing to it. 
 
 Is there any property besides land ? There is property arising from 
 corn rents, settled by an act of parliament, and property in houses ; one 
 or two in Lincoln ; a shop and stable 1 believe, and a farm house, upon 
 one of the estates. 
 
 For what is the whole let? The rent of this property is of a mixed 
 nature; it is partly let a rack rent, and the other on leases for three 
 lives, or twenty-one years. 
 
 How much is let upon fines? There is but one estate, which is an 
 estate at Bicker, which is let for 3l/, 10$. a year. 
 
 What is the rent of that which is let upon fine ? It is about 3()/. a 
 year ; about half the income. 
 
 Can you give the Committee any estimate of the extent of the land let 
 upon fine ? No, I cannot. 
 
 Is it 100 acres ? Considerably more than 100 acrrs ; besides the 
 houses, there are two estates, one let upon !iv<^, :md one by lease; 
 one is held by Lord Monson's family, unrler a lease of three lives j and 
 the other, which i at Skillingthorp, is let (or twenty-one years. 
 
 About how many acres may there b<? in th<isi- two estates? 1 can tell 
 the rent more accurately than the extent ; ihe incon.e from Sk'llingfhorp 
 arising partly from corn reut, and partly fh.ui rent paid by the tenant, 
 is something more than six or seven hundred a year; but 1 should beg 
 to -state to the Committee, that out of that sum there are certain scr-
 
 HOSPITAL OF SPITAL. 67 
 
 vices ; the vicar is paid his whole stipend, and I believe the chancel is 
 repaired out of that particular rent. 
 
 How much is paid to the vicar? I believe thirty or forty pounds a 
 year ; but I think thirty. 
 
 Now the other estat<- ? The other estate is at Burton, which is the 
 seat of the Monson family ; I do not know what that estate is let for. 
 
 Have you any guess? No, I have nnt; I can lell what was the fine 
 paid for putting in a life, when there were two lives upon it; 1-iO/. was 
 the sum paid by order of the Court of Chancery. 
 
 What is the fine for letting the other estate ? The last fine that ever 
 was paid was 200/. 
 
 Who was the lessee of that estate ? A Mr. Matthew Gray, of Lincoln. 
 
 Who had the lease before ? rl do not know. 
 
 Is he connected with the warden ? I do not know. 
 
 How do you account for a lease, for twenty-one years, which was let 
 after paying al! deductions, for about GOO/ on a fine of 200/. ; and for a 
 reserved rent of somewhere about 24<. ? In answer to that, I believe at 
 that time, the land was not worth any thing like what it is now worth ; 
 and, in addition, I should say, that the lessee had a lease for fourteen 
 years upon it, having already so powerful a hold, the warden would not 
 demand a higher fine. 
 
 Do you know what fine was paid pn the first lease ? I have heard 
 eay, that the fine be-fore the 200'. was only 20/. ; the estate has been 
 much improved of late by enclosure, as well as the general improvement 
 of property throughout the kingdom. 
 
 When will the 21 years lease expire? It has been renewed, within a 
 short time. 
 
 When was it renewed ? In the course of this spring. 
 
 For the same rent ? It is under particular circumstances. 
 
 For what rent was it renewed ? 1 am not able to state that. 
 
 Upon what fine was it renewed ? I cannot give a direct answer to that 
 question, without stating a tram of circumstances. 
 
 Then state the circumstances of the renewal ? At the time that the 
 seven years of the lease was out, the lessee refused to renew with the then 
 master; in consequence, for a term of years, no 'money arose upon that 
 state, excepting from the reserved rent ; and upon my taking it, the 
 person who had the lease was, I believe, not anxious to renew; and since 
 that, I have not felt any inclination to renew, conceiving that I have full 
 power to renew with the lessee, or not, as I think proper; the time 
 would be out in three years after the 17th of this month, that is, in June, 
 1721. 
 
 What consideration did you give for renewing that lease ? I purchased 
 the remainder of the term of the lessee, myself. 
 
 In whose occupation is it now ? Mr. Hemley's. 
 
 To whom does he pjiy rent ? He has never paid me any rent yet ; I 
 consider myself as standing in the situation of landlord. 
 
 Then what rent is he bound to pay you ?-^Someth.ng between six and 
 seven hundred pounds, out of which the vicar is paid, as I have stated 
 before, and the chancel is repaired. 
 
 What did you pay for purchasing that lease? I gave the exact sum of 
 money for it which the rents would have amounted to three yearn since. 
 
 What does that amount to ? To something more than 1,800/. 
 
 What are the outgoings upon this rent ? I have got accounts of the 
 present outgoings of the charity, for ten different yeajrs. 
 
 When the three years of the present lease expires, what do you expect 
 it to let at ? I do nut apprehend that is capable of any increase. 
 
 I 8
 
 68 YEOVIL CHARITIES. 
 
 Can you tcH us how many acres there are? I think, something more 
 than 300, but I am not sure that it is so. 
 
 Please to state the account of the outgoings? The outgoings, 2f/. 4*. 
 
 To whom paid ? To four pensioners and a half, 51. 4*. each, at eight 
 shillings a month ; there is a half pensioner, arising out of a very old 
 custom. 
 
 Who is the visitor of this charity ? It is not known to myself; I rather 
 think the Dean and Chapter of Lincoln appoint the visitor. 
 
 Who appoints to Mere ? The Bishop of Lincoln. 
 
 Who is the visitor of Mere ? My own opinion is, that the Bishop of 
 Lincoln is visitor. 
 
 You do not know whether he ever exercised his visitatorial power ? No, 
 I do not know that he ever did ; I would beg to state, that originally, 
 the pensions were only a penny a day, they are now five pounds four 
 shillings a year, and the remainder was for the maintenance of the mas- 
 ter, as appears from the document laid before the Committee. 
 
 John May Bromehead, Esquire, called in ; and Examined. 
 
 HATE you any thing to state to the Committee upon the subject o^ 
 tfee Spital hospital? There was a decree in Chancery in the 10th of 
 Elizabeth, 1568, and another in the 40th of Elizabeth, 1598, by extracts 
 from which it appears these expressions are invariably used, " this was, 
 founded for the relief of the master of the said hospital and the poor 
 there," meaning at Spital, of which there is not one person to take the 
 benefit, therefore Mr. Prettyman gives it to some other poor people ; 
 there is not a poor person to receive it " for the relief of the master who 
 is to be a priest," it is so directed, " and the poor there." 
 
 (To the Rev. Mr. Prellyman.j Is there a parish of Spital ? Certainly 
 there is, 
 
 Are there no poor in the whole parish ? I believe not one ; I conceive 
 it is extra parochial ; there is a chapel UK re, which I think myself bound 
 to repair, and upon which two years ago I expended forty pounds. I 
 would besy to add, that the founder, in the endowment, expressly states, 
 that service shall be performed there once a month, which is strictly 
 performed. 
 
 YEOVIL CHARITIES, 
 
 June 1. 
 
 Mr. George Wattst Mr. William Wilmington^ and Mr. Henry 
 Collins, were called in ; and Examined. 
 
 HAVE you all been churchwardens at different times of the parish of 
 Yeovil ? We have. 
 Are any of you churchwardens now? Noj in 1802 we were put i
 
 YEOYIL CHARITIES. 69 
 
 churchwardens ; and an order of the present Bishop of Bath and Wells 
 came, desiring us to look into the charities in the town, and to place 
 them on the boards in the church, before the 25th of March next j thic 
 was in 1803. 
 
 What followed ? In consequence of that, a person of Romsey wrote 
 us a letter ; directed to the churchwardens, to know if there wtre any 
 charity school in the town; that for years past he had paid the master, 
 an annual sum, but he had not for some time past received any account 
 whatever ; and our answer was, that there had been a school there, but 
 we knew but little or nothing about it. 
 
 In what way did you cease to be churchwardens ? In 1813, owing to 
 the dispute that had arisen, and a law suit that had commenced in Chan- 
 cery, respecting these charities, the trustees of the charity, as they call 
 themselves, made a party, and bid defiance to us; the vicar of the town 
 told me to tell the bishop, that we knew nothing of any charities, and 
 we were not to place any upon the boar-Is in the church. 
 
 How did you cease to be churchwardens in 1813 ? Our party was al- 
 most deserted except by us three ; in consf queuce of that, the otlu-r party 
 got so strong, they bid us defiance, and they took the books from me, 
 which cost me more than 50/. in Wells Court. 
 
 What charities do you apprehend to have been abused in YeoYil ? 
 The whole; the church charity, the two almshouses, and the school. 
 Is there a foundation school in Y''ovil? Yes, fonnded by John Nowes. 
 Have you the deed of endowment ? We have a copy of the w-ll. 
 Have you that copy here? Not here ; Mr. Hulme, in Russel-square, 
 has the whole of the papers, who, I paid him 120-. to finish the business, 
 and is now. dead. 
 
 According to what you know of the will, what wag the foundation of 
 the school ? We have the whole manor and mansion house in the parish 
 of Lee, near Romsey, in the county of Hants, comprising 213 acres, to 
 the support of the school. 
 
 Have you been on the spot ? I have been over the estate. 
 Was there any thing else comprsed iu the devise besides those ? No, I 
 believe not ; he left the whole of this estate to educate and clo he forty poor 
 boys, as the blue school in London ; but by some mean* there was a de- 
 ficiency in his will ; he did not say where those boys were to be taken 
 from ; in consequence, his daughter or sister, Mrs. Ann N w.-s, by a de- 
 cree in chancery, founded, that ten of the boys were to be taken from 
 Preston, twenty from Romsey, and ten from Fisherton. 
 
 Was this another school, independent of the school founded by Mr. 
 Nowes ? No, it is all the same th'ng. 
 
 Wha{ right had she to do that ? This gave rise to the suit in Clnn- 
 cery, and it was in consequence of that a decree was made, to the effect 
 of leaving it to her discretion ; and it was in executing that power she 
 made the above appointment. 
 
 What was the date of the appointment ? About 1719, or from that to 
 1721 ; so much was to be given to clothe and educate the boys, so much 
 to be given to bind the boys apprentice, and then the rest was to settle 
 those boys in the world. 
 
 Has any further benefaction ever been made to Nowes charity since ? 
 Yes. 
 
 Who has made those additions ? Mr. Edward Bowker gave a field of 
 about five acres. 
 
 Did any body else give any thing? A person whose name I do not 
 know ga^e eleven acres ; another person gave a house and orchard, at the 
 Marsh ; Mr. Gillingham, iu 1713, gave30/. in money ; and various other
 
 70 
 
 YEOVIL CHARITIES. 
 
 persons from that time to 1730, gave sums of money, amounting in the 
 wholeto4t3<. 17*. 3d. 
 
 Were these monies to be laid out in land ? We do not know ; in 17] 1 
 Frances Cheesenuan gave 150/. bank stock, and in 1 730 Thomas Cheese- 
 man gave 51. 9. year more; the bank stock given in 1711 was not called 
 for till J786. 
 
 What is the estate at Romsey let for a year ? I do not know, but I 
 think it is worth more than I have valued it at. 
 
 What do you value it at ? 532/. a year. 
 
 Are you acquainted with the value of land ? I have been steward for 
 twenty-one years to Colonel Prose of Somersetshire. 
 
 Do you believe that to be under or over the mark ? I would give over 
 that for it. 
 
 What do you believe the value of the several houses here mentioned to 
 be ? According to the best account I could get, they were worth 50/. a 
 year. 
 
 Are those valuations exclusive of the mansion house and timber sold in 
 1808, as appears by this paper ? Yes. 
 
 What became of the 1.285/, got for that ? God knows. 
 
 Under what authority was the sale effected ? It was sold by auction, 
 as I understand. 
 
 By whose authority ? I suppose by the trustees. 
 
 Was any order of the Court of Chancery made ?--No, not that I know. 
 
 What is the value of the field called Bear's Close ? Fifteen pound* a 
 year. 
 
 What is the value of Copse Hall ? Twenty-two pounds a year. 
 
 What is the value of the house and orchard at Marsh ? I suppose 
 about 20 /. a year. 
 
 To Mr. Collins.] Do you agree in the valuation made ?-^-Yes, as far 
 as I know. 
 
 Do you know the Yeovil estate only, or the Romsey estate also ? 
 The Yeovil estate only. 
 
 Do you know the value of land ? Yes. 
 
 Are you a considerable proprietor of land ? Yes. 
 
 To Mr. Wntls.~] According to your estimate, then, is the annual in- 
 come of the school about 700/. including the interest of the proceeds of 
 the sale in 1808, the interest, and interest money of the 413/. 17f. 3d. ? 
 Yes. 
 
 How many scholars are taught now at this school so endowed ? I da 
 not know ; I have not interfered since they took the books from me. 
 
 How many were taught in 1813, when you ceased to be churchwarden ? 
 There might be seven or eight; I do not exactly know. 
 
 How many boys were there in 1802 ? None that I know ; when the 
 boys were there, they paid the master for pens and ink, and things of that 
 kind, of which I have here the receipts. 
 
 Who at that time pocketed the money of this estate ? God knows; I 
 do not. 
 
 Who were the trustees in 1812? The following gentlemen, to the best 
 of my knowledge, call themselves trustees : John Hooper, William Phil- 
 lips, the vicar; John Goodford; John Hitchings ; Thomas Tomkins, the 
 curato; William Hilyar; John Newmans; James Parsons; William 
 Lambert White; Sir William Heathcott; Richard Figes ; Sir Thomas 
 Heathcott ; Sir Charles Mills ; but Mr. Figes had the whole management 
 of the Romsey estates, as he told me.
 
 VTho is Mr. Figes ? He was the person who had the management of 
 the lands at Romsey for the schools, and he wrote a letter, asking me, 
 whether there was any schoolmaster at Yeovil, for which he had always 
 paid him for clothing and educating ten boys. 
 
 Who was Mr. Figes ? I believe he was an old schoolmaster, and Was 
 a sort of justice's clerk. 
 
 In what manner had he got possession of this trust ? Some how or 
 other j but when I went there the charity was nearly as badly off as it 
 was at Yeovil ; and the churchwarden at Romsey knew nothing of thfc 
 charity ; be said sometimes there was a boy had a coat, and sometimes 
 nothing. 
 
 Did you find any school at Romsey ? Yes ; bat almost as bad as it 
 was at Yeovil. 
 
 When you examined the estates, the manors, house down, at Lee, 
 whom did you Gnd the rent was paid to? Mr. Tubb was Sir William 
 Heathcott's surveyor ; I do not know who received the rents. 
 
 What is he? He was a land surveyor at Fisherton, near Salisbury. 
 
 To whom was the land let in 1812? To different tenants, as specified 
 by Mr. Tubb, with the map of the estate. 
 
 To whom do those tenants pay their rents ? I cannot pretend to 
 ay. 
 
 Did you ask any one tenant to whom they paid their rents ? Old 
 Figes used to receive the rents, as he told me j he is dead now. 
 
 What did Old Figes do with the rent?->-He used to pay a certain sum 
 to a schoolmaster at Yeovil. 
 
 What did he do with the rest and residue? God knows; many of 
 the parents of the boys have told me, they had nothing to bind them out, 
 nor settle them in the world. 
 
 Did you ever hear of any thing being given by Old Figes to bind a 
 boy out ? Yes, to bind a boy out, but never to settle him. There was 
 one bound to Mr. Collins, but Mr. Collins never had any thing with 
 him. 
 
 What does he give for binding a boy ? Five pounds. 
 
 Do you know what rent was actually paid by these tenants in 1812 ? 
 I do not know. 
 
 How long is it since Old Figes departed this life ? I do not know. 
 
 How long is it since you have seen him ? Not. lately j not for several 
 years. 
 
 Who succeeded him in the trust ? God knows. 
 
 Who receives the rents ? I do not know. 
 
 What has become of the school at Yeovil ? It is a little better now 
 than it was. 
 
 How many boys are there ? I do not know ; but the school is kept in 
 a very bad manner. 
 
 What is the population of Yeovil ? About four or five thousand. 
 
 Mr. Collins.'] I remember when there were about thirty boys. 
 
 To Mr. Watit.] Have you any notion now who is the trustee or pre- 
 tended trustee, to receive the rents ? -They are altogether connected 
 with the whole charities. 
 
 Does Thomas Tomkin receive any rent? He is master of the school, 
 and holds some of the land. 
 
 Was Old Figes the master of the school hi his day ? -No, he lived at 
 Romsey ; Mr. Tom kins was 
 
 Was he master there ? No ; he was the manager of the estate. 
 
 Who is the manager of that estate now ? I do not know. 
 
 Does Mr. Tomkins occupy the fields of the Yeoril estate ? One field
 
 YEOVIL CHARITIES* 
 
 of the charity, and one of the fields of the almshouses. H was the 
 master of the almshouses for years. 
 
 What is the value of the estate belonging to the almshouses ? About 
 506/. a y< ar; but there was some acres of land lost, which reduced it. 
 
 In whose hands are the rents for the almshouses ? The same 
 trustees ; they are all one concern. 
 
 How many are maintained at the almshouses out of these rents ? 
 There used to be only three or four, but now there is the proper number, 
 which is twelve, six of each sex; but the rules not complied with as 
 ordered. 
 
 Is five hundred and odd pounds spent upon these almshouses ? No, 
 nor yet two hundred, I should suppose. 
 
 Who pockets the residue ? God knows. 
 
 How many are there in the poor almshouses ? Four. 
 
 How many ought there to be ? Nobody knows any thing about it, 
 that t know. 
 
 Do you ever remember more than four in it ? No. 
 
 What is the revenue of that almshouse ? About 642/. to the best of 
 my knowledge. 
 
 Who pockets the residue of that ? There were persons calling them- 
 selves portreeves and burgesses, four in number, Thomas Shorland, 
 George Well n^ton, Thomas Andrews, and John Greenham; one of them 
 is dead, Shorland. 
 
 Do they call themselves portreeves ? George Wellington does, and 
 the other two call themselves burgesses of Yeovil. 
 
 Have they the charter ? I believe it is lost, as I have heard. 
 
 Do those persons pretend to have a right to the management of this 
 charity ? Yes, they manage the whole, and pay the poor women. 
 
 Do they manage both Woburn almshouses and the poor almshouses ? 
 No, John Greenham and others has got the Woburn house, but the three 
 together only manage the poor almshouse, Wellington, Greenham, and 
 Andrews. 
 
 Do they pocket the surplus of the 642J. after paying the four old 
 women ? Some years since the paupers that went through the town, 
 poor sailors, or any other poor person, went to the portreeve and re- 
 ceived a certain sum of money to pass, and there was a pump in the 
 middle of the town, whereon there was an iron ladle for them to drink 
 out of, as they passed on. That pump has been taken up by Mr. 
 Shorland, and sold; there is no such thing now standing ; they gave 
 their answer in, that they were to lay out the money for the good of the 
 poor, but I have never known that done. 
 
 Do lbo<e four old women who receive relief from the poor almshouse, 
 receive parish relief also? They do from two to three shillings a week 
 each. 
 
 Do you know, of your own knowledge, that they receive any thing at 
 all from the portreeve and burgesses ? They receive one shilling a 
 weekbelwedi them, and on certain days they receive compensations, 
 If. 6fA on Saint Thomas's day, Is. 6d- on Christmas day, Is. 6d. at 
 Easter, and lj. 6.7. at Wh tsuntu'e. 
 
 To whit uses were the funds of Woburn charity originally destined?- 
 Here are the orde.r and statutes, confirmed by letters patent of Edward 
 the Fourth, dated November 9th, 1476, and the 1 6th year of his reign.
 
 YEOVIL CHARITIES. 73 
 
 They toere delivered in and read, as folloios."} 
 
 ORDERS and STATUTES extracted out of the Writing belonging to 
 the Almshouse in Yeovil, confirmed by Letters Patent of Ed- 
 ward IV., bearing date November the ninth, ia the sixteenth 
 year of his reign, one thousand four hundred and seventy-six. 
 (1476.) 
 
 I. Imprimis, That an almshouse, one custos, two wardens, and 
 twelve poor people of both kinds, by equal portions of number (or 
 eight at least) always living sole and chaste, not leprous of evil, do 
 pray for ever in a chapel builded to the honor of Saint George and 
 Saint Christopher, the blessed martyrs, or in the parish church of 
 Yeovil, &c. 
 
 II. That these be called the custos, warden and almshouse of Wil- 
 liam Wobourn, late minor canon of the cathedral church of Saint 
 Paul in London. 
 
 III. That the custos, wardens and poor of the said almshouse, and 
 their successors for ever (being chosen custos, wardens and poor of the 
 said almshouse) shall be one body and one commonalty for ever, in 
 substance and name, and shall be able persons in law, and may pur- 
 chase, obtain and receive, &c. whatsoever lands or other profits shall 
 be sold, bequeathed, given, assigned, &c. may plead and be im- 
 pleaded, prosecute all manner of suits, quarrels, causes, and defend, 
 &c 
 
 IV. That every year the custos and wardens continually be changed 
 within fifteen days after Easter, being to be chosen by five or seven 
 of the honestest and discreetest men of the parish of Yeovil, to be no- 
 minated by the custos and wardens then being, and he so chosen into 
 the custosship, and they so chosen into the wardenship, shall take 
 their oath before the residue of the men then present, to all and 
 singular things which do pertain to their office in that part to be 
 done ; and if it happens the said custos, or any of the wardens, shall 
 depart thence or die in the year in which they are chosen, he or they 
 which lire and remain (with the consent of five or seven of the 
 honestest and discreetest men of the said parish, and with the consent 
 and assent of the poor of the said almshouse, within fifteen days after 
 their departure) choose in the stead of the departed, the remaining 
 part of the y ar, and they so chosen to take oath as abovesaid. 
 
 V. That when any one of the poor depart, die or be removed by 
 the custos or wardens for ill behaviour (being first three times warned 
 by the custos or wardens) that one other man or woman be by the 
 custos or wardens, within fifteen days, placed in the stead of the 
 departed dead or removed. 
 
 VI. That the commemoration of the founders, and all their re- 
 lations of note, be celebrated in the church of Yeovil on the eighth 
 day of the calends of January, being the day of the Conversion of 
 Saint Paul, (Jan. 25, / at which time a dole is to be made in the church 
 of Yeovil as followeth, viz. to the vicar twelvepence ; to every one 
 of the nine chaplains then present, sixpence ; to every clerk of the 
 cburcb, fourpence; to every one of the boys serving in the quire, 
 one penny ; to the custos of the almshouse, sixpence ; to every 
 warden of the house, sixpence ; and for two new wax candles then to 
 be burning, at least two pound of wax, to the sustentation of the said 
 church, two shillings ; to the priest reciting the names of the bene- 
 factors in the pulpit every Sunday (as the custom is) yearly, sixteen- 
 
 K
 
 74 YEOVIL, CHARITIES. 
 
 pence; to the poor, being present, and sick, absent, in distribution of 
 bread,' seven shillings ; to the ringers, eightpence ; to the bells to be 
 rung, .sixpence ; to the criers, reciting the names of the benefactor* 
 through the town, fourpence. 
 
 VII. Also one other alms, to be made for ever in the church, at 
 the procession on (July 22,) the day of Saint Mary Magdalen, viz. 
 to the vicar, twopence; to the nine chaplains then present, every 
 one a penny ; to every clerk of the church, a penny; to the seven 
 boys administering the quire, every one a punny j to the custos a 
 penny ; 'to the two wardens of the house, twopence ; to the bells, six- 
 pence ; to the ringers, sixpence ; to the crier of the town, a penny. 
 
 VIII. Also one other dole every year for ever on (Oct. 21,) the day 
 of the Eleven Thousand Virgins, viz. to the vicar twopence ; to every 
 one of the nine chaplains then present, a penny ; to every clerk of 
 the church, a penny ; to the seven boys administering in the quire, 
 every one a penny; to the custos of the house, a penny ; to the two 
 wardens, twopence ; to the bells, sixpence ; to the ringers, sixpence; 
 to the crier, one penny. 
 
 IX. Also that one other dole be made for ever in the same church, 
 at the procession on (Nov. 25,) the day of Saint Catherine the Virgin, 
 viz. to the vicar doing 'his office, twopence; to the nine chaplains 
 there present, every one a penny ; to every of the seven boys minis- 
 tering in the quire, a penny ; to the custos, a penny ; to the wardens, 
 twopence ; to the bells, sixpence ; to the ringers, sixpence ; the crier, 
 a penny. 
 
 X. That five shillings, and the portions of all them that be absent, 
 be distributed every year on ShroveThursday, in bread to the poor 
 present, and sick absent, of the said parish. See figure twenty -fourth 
 following. 
 
 XI. That the custos and wardens do make a brotherden of the 
 parishioners of the said church of Yeovil, and of others that of their 
 own devotion will be of the said fraternity or society ? to provide 
 within themselves for the sufficient sustentation of the poor aforesaid, 
 and for the sustentation of other charges of the poor of the said alms- 
 house; and that the said custos and wardens for the time being have 
 the rule and government of the said society. 
 
 XII. That immediately after the custos and wardens are chosen, 
 and have made corporal oath as abovesaid, brfore they meddle or 
 take any administration in the same, they make a faithful inventory 
 in full of all the Roods of the same house and fraternity or society, 
 in the name of their election there found, given and bequeathed, with 
 the advisement of the custos and wardens 1 aforesaid, in the presence 
 of five or seven inen as afore>ai I, and others that list to be there. 
 
 XI If. And at the end of the year, vizi within fifteen days after 
 Easter, the same cu--tos and wardens for the time being do for ever 
 yield and make a lawful accompt of ail their receipts, their expences 
 lawfully ht-stowed, and of the goods and ornaments to the same house 
 appertaining, before five or seven men as aforesaid, and others of the 
 sain' paris i that will be present. 
 
 XIV. That the custos and wardens have one common coffer, in the 
 which coffer shall be the common seal of the said almshouse, and the 
 letters patent aforesaid, and all other writings and muniment rolls of 
 accompts, acid the treasury of the -aid almshouse, and other things 
 which shall be thought good , to the custos and ward< ns for the time 
 being ; which cofi< r shall be put in a secret and sure place, and to 
 the said coffer shall be three keys, with divers wards, one key for the 
 cu&ios, and for each warden one.
 
 YEOVIfc CHARITIES. 76 
 
 XV. That the custo, wardens, and twelve or eight poor, and their 
 successors, shall have to the value of ten markes by the year above 
 II charges and expenses, viz. obits, processions, reparations and 
 quit rents, or annual rents, which of our Lord King be not holden to 
 support and bear all charges above specified ; and the residue of the 
 said ten markes, if any be above the said ten marker or charges, be 
 always employed to the summation of the poor of the said alms- 
 house for the time being. 
 
 XVI. That if the custos and wardens do foresee, and cause that all 
 the statutes and ordinances aforesaid, and all their articles according 
 to the strength, form and effect of these presents be observed and 
 kept, that then the said custos and wardens have and take yearly, 
 for their labour in that behalf, six shillings, viz. each one two 
 shillings. 
 
 XVII. That if the cnstos and wardens make default herein by any 
 means, then that the aforesaid power of the house for the time being 
 do take the six shillings between them, equally divided, as oft as the 
 said custos and wardens shall make default, &c. 
 
 XVIII. That it shall not be lawful for the custos, wardens or poor, 
 to remit, release, exchange, permute, or any otherwise to alienate 
 the lands, tenements, rents and services, or any part or parcel lying 
 in Okeford Fitzpaine, or anywise to the said almshouse pertaining, 
 not to let ferme above seven years ; and that if aught be done con- 
 trary to this statute, it be utterly void. 
 
 XIX. That each of the twelve or eight poor have weekly, on 
 the Sunday before high noon, by the hand of the custos or his 
 assigns, and of the wardens, three-pence for each of the poor, (and 
 above, when ability of the said almshouse shall thereto suffice,) be- 
 sides their chambers and beds, all things being deducted, according 
 to the discretion of fire or seven of the good men of the same 
 parish. 
 
 XX. That for more surety, one of the poor that is of strongest 
 body, with the custos and his assigns, or the wardens, do yearly, 
 within fifteen days after Michaelmas, survey and oversee their lands 
 in Okeford Fitzpaine, to be rooted, cleansed, and rid by the farmers 
 from thorns, brambles, and other hurtful things growing upon the 
 same, and other defaults of hedges, ways, paths and ditches, to be 
 amended. 
 
 XXI. That there be planted yearly continually by the farmers, 
 twenty or thirty oaken plants in the hedges of the said lands, where 
 most need should be requisite. 
 
 XXII. That every of the poor shall wear continually en his breast a 
 red cross, in memory of Saint George the Martyr, signed and sealed 
 by John Wobourn, brother to the said William, and by Richard 
 Huet, chaplains, in a writing tripartite indentia yeaven at Okeford 
 Fitzpaine, anno doin. annoq. Edward 4th, 17 4 . 
 
 XXI II. And further, by way of amplifying the obits and proces- 
 sional days aforesaid, that there be assigned to the portreeve of 
 Yeovil, being personally at the obits aforesaid, one shilling ; to the 
 bailey of the said town sixpence ; to every warden of the said house, 
 fourpence; also to the aforesaid portreeve, for every processional 
 day, twopence; to the bailey of the said town, one penny; to every 
 clerk of the said church, oae penny ; to every warden of the said 
 church, one penny, &c. 
 
 XXIV. And that the portions of all them that be absent be put to 
 the five shillings, as in Sheere Thursday aforesaid, and for ever be 
 
 K 2
 
 7(5 YEOVIL CHARITIES. 
 
 amplified and distributed to tke poor of the said parish thenpres cut 
 and to the sick absent. (See figure tenth above.) 
 
 XXV. And that there be assigned to five or seven of the best 
 and discrectest of the parish, as well at the election as at the accompt 
 of the officers of the said almshouse, being for their drinking at the 
 said house, eight-pence. 
 
 These orders and statutes are, by Mr. John Seal, vicar of Yeovil, 
 rector of Soch Denyse, and sometimes follower of King's College, in 
 Cambridge, extracted out of the translated copy of one of the tri- 
 partite indentures, which is attested by A. Maynard, to agree wiih 
 the writing indented, lying in the vestry of the Monks ofMontacute, 
 and with the writing indenture lying in the coffin of the bishop of 
 Baldoc, in the chappie of Saint George, in Paul's, at London. The 
 founders herein chiefly commemorated, and by their hand and deed 
 acknowledged, are John Wobourn and Richard Huet, chaplains, en- 
 couraged by the bounty and example of William Wobourn, minor 
 canon of St. Paul's, London. 
 
 The persons chiefly commended to the prayers of the almshouse, 
 according to the custom of those times, as foiloweth, viz. 
 
 For William Wobourn, minor canon of Paul's ; John Wobourn and 
 Richard Huet, chaplains of Yeovil ; and Lady Eleanor Poynings, 
 widow, countess of Northumberland, founders. 
 
 For Mr. Ralph Baldoe and Mr. John Chesheed, ancestors of th 
 said John Wobourn ; Henry Percy, Earl of Northumberland, late 
 husband of the said Eleanor Lady Poynings, &c. 
 
 For Henry Percy, then Earl of Northumberland, and Matly hift 
 wife ; William Downley, Earl of Arundell, brother of the said Lady 
 Eleanor; Henry Wobourn, and Margaret his wife, parents of the 
 said William and John ; Sir Thomas Harling, late parson of Yeovil. 
 
 For the Lord Richard Poynings, and Eleanor his wife: of the said 
 Lady Poynings ; Mr. Nicholas Lyet, and Elizabeth his wife ; Thomas 
 Hilling, and Agnes his wife. 
 
 For Mr. Raynold Kentwood } Mr. John Cole ; Sir John Suell ; Sir 
 Thomas Darnet. 
 
 The Founders principally to be commemorated are : 
 
 John Wobourn and Richard Huet, chaplains of Yeovil, encouraged 
 by the county, and good ; William Wobourn, minor canon of Saint 
 Paul's, in London. 
 
 And it is to be called the almshouse of William Wobourn. 
 Anno Dom. 1662. 
 
 There is here a prohibition to let for any term above seven years. Is 
 that statute disregarded ? YFS; here is an advertisemeut by a Mr. 
 White, an attorney, offering two lots ; one for the remainder of a 
 term of four score ami nineteen years, determinate on two lives, the 
 other for a term of fourscore and nineteen years, determinate on three 
 lives. The first of these belongs to the poor almshouse ; the second be- 
 longs to Wobo urn's. 
 
 Have you the statutes of the poor almshouse ?^ No. 
 
 Do you know whether that statute of that almshouse has any pro- 
 hibition of leading ? I believe the Foundations of all the church charity 
 and almshouses are destroyed. We went to one of the trustee's house 
 alter he was in office, about some church lands, and inquired of him,
 
 YF.OVII. CHARITIES. 77 
 
 whose father was the clerk of the town, some yean before an attorney, 
 and he said be was very sorry, but since his father's death he had burnt 
 a great many writings, which might have been of some use to the town ; 
 and we understood by the servant, they were things belonging to the 
 old charity. They were burnt about 1800; therefore 1 do not think the 
 Committee will find any foundations for any of the charities except 
 Wobourn's. 
 
 Are the custos, wardens and poor of the said house, made a corpo- 
 ration by this statute ? They are. 
 
 Have you any other deeds belonging to the corporation ? No, I have 
 not. 
 
 In whose name are the leases granted ? They are granted by the 
 custos and wardens. 
 
 To whom is the rent paid ? We know nothing at all of that, it being 
 all kept secret. 
 
 To whom does the statute give the residue ? Entirely to the poor, I 
 believe. 
 
 Are there any other charities besides those you have mentioned * 
 There is a fourth, the church lands. 
 
 What is the value of those fr I would give ISO/, a year for them, if 
 the houses were built up. 
 
 Who receives the rent? I believe nobody; the churchwardens re* 
 ceive about 2/. Is. 4</. yearly. 
 
 In whose occupation are those premises ? Mr. Messiter, an attorney, 
 told me he bought; the interest of the house at Shaston for sixty pounds, 
 of the trustees. 
 
 To whom did he pay the money ? He said to the trustees. 
 
 Who are they ? I believe John Hooper, Thomas Tomkins, William 
 Helyar, John Newman, and others. 
 
 Do you know any thing of the other premises ? I do. 
 
 In whose occupation are they ? Mr. Tomkins received the rent, and 
 gave a receipt as almshouse property for some. 
 
 In whose occupation is the house in Grove-lane ? Jennings ; but it 
 is in a bad state. 
 
 In whose occupation is the bouse, shop and warehouse ? Mr. Peter 
 Daniel. 
 
 What does he pay ? U 3s. per year. ' V /$ 
 
 What is its worth ? I have set it down, in the paper before the Com- 
 mittee, at eighty pounds ; it may be worth a hundred. 
 
 The land where six houses stood, in whose occupation is that? 
 In nobody's. The trustees, as they call themselves, let the houses fall 
 down. 
 
 The north aile, in whose occupation is that ? Mr. Harbin. 
 
 A cellar and barn, in whose occupation is that ? The cellar appears 
 to have been leased out to a person who was a trustee, with other pre- 
 mises, in 1778, on a consideration of thirty pounds, which was never 
 accounted to the town, as I believe. 
 
 What was it worth ? The barn about 4/. or 51. a year ; it belongs to 
 the premises above, at 80t a year. The reserved rent was twenty-three 
 shillings, as above. 
 
 Who was the lessor > Edward Phillips and others, as feoffees and 
 trustees of the estate. 
 
 Who were the lessees ? Mr. Seward was the lessee of the cellar. 
 
 And do any of these trustees let leases to themselves ? Mr. Dann 
 leased out a great deal of the almshouse to himself, and paid little or 
 no fines.
 
 78 YEOVJ.L CHARITIES. 
 
 , What rent did he lease it for? Ten shillings, and it was wortfc 
 twenty pounds. 
 
 Did those trustees of those four charities, being- almost all the same 
 persons, lease to each other ? Some of them ; Mr. Qreenham has 
 got two or three of those things ; Mr. Penny has got some of the alms- 
 house land. 
 
 Is Mr. Greenham a trustee of the charity of which he has a lease ? 
 He calls himself a custos or warden of the almshouse. 
 
 Is Mr. Penny ? He is a churchwarden, and he holds some of the 
 portreeve land and some of the almshouse land. 
 
 Mr. Greenham is a burgess ? Yes ; he says he is. 
 
 What lease has he ? He has some land of the poor almshonse, t 
 believe. 
 
 What does he pay ? Very trifling, I believe. 
 
 Is he a trustee of the poor almshouse ? He calls himself a burgess. 
 
 Is he a trustee of the Wobourn almshouse? He calls himself a custos 
 or warden, and has, with others, leased out house, &c. 
 
 What are the uses to which the church lands were destined > For 
 beautifying the church, as we understood. 
 
 Is the church beautified accordingly ? I received, as churchwarden, 
 money, 11. Is. 4r/. and the land is estimated at ISO/. 
 
 Did you go into the court of Chancery soon after the year 1802 ? 
 We instituted proceedings there in 1804. 
 
 How long were you in Chancery ? We are not out yet ; we have 
 paid twelve or thirteen hundred pounds, and only received about three, 
 hundred from the town. 
 
 Have you found that court afford you relief? Oh, it has ruined me. 
 
 Have you found the expenses heavy ? Oh, good God, I have wished 
 myself out of the world a thousand times since I have got into it ; it 
 has entirely ruined me ; I had a nice business, which brought me in 
 four or five hundred a year, which it has ruined j and 1 have now a 
 wife and family. 
 
 To Mr. IVtlmingto* ] Have you suffered anything in this court ? 
 My heart is almost broken ; indeed my nerves are so shook by the 
 losses I have sustained by this proceeding, that I scarcely know what 
 I am speaking of, and I have a wife and eight children ; it is the most 
 grievous thing to me I have ever known ; I was a churchwarden only 
 two years. 
 
 To Mr. Collini.'] What have yon found the court of Chancery to 
 be r It has cost me about 500/. and I am afraid I do not know the worst 
 of it yet ; I suppose the other party will bring in a bill against us. 
 
 To Mr. Walts.] By whose desire did you institute the proceedings ? 
 By an order of the vestry, dated 24th April, 1804, to the following 
 effect : " At a vestry duly called and held, we whose names are hereunto 
 signed, do order and authorize the churchwardens to call upon the oc- 
 cupiers of the church lands, and every other person whom it might 
 concern, for payment of the rents and arrears thereof, and on nonpay- 
 ment, to sue any person or persons for the said rents and arrears there- 
 of; and also to request of the trustees of the church lands, or any 
 other person, to produce to them all deeds and writings relative thereto 
 for their information ; and further, to prosecute any suit?, to the 
 maintaining and re-establishing the charity and rights of this town j 
 and we hereby authorize and empower the said churchwardens to re- 
 imburse themselves all costs and expenses attending this business afore- 
 said by rates. As witness our hands this 24th April, 1804." Signed by 
 fourteen principal inhabitants of the town. This was a meeting held
 
 YEOVIL CHARITIES. 79 
 
 vfter many different vestries had been called on the subject. The reason 
 of this was, that Mr. Phillips, the vicar, promised to meet the vestry 
 three weeks before on that day ; and instead of his coming, he sent a 
 note by his curate, Mr. Tomkins, to say, the gentlemen that had any 
 books, deeds or writings relative to the charities, were to withhold them ; 
 and if the town and churchwardens were not satisfied, there was a court 
 to apply to. 
 
 Is it, according to your estimate, estates, some in band, and some on 
 leases, to the amount of upwards of 2000/. year, that ought to be 
 applied to four charitable purposes in Yeovil ? Yes, I know the property 
 well ; I have been over it and seen it several times, and I have no doubt 
 of that being about the valuation, was it not leased out, or more. 
 
 How came you to be so much money out of pocket, and that you have 
 not reimbursed yourself out of the rate? Many of the trustees would 
 not pay a farthing. 
 
 Have you any means of reimbursing yourself? Only by the court 
 of Chancery; the parish is in our debt about 523'., as on the church 
 book. 
 
 Have you ever levied a rate for it ? They will not grant any thing. 
 
 Do you mean to say, that you having been ousted of your place at 
 churchwarden by the opposite party, in consequence, as you represent, 
 of having taken part in these inquiries, they being in possession of the 
 offices, refuse to levy a rate to reimburse you ? Yes. 
 
 Might you not have brought your action against your successors of 
 the parish generally ? Yes, but what can we do ; we hare no money to 
 go to law with, we have spent so much already. 
 
 Do you mean to represent, that having found the court of Chancery so 
 expensive, you were unwilling to go to further expense? We cannot go 
 further ; we have dropped every thing. There was a man who promised 
 to pay his share, amounting to fifty pounds of that 500/. ; I went to 
 law with him ; it came on at the last assizes, and it cost me nearly 
 200/. 
 
 Did you recover the fifty pounds ? No, they said it could not be done, 
 because it was not out of Chancery. 
 
 How mucli has it cost you altogether for your proceedings in Chancery 
 and at law ? About 1,200/., besides our trouble and travelling expenses, 
 and about 200-'. at the assizes the other day. 
 
 For this 1,400/. and upwards, what have you gained for the charity? 
 It is almost as bad as ever it was. There is little or no difference, and 
 we suppose, have got our opponents to pay likewise. 
 
 How long have you been in the court of Chancery ? Ever since 
 1805 ; it is complete ruination ; it is worse now than ever it was, as the 
 attorney employed is dead. 
 
 Is the case heard, and does it stand for judgment; is it ready to be 
 decided ? It is in no state at all, that we know of; it is not two pence 
 better than it was at first 
 
 Were there any other falls of timber, besides that in 1808? Yes, at 
 the alms-house. I was up there to look at it some t me ago. The will 
 of the founder requires that it shall be entitled " Wobonrn Almshouse;" 
 and I saw upon the door an inscription, " This almshouse was taken down 
 and new built, at the expense of Mr. Henry Dunn, of Yeovil." 
 
 Docs be undertake the management of the funds ? He did at that 
 time. 
 
 Was he himself in the occupation of the lands ? He leased out lands 
 and some premises to himself, without small or no fines whatever. 
 
 At what rents? Some at ten shillings a year j some more, some lesji, 
 as I before stated.
 
 80 CHOYDON CHARITIES. 
 
 Samborne's Charity, founded 22d Edward III, endowed with Seven 
 Messuages, and Thirty Acres of Land, in Yeovil, Kingston, and Marsh. 
 
 15 Edw. IV. In 1476, John Wobourne founded and endowed an 
 almshouse for one custos, a master, two wardens, and twelve poor 
 people of both sexes, and in 1477 settled on the said foundation, 128 
 acres of land:, ar:, mead:, and past:, lying in Okeford Fitzpain, for 
 support of said poor, and maintenance of a chaplain to perform service 
 every day in a chapel erected for their use. 
 
 17 Edw. IV, Thomas Bartlett, vicar of Yeovil, and others conferred 
 14 messuages and 21 acres of land in Yeovil, Ashingtou, Kingston, 
 and Henford, all held under the abbot of Sion, on the above institution, 
 and confirmed by Edward the Fourth. 
 
 In the year 1619, a suit in Chancery was commenced by the poor 
 of Yeovil against Francis Sutton and others, for demising and selling 
 sundry parcels of land belonging to the almshouse, considerably under 
 their known real valua, to the injury of the said charity ; on a hearing 
 of the case, the Lord Chancellor ordered a commission to the bishop 
 of Bath and Wells, and Dr. Hassey, one of the masters in chancery,, 
 who passed a decree; 
 
 1st. That the tenants and oustos of the said almshouse negligence 
 was inexcusable, and that they should pay ten pounds to the poor of 
 the said almshouse. 
 
 3d. That for a fuller amends unto the poor people, the tenants who 
 had taken leases for longer terms than the statute made for hospitals 
 permit, should surrender the same. 
 
 And 3dly. That from henceforth they should let no leases for longer 
 terms than the charter for their foundation and the laws of the land 
 permitted. 
 
 Which being certified by the said commissioners, the Lord Chan- 
 cellor confirmed the same. 
 
 .The rules and orders are by Mr. John Beal, vicar of Yeovil, rector 
 of Sock D<:nnis, and sometimes fellow of King's College, in Cambridge, 
 extracted put of the translated copy of one of the tripartite indentures, 
 which is attested by A. Maynard, to agree with the writing indented, 
 lying in the vestry of the Monks of Montacuto, and with the writings 
 indented, lying in the coffer of the bishop Baldock, in the chapel of 
 Saint George, at Paul's, in London.
 
 CROYDON CHARITIES. 81 
 
 CROYDON CHARITIES. 
 
 June 6. 
 Mr. William Dutton Harding, called in ; and Examined. 
 
 You reside at Croydon in Surrey ? Yes. 
 
 Have you had occasion to inquire there into the state of charitable 
 funds in that parish? Yes; the last eight years I have had little or 
 nothing else to employ me. 
 
 Are the funds considerable if well managed ? There appears to be 
 about 300/. a year coming in to the parish funds, but not appropriated 
 to the poor, except about fifty or sixty pounds worth of bread on new 
 year's day ; there is an hospital founded by archbishop Parker; these 
 are the ordinances of it. 
 
 Is there any thing be- ides this hospital ? There is another school of 
 archbishop Tennyson, established in the year 1714; I do nut know much 
 about that, but the funds are considerable; aid they have made some 
 alteration, and they took archbishop Laud's, a farm at Home in Surrey, 
 am) appropriated it to the other charity, which is to bind out poor boys 
 apprentice, not to teach the free school. 
 
 Is there any other ? Yes. there is another almshouse for seven poor 
 people, as to which I have been in Chancery, there is the constitution 
 altered by bishop Parker. 
 
 Can you give the Committee any idea of the total real value of those 
 charitable funds ? Here is a statement, entitled, " An Abstract of the 
 Estates belonging to the Hospital of the Holy Trinity in Croydon, on the 
 foundation of archbishop Whirgift," from which it appears that the rental 
 of 1812 was 3361. It. 9Jrf. ; that the new rental in 1818 is 8601. 4*. IJrf. ; 
 but that the real annual value of the estates, surveyed by Mr. John 
 Middleton of Lambeth, a land surveyor of great eminence, amounts ta 
 3,675/. It. 6d. I have it in his own hand-wr.ting. 
 
 [ The witness delivered it ins and it mu read. ]
 
 82 
 
 CROYDON CHARITIES. 
 
 AN ABSTRACT OF THE ESTATES 
 
 Belonging to the Hospital of the Holy Trinity in Croydon, of the Foundation of John 
 Wkitgtft, Archbishop of Canterbury. 
 
 NAMES OF THE TENANTS, 
 and 
 DESCRIPTION OF PREMISES. 
 
 Old Rental, 
 
 1812. 
 
 ew Rental, 
 1318. 
 
 \nnual Value 
 f the Estates, 
 
 by 
 
 . Middleton, 
 Lambeth. 
 
 
 . ' t. d. 
 Free. 
 
 . s. d. 
 Free, 
 
 . s. d. 
 
 Hit 
 
 Reverend Bisaet, schoolmaster's house, &c. - - 
 
 4 10 74 
 
 JO 3 j| 
 4 12 4 
 6 10 2 
 5 6 10 
 7 17 1 
 2 12 6 
 10 
 
 6 5 
 11 9 11 
 
 22 9 10 
 3 16 8 
 6 13 10 
 13 1 li 
 21 6 10 
 42 6 6 
 17 5 
 8 18 3 
 6 14 2 
 19 6 
 
 2 19 3 
 3 16 
 16 2 
 
 7 8. 
 
 2 
 2 
 
 6 13 4 
 57 
 27 8 
 
 10 
 
 35 
 
 274 
 60 
 20 
 30 
 27 
 10 
 5 5 
 4 _ 
 10 
 25 
 
 130 
 3 16 8 
 6 13 10 
 13 1 li 
 21 6 104 
 42 6 6 
 17 5 
 8 18 3 
 6 14 2 
 19 6 
 
 2 19 3 
 3 16 
 16 2; 
 7 8. 
 ^~ 
 2 
 
 6 13 4 
 57 
 
 27 8 
 
 10 ' 
 45 
 
 298 
 80 
 75 
 55 
 66 
 13 10 
 45 
 4 _ 
 
 jiy 
 
 85 
 
 195 
 48 
 32 
 92 
 186 
 542 
 339 
 85 
 60 
 11 13 6 
 
 42 
 37 
 12 5 
 
 3 
 29 
 
 6 13 4 
 57 
 278 
 
 
 Mr. Hutsou, farm, cottages, and land, 182 A. 3 it. 
 
 R, Osbom, 10 houses, yards, garden and allotment 
 
 
 J. Mann, 2 houses and land, 4 A. 2 R, 37 P. - - 
 J. Streeter, part of a house and land - - - - 
 W. Chatfield, cottage, stables, &c. at turnpike - 
 General Grose> land, A. 3 u. 19 P. - - - - - 
 R. Blumsum, house and garden, 37 p. - - - - 
 J. Dunkley and R. Howes, 3 houses, Northampton 
 * H. E. D. Radcliffe, house and land, 96 A. 2 R. 
 *v\ D 
 
 T. Penfold, house and garden, George-street - - 
 A. Harmaii, Swan Inn, and allotments, A. 3 R. 9 P. 
 A. Adair, 2 houses, gardens, &c. George-street - 
 - Do. - land, 75 A. OR. 33 p. and FoxandfJoost 
 T. Meager, Croham Manor farm, 342 A. 3 R. 33 p 
 R. Bidgc, Biggin farm, Norwood 90 A. R. P. 
 T. Blake, 6 houses in Church-street - - < 
 Mrs. Lewen, 2 houses and gardens at North End 
 
 D. Shove, 5 houses and gardens, and 4 acres al 
 
 G. Richardson, 6 do. and do. adjoining - - - 
 Lady Blunt, land and allotments - - - - 
 W. Cole, Land at Crohara Hurst, 8 A. - - - 
 J. Brickwood, land, an allotment, A. 3 R. 35 P. 
 J. Moore, house and land, Thernton Heath 
 For a fee farm rent, No. 19, St. Paul's Church 
 
 J. Moore, a farm at Mitcbam, 48 A. 2 R. p. - 
 Dividends or interest of 90 It. 2s. 9d. 3 per cents 
 
 
 Rental increased during the present warden's tin 
 
 Total 
 
 336 7 9 
 523 16 3, 
 
 860 4 1 
 
 860 4 1: 
 
 2673 2 6 
 
 * The Rent now offered by tlie tenant.
 
 CHOYDON CHARITIES. 83 
 
 Who employed Mr. Middleton ? I got him his birth as surveyor to 
 the hospital. 
 
 Was he a regular surveyor employed by the hospital, by the officers ? 
 Yes, appointed under their han i and seal. 
 
 How do you account for the lands being let so much under their real 
 value ? They weie let formerly at what they call twenty-one years lease, 
 renewable every seven years, upon a fine. 
 
 What fine is taken upon the present renewals ? We have abated from 
 that plan, and let twenty-one years leases at rack rents, and that causes 
 the alteration. 
 
 Before the alteration what was the amount of the fine ? Various suns 
 were taken. 
 
 Had you ever any proceedings relative to these matters, at law ? Yes, 
 we had; the Reverend Dr. John Rose was schoolmaster from 1801 to 
 1811 ; we were a long time before we could get the Archbishop to dis- 
 miss him, which we were desirous of, on account of his having received 
 fines, and not brought them to account. 
 
 How much did it appear he bad received, without bringing to account ? 
 We did not know at that time, but it is now ascertained, by the trial in 
 the action which we brought against him, that 480''. Is Id. had been so 
 appropriated by him, which sum we recovered in damages. 
 
 Did it appear, that there was any other suui he had appropriated, be- 
 sides this ? Yes ; we have since recovered some. 
 
 To what amount ? We do not know ; the parties refuse to tell us. 
 
 What were the fair emoluments of the schoolmaster altogether ?- He 
 has a house ami premises, valued at 70'. a year, and 20/. a year for 
 reading prayers in the chapel, and whatever the other poor brothers 
 have ; this is 20/. over and above their pay ; they bad about 3*. 4d. a 
 week when I began with them ; I have now got them up to 81. besides 
 25s. every quarter day. 
 
 What became of the overplus of the funds ? We keep paying them 
 up now; they have all the money that is coming in, which is about 
 12*. a week, but we shall have more soon ; they were let in reversion, 
 and that is done away. 
 
 Hitherto, you have spoken of archbishop Whitgift's hospital ; are you 
 aware of any other poor funds, of which you can give information to the 
 Committee ? There is another sum of money in the funds of another 
 charity ; we have extracted this from the register of memorials at the 
 clerk of the peace office (producrns a paper.) 
 
 What is the real property here estimated at ? Besides the landed pro- 
 perty, there is twelve hundred and odd pounds in the funds; it was con- 
 sidered, if the property had been let according to the valuation of it by 
 the parish surveyor, it would be 303/. 10*. 
 
 What is it actually let at ? We never could find out; it is impossible 
 to say ; the trustees, as they call themselves, wonld not give us an ac- 
 count, and we filed a petition under Sir Samuel Ilomilly's act, and they 
 have raised the pay. 
 
 Have yea any idea of what it is let at ? No, I have not. 
 
 Do you know the estates belonging to any other charities in Croydon ? 
 Yes, there are the parish estates, which are let at 300/. altogether ; but 
 there are petitions in Chancery which stop it, and things are not brought 
 forward as they should be. 
 
 What are they actually let at ? I can tell you some of them ; there 
 are 26 acres of land at New Cross, by Deptfor'd, let at 1431.; they are 
 worth 1,000/. they tell me now. 
 
 For what term is it let ? I believe a shrty years lease. 
 
 What fine was taken ? We do not know that. 
 L2
 
 84 CROYDON CHARITIES?. 
 
 When does it expire? Some years to come $ but they will not (e!l 
 us. 
 
 Who will not tell you ? The churchwardens or governors, who bring 
 it into their accounts ; they put it into the church account. 
 
 In whose hands is the management of the charity to which those 
 acres belong? The money is brought forward by Mr. Drummond, so- 
 licitor of Croydon, and brought into the churchwardens account. 
 
 It belongs to the parish ? Yes, it was 1,f>00/. left by Henry Smith, 
 Esquire, called Dog Smith, about the year 1627. 
 
 Why was he called Dog Smith ? Because he used to travel about the 
 country with a dog. 
 
 Has Whitgift's charity a special visitor ? No. 
 
 Any governor ? No, not that I know of; I believe the parish bought 
 that land I have just mentioned, with the money he left. 
 
 Who are the present churchwardens ? Thomas Head and Thomas 
 Hewson. 
 
 To whom were the acres at Deptford let ? Evans was one name. 
 
 Who is possessed of the deeds relating to Whitgift's hospital > The 
 warden ; I have them in the chest now, and Queen Elizabeth's deed of 
 foundation. 
 
 {The uilnest dtlioertd a document, which wat read,'} 
 
 It it intituled Statnte<), Constitutions and Ordinaunces devised by me 
 John Whi'enift, archbishop of Canterbury ; founder of the hospytall 
 of the Holye Trinity in Croydon, in the county of Surrye, and given 
 unto them of the sayde hospital), for the order, governemenle and 
 direction, touchinge the lands and tenements of the said hospital), 
 and all the members thereof. 
 
 (From a copy in the M.S. library at Lambeth, No. 275.) 
 
 The Archbishop's most noble foundation of his hospital, free school 
 and chapel, at Croydon, was finished in the year 1599. 
 
 The following are the material passages : 
 
 ESTATES, &c. given to the Hospital : 
 
 1619. Two messuages or tenements in Northampton/given . s. tt. 
 to the said hospital by the Rev. Dr. Pretherg ----- 868 
 
 A rent charge payable out of a tenement in St. Paul's 
 Church-yard, London, given to the said hospital by Mr. Ed- 
 ward Barker, of-------------- 6 13 4 
 
 Three-fifths of a farm at Mitcbain, in Surrey*, given to the 
 said hospial, by Palph Snow, Esq. amounting to - - - - *15 8 
 
 A tenement and piece of ground in the Butcher-row, given 
 to the said hospital, by Mr. Richard Stockdale .... 4 10 
 
 A dinner yearly to the said hospital, for which the Fish- 
 mongers company, in London, pay -------- 0134 
 
 And put in the box --.--------- 0100 
 
 Cap, 1. Of the number of these that are to be mayntenedin w 
 by the hospitM. 
 
 FIRST, I do ordeyne that the number of the bretheren and sisteres 
 of the say.le hospital! bh ,11 be ever thirtie at the least, and so many 
 more under XL. in all, as the. revenues of the sayde hospital), accordmge 
 
 * Now (1782) supposed to be let for . 24 a year.
 
 CROYDON CHARITIES. 85 
 
 to the proportion in theis ordinaunces lymitted may heare, untill all 
 the several! roomes therein appointed for lodginge be replenished, of 
 the which number of bretheren one shall teache a common schoole, 
 in Croydon, in the schoolehouse there by me buylded, and perfbrme 
 such other duties as is appointed unto him in these ordinaunces and 
 statuts ; provided alwnys, that the yearly sume of tenn pounds owte of 
 the revenewes be yerely reservid for reparations, sutes in lawe, and other 
 necessary charges, &c. over and above the proportions hereafter lym- 
 mitted. Item, yf any of the places of the poore brethren or sis'ers 
 aforesayde upon any occasion, shall happen to be voyde by the space 
 of one hale inonetbe or more, or the place of the Schoolemaster by the 
 spare of three moneths or more, or yf yt shall please God so to blesse 
 the hospital), as that any other overpluss of revenewe shall remayne 
 when al! the roomes as aforesayde shal be replenished, tlv allowance 
 that shall be due unto suche vi.yde places, and suche overpluss shall 
 be layde up and reserved safe in the common chest of the say.le hospi- 
 tal!, as a stocke to be imployed for repayringe, reedyfyinge, defence 
 in lawe, or for other common charges. 
 
 Item, I ordeine and appoinle that the poore brother, appointed to 
 be the schoolmaster, shall be a parson well qualifyede for that fu.-iction ; 
 that is to saye, an honest man, learnede in the Greeke and Lattin 
 tongues, a good versifiere in bothe the foresayde languages, and able to 
 wryte well, (yf possible yt may bee) which poore brother appointed 
 to that offyce, and qualified and placed as afore, shall hive for his 
 lodginge and dwellinge place, during the time that he contineweth 
 schoolmaster, that house which I have bnylded for that purpose, ad- 
 joyninge to the said hospital), and nere unto the siyde schoolehouse, 
 togither with suche backsides and grounds as I have appointed to be 
 annexed to the sayd house, and which the present schoolemaster nowe 
 enjoyethe; and shall also have the some of twentye pounds yearely 
 for hi* stipande, to bee payde quarterlye, together with other further 
 comodytes of corne or wood, as hereafter shal happen to be allotted 
 to other of the poore brethren of the said hospital!. I do lykewyse 
 ordeyue and appointe that the howse which I have builded for the 
 sayde schoolehowse, and also the howse which I have buylded for the 
 schoolemaster, shal be for ever imployede to that use onlye, and to no 
 other. 
 
 Cap. 7. Off the office of the poore brother that is appointed to 
 be schoolemaster. 
 
 The schoolemaster shall freelye teache suche of the children of the 
 parishe of Croydon, without exaetinge any thmge for th-yre teachinge, 
 as are of the poorer sorte, suche as shal be so accounted by the vycar 
 or curate of Crrydon, and two of the better sorte of the inhabyiants 
 in Croydon; but yet it shal be lawfull to and for the sayde schoole- 
 master to receave that which is voluntaryiy be-towde uppon him by 
 any of the sayde poorer sorte of parishioners, and for the children of 
 suche as be of the better sorte of the parishioners of Croydon. Yt the 
 sayde schoolmaster shill enac'e to much for theyre teerhsnge, or refuse 
 to teacbe them, the same shall be ordered or moderated by the arch- 
 bysboppe ol Canterbury for the ty me beinge. 
 
 Bothe the sayd schoolemaster and scholars shall from tyme to tyme 
 be ordered, governed and directed by suche prescriptions and ordi- 
 naunces in all points as by me the founder of the sayde hospital! shal be 
 in my lyfetime devised, and after by my successors archbyshops of
 
 86 CROYDON CHARITIES. 
 
 Canterbury, so that always the saide ordinauuces of my successors be 
 not contrarye to my ordinaunces. 
 
 Cap. 19. Holts the tuardeine and schoolemaster shall be cen- 
 sured, if he or they shall be fownde to be negligente in 
 performynge such duties as by theis ordinaunces are imposed 
 uppon him or them. 
 
 1 doe ordeine, that yfthe wardeine of my sayde hospital! or school- 
 master shal be founde to be necligente in performyng the charge by 
 these ordinaunces imposed uppon him or them, then uppon notyce 
 thereof given to the archbyshopp of Canterburye for tho tyme beinge, 
 siH-.hc punishmente shall be inflicted upon him or them as the sayde 
 archbishop in his dyscretion shal! thinke conveniente. 
 
 Cap 21. Of t he founder, visitor, and cheiffe governor of the 
 hospitall. 
 
 It shall be lawful! for me the nowe archbishop of Canterbury, founder 
 of the sayde hospital!, to abrogate, add unto, change, or alter theis 
 ordinaunce.s, aud to place or displace anie member thereof, wythe 
 cau.se or without cause to be rendered thereof unto any other, to dispose 
 of the lodgeings in and wythoute the sayde hospital), to lett leases, and 
 helpe to governe the same, according as shall please me, during my 
 natural lyffe, without any other persons iutermedlinge therein; after 
 the death of me the sayde founder, then the archbishop of Canterbury 
 for the time beinge, bye himself or other whom he shall appointe, shall 
 have full powre and autborite, from tyme to tyrne, not only to interprett 
 any doughte ansinge out of the ordinaunces which by me the founder 
 shal be It fie unto the hospitall, but allso shall have full power, libertye 
 and authoritie to punishe, confine and remove anie member thereof, 
 convicted accord in go to theis ordinaunces. 
 
 I doe ordeine that my successors archbishops of Canterbury, shall be 
 the cont:newall patrons, governors and visitors of the sayde hospitall, 
 earnestlye requestinge them (in the bowelles of Christe) to have from 
 tyme to tyme a fatherly and compassionate care of theire good estate, 
 and of the poore members thereof, and that they wolde be pleased from 
 tyme to (yme (as occasion shall be offered,) to compose theyr con- 
 troversies, to protecte, advise, order, governe and direct them, and when 
 neede shall require, by themselves or bye such discreite persons as they 
 shall thinke fitt, in personn freelyeto visite the sayde hospital!, and to 
 enquire bothe of the publique state of itt, and also of the private 
 demeanure of every particular member thereof, by such a course as the 
 lawts doth nllowe ; which visitation I wolde heartily wishe mighte at the 
 least every third yeare be performed, whether there seeme anie neces- 
 sarie occasion thereof or noe. 
 
 Jo. Canluar. 
 
 Houses belonging to the Hospital in the year 1810. 
 
 2 tenements in High-street, held on lease by Mr. S. Scott. 
 
 2 do. near the town-hall - - do. - - Mr. H. Strudwicke. 
 
 1 do. the Swann inn ... do. - - A. Harman, Esq. 
 
 2 do. at North End - - - - do. - - Mr. M. Lewen. 
 11 do. adjoining ----- do. - Mr. R. Osborn*. 
 
 1 do. in George-street - - - do. - - Mrs. M. Leweti. 
 1 do. in do. ------ do. - - Mr. T. Penfold.
 
 CROYDON CHARITIES. 87 
 
 6 do. facing: the palace pond - do. - - Mr. T. Blake. 
 
 5 do. in the Old Town - - - do. - - Mr. G. Richardson. 
 
 6 do. in do. . - - - - - do. - - Mr. D. Shove. 
 1 do. at Woodside - - - - do. - - Mr. J. Sharp. 
 
 1 do. at do. ------ do. - - Mr. M. Lewen. 
 
 2 do. the manor house at Croham, do. - - Mr. T. Meager. 
 1 do. called Biggin House - do. - - Mr. B. Ridge. 
 
 Lands belonging to the Hospital in the year 1810. 
 
 About 400 acres arable & woodland, do. - - Mr. T. Meager. 
 
 About 8 do. called White Pit - do. - - Messrs. Fly's. 
 
 About 60 do. at Addiscombe, - do. - - A. Adair, Ksq. 
 
 About 60 do. at do. - - - - do. - - T. Tait, Esq. 
 
 About 40 do. at do. - - - - do. - - J. Darby, Esq. 
 
 About 200 do. at Woodside - - do. - - Mrs. M. Lewen. 
 
 About 3 do. at do. - - - - do. - - Mr. J. Sharp. 
 
 About 84 do. Biggin farm - - do. - - Mr. B. Ridge. 
 
 A field called Clotmead - - - do. - - Mr. J. Mann. 
 
 A do. near do. do. - - Mr. W. Chatfield. 
 
 The above statement of property was, after much difficulty, collected 
 by (Mr. 6. Hcffer,) one of the poor brethren of the hospital. ,-.- 
 
 Do you know of any other lands than those you have mentio ued r 
 There are seven acres of laud, called the Hermitage Land, at Streatham. 
 
 What does that let for? For 35L now; that is let at its value; I 
 went and bid all the money for the purpose: there is a farm at Stalk- 
 enden, at Linstie!d. 
 
 Of how many acres does it consist ? One hundred acres. ' , , 
 
 What does it let at ? At SOL 
 
 What is it worth? I am not a judge; I have never seen it; that is 
 about eight or nine miles below Croydon; there are two tenements near 
 Mint Walk, let at a rent of 40*. 
 
 What are they worth ? Perhaps fifty or sixty pounds ; there are two 
 tenements or stables, called the Old Shops, let for 2/. ; I rather think 
 they have been changed away ; and we have but one stable instead of 
 two tenements. 
 
 Who is tfce visitor of the hospital ? The archbishop of Canterbury, 
 
 Does he ever visit ? Yes, he has. 
 
 When did he visit last ? He appointed two other persons last Monday 
 to visit it, not on account of the revenues, but on account of the mis- 
 conduct, as they conceived, of the warden and schoolmaster; this 
 warden I got put in ; he was one of the poor brothers ; he is offensive to 
 the archbishop and to the clergy : the school is now kept open by 
 subscription, and not according to the ordinances. 
 
 What school do you mean ? The hospital. 
 
 Do the ordinances require it to be a free school ? Yes, for such as are 
 of the poorer, and men of the better sort. 
 
 Are they fed or clothed ? No ; neither food or clothing are given ; 
 there was no school kept ; government occupied it as a storehouse within 
 my memory, till Joseph Lancaster came to Croydon, and then Dr. 
 Ireland called a meeting of the inhabitants, and they established a 
 School upon Bell's system. 
 
 In what year ? Lithe year 1819. 
 
 Was this school established by subscription ? It was. 
 
 la it still supported by subscription ? Yes. 
 
 Does Archbishop Whitgift's hospital subscribe to it? No. 
 
 Is the archbishop's school in existence at all? Not at all; the
 
 38 CROYDON CHARITIES. 
 
 schoolmaster appointed on that establishment keeps a private school 
 for his own emolument, and does no public duty as schoolmaster 
 whatever. 
 
 Before, fifty years ago, used there to be a school in the hospital ? Ob, 
 yea. 
 
 How many have you heard of being there ? The old inhabitants hare 
 heard of numbers being instructed there. 
 
 Has the archbishop, as visitor, insisted upon the school being revived ? 
 No, but I have, and he will not do it. 
 
 What steps have you taken ? I have written to him several times 
 formerly, and wished him to have it established upon its original foun- 
 dation, as specified in the statutes; because, I said, those subscribers 
 would die off. 
 
 What answer did his Grace give you ? He never thought proper to 
 notice my letters. 
 
 Did the parish, at any vestry meeting, express a sense of your useful 
 conduct in investigating these charities ? Unanimously, by a resolution 
 of thanks, 300 being present, on the 13th May, 1818, after I had been 
 engaged in these investigations for upwards of eight years, and undergone 
 several suits in law and equity. 
 
 Did you experience great vexation in the course of these law pro- 
 ceedings ? Nothing else, besides a most respectable gentleman being 
 maliciously indicted for perjury, for having given evidence in those 
 inquiries, who was most honourably acquitted. 
 
 Was the dean of Westminster, Doctor Ireland, vicar of Croydon ? 
 Yes, he was, for twenty years. 
 
 Has he any official connection with the charities ? He is trustee 
 of the farm at Mitcham, belonging to the hospital, which he will not 
 give up. 
 
 Is he lessee ? No, Major Moore is lessee. 
 
 Has he had any thing to do with Archbishop Whitgift's hospital ? 
 Yes, he had for twenty years, as vicar. 
 
 June 8. 
 
 Mr. Thomas Hewson and Mr. Thomas Head called in ; and 
 Examined. 
 
 You are churchwardens of Croydon ? Mr. Heteton: Yes. 
 
 Do you know any thing of Archbishop Whitgift's foundation for a 
 school ? We can give very little information upon that. 
 
 Is t here a school there ? Yes. 
 
 A free school ? It should be a free school. 
 
 Thf re is a school supported by voluntary contribution ? Yes. 
 
 Is there a school in Croydon upon Archbishop Whitgift's foundation? 
 Ye, there is a school opened, and a schoolmaster who is paid from 
 Archbishop Whitgift's charity, 20/. a year, and he has a house. 
 
 How many boys does he teach on Archbishop Whitgift's foundation? 
 None, there are none educated but under Archbishop Tennyson's 
 will. 
 
 Mr. Heid I believe the reason none are taught under Archbishop 
 Whitgift's will is, that none have applied. 
 
 Does the mnster teach any boys on any other foundation ? The school 
 is opened on Dr Bell's system. 
 
 Mr. Heaton. There are two schools there; Mr. Bissett is appointed
 
 CROYDOtf, CHARITIES. 89 
 
 schoolmaster by the society, and he has the house to live in, and the sa- 
 lary belonging to Ar hbishop Whitgift's foundation. 
 
 Who is the other schoolmaster ? I do not recollect his name ; but that 
 on Bell's planr is taught in Whitgift's schoolhouse. 
 
 Doe- Mr.. Bisset, .'ho has a salary from the charity, teach any scholars 
 at all ? Yes, he does. 
 
 In what way ? I suppose as boarders ; he takes in boarders. 
 
 Dees he take in any free, and for nothing ? 1 do not think he does one. 
 
 You <=tatf, that the reason why he teaches none free, is, that none have 
 applied ? So it is *^aid. 
 
 Why do people in Croydon wish to be taught when they pay, and not 
 apply to be taught for nothiu? ? Mr. Head. I believe the reason is from 
 the long disuse of it; that seems to be the case. 
 
 H.ive people in Croydon any objection to have their children taught 
 for nothing ? No, if they were aware that they could have them taught 
 for nothing, they would be glad to attend to.it. 
 
 Mr. Hezeson. It has been forbid in such a way, that they do not apply 
 for it. 
 
 By whom has it been forbidden ? It has been discouraged j there has 
 not been a school for many years. 
 
 Do you know any thing about the property of the hospital ? A little 
 about it. 
 
 Are the lands much under-let? Yes, I should think they are ; they 
 are let upon lease. 
 
 Do you know what is done with the overplus oF the funds, after paying 
 the expenses ? I do not know , the warden, the poor brethren, and Mr. 
 Uisset the schoolmaster, have the management of it altogether. 
 
 What do they do with it ? I cannot say. 
 
 Mr. Head. I believe, s ; n-e an investigation has taken place, it has 
 been applied according to the donor's will. 
 
 What is the yearly value of the estate at New Cross of 35 acres of land ? 
 Mr. Heuison. We cannot tell ; I suppose 1,000/. or 1,5001. a year ; 
 but it is let on a long lease. 
 
 Who let the lease ? The trustees. 
 
 To whom is it let ? It is let to several tenants. 
 
 When did the lease commence ? That t cannot tell. 
 
 How many years are there to run ? I do not know, but it is said that 
 the lease is for ninety years. 
 
 Has it been let within the last twenty years ? Yes, I think it has been. 
 
 What fine was taken en letting it on lease? That I know nothing 
 about ; the parish has lately received nothing from this estate. 
 
 Who let it? The trust; there were twelve or thirteen when they 
 were appointed some years a<ro, but very fetv people know who are the 
 trustees ; Mr. Drammond, of Croydon, the clerk to the trustees, will be 
 able to give every information upon the subject. 
 
 Have you seen the pr nted paper which Mr. Harding produced to the 
 Committee ? No, 1 do not know that I have ; I have seen papers printed 
 in Croydon, which may be those referred to. 
 
 As far as you know, do you believe them to be correct ? Yes, I be- 
 lieve they are. 
 
 Do they make the actual rent 336/. a year ? Yes. 
 
 Do they make the rent they might be let for, 2,673/. ? Yes. 
 
 Do they make the new rental in 1308, 860/. ? Yes, so far as we know; 
 but we know very little about it; the warden could give most informatics 
 upon that subject.
 
 WELLINGBOROUGH CHARITIES. 
 
 June 6. 
 John Newton Goodall, Esq. called in ; and Examined. 
 
 Do you belong to Wellingborough ? Yes. 
 
 Have you attended to the estates of the charities in that place ? I 
 have, for these last seven or eight years 5 1 have been employed by the 
 parish as their solicitor. 
 
 Are there many endowed charities there ? There are several. 
 Have they ample funds if they were well managed ? Doubtless. 
 In land or houses? In land and houses, a variety of estates. 
 What do you estimate the annual value of those estates, as far as you 
 can conjecture, if they were well managed ? I believe they are worth 
 1,000/. and odd ; the feoffees estate was about ISO/. ; it was let by public 
 auction at 500/. ; but that does not solely relate to the education of 
 children, but also to other charitable purposes mixed up with education. 
 Are they the same trustees in the other charities who are in the edu- 
 cation charities ? No, distinct. 
 
 Are there the same deeds of endowment relating to both ? No, distinct. 
 Are they wholly unconnected ? Not exactly so ; the feoffees of the 
 town land pay to the head master and under master, a gift, I think, in 
 order to carry on the purposes of the school, as they call it ; but the 
 ether charity connected with Freeman's school emanates from Freeman's 
 chanty, that is at this time before the court; and we have put in the 
 schemes, and settled the schemes on an excellent footing, so as to have 
 a great many more scholars instead of clothing ; that is now before the 
 court. 
 
 What is the real rent actually received from those estates at the 
 present time f There is about 200/. from that before the court ; 160/. 
 the master found it worth. 
 
 Is that actually received now ? Yes. 
 
 What do you take the whole revenue actually received by those charities 
 at Wellingborough to amount to? I think the last time we had a 
 meeting, I undertook to prove, that though there was only 681. a year 
 upon the benefaction board in the church, there were rents actually 
 received belonging to the parish, to the amount of about a thousand 
 more. 
 
 When was the board put up ? By the churchwardens and overseers, 
 I think, 15 or ]6 years agoj the rents have been raised considerably 
 since that. 
 
 To what is the overplus of that fund appropriated ? To such uses, I 
 believe, as the feoffees choose for the benefit of the town ', but I never 
 saw the deed. 
 
 In whose possession is the deed ? I do not know that. 
 Who are the feoffees ? They are gentlemen of the town of Welling- 
 borough, but heretofore, before it was interfered in and re-let at a public 
 auction, it used to be let to- their tons and their relations. 
 
 Do any of the feoffees occupy any of the property themselves ? I bc- 
 lie? e not.
 
 WELLINGBOROUGH CHARITIES . 91 
 
 When did they cease so to do? t believe eight or nine years ago. 
 
 Wai that in consequence of your interference? No, I believe not; 
 but I did pledge myself that I would bring the whole upon the benefaction* 
 boards. 
 
 Are there any special visitors in the charities ? None that I know of. 
 
 Any governors? None that I know of. 
 
 Any school ? There is a free school. 
 
 How many children are there? I cannot say how many; but the 
 grammar school, I believe has been a sinecure for twenty years or more 
 until Chribtma> last. 
 
 What does the master receive ? I think he receives about 35A from an 
 estate at Burton, including perhaps what the feoffees give him, and he has 
 not had a single scholar for many years until Christmas last. 
 
 In what way do the feoffees, in point of fact, dispose of the surplus for 
 the benefit of the town ? They lay their accounts before the parish every 
 Easter; lately they did not use to do so, but they have for some years 
 past submitted their accounts to a meeting of the parish. 
 
 How do they employ them ? I believe by giving money away to poor 
 people who do not receive relief. 
 
 How did they employ it before they were in the habit of making their 
 accounts public ? I never knew; I do not believe the parish were at all 
 informed. 
 
 How was it let ? I never heard any complaint. 
 
 Did they take beneficial leases themselves ? No ; I believe not. 
 
 Have any ef their families beneficial leases of the lands ? Not that I 
 know ; they were let at one time to the families and friends of the trus- 
 tees, but not latterly. 
 
 When did the proceedings in the Court of Chancery commence ? 
 I think four or five years ago. 
 
 How near to an end is it ? The master has recommended a recon- 
 ciliation on the schemes, and we have nearly succeeded on our second 
 set of schemes put in before the master. 
 
 How much money has been required to be advanced to carry these 
 proceedings before the court? Three hundred pounds I should think ; 
 we had an order for the payment of the taxed costs out of the charity j 
 the churchwardens and overseers petitioned by desire of the parish. 
 
 Have you made any attempts at different times to get the accounts 
 corrected ? I have applied to the particular trustees, who called them- 
 selves trustees of Fishers, to get the accounts corrected, but it is not 
 pleasant to have to do these things. I have been called before a public 
 ordeal of the parish, on the pretence that I was going to ruin the parish 
 by expenses, and so on ; but the facts bore me so out, that the parish 
 voted me a unanimous resolution of thanks ; I told them I would bear 
 the whole expense sooner thai it should be given up ; the trustees are 
 all magistrates and attend the petty sessions, where I have to meet them 
 in the discharge of my duty ; we shall now have a very good school, and 
 a good many of them, instead of having 25 girls, whom we all clothed. 
 The schemes which are now in, are approved by the master and the 
 parish.
 
 92 
 
 HUNTINGDON SCHOOL. 
 
 June 8. 
 
 Samuel Wells t Esq. called in ; and Examined. 
 
 You are a solicitor at Huntingdon ? Yes. 
 
 Have you had occasion to look into the state of the charities at Hun- 
 tingdon ? I had occasion to look into a particular charity some years 
 ago, St. John's hospital. 
 
 Is that a considerable charity ? A very considerable charity. 
 
 When was it founded ? In the reign of one of the Edwards, Edward 
 the Second or Third ; it was, founded by David earl of Huntingdon. 
 
 How did he endow it? With lands and tenements in Huntingdon 
 and its vicinity ; by an inquisition taken in the reign of Qu en Elizabeth, 
 it was found that the hospital was endowed for the purpose of a free 
 grammar school for the town of Huntingdon. 
 
 Was that a commission for charitable uses ? Yes. 
 
 In what year was it executed? It was a commission out of Chan- 
 cery (I think not under the statute) in the 6th of Elizabeth. 
 
 What did they find the uses to be ? For founding a free grammar 
 school for the town of Huntingdon. 
 
 Did it state the value of the estates thfin ? No ; but I find in Nas- 
 mith's Notitiae Monumental Antiquae, it *ras 37/. 12s. in the reign of 
 Edward the Second or Third. 
 
 Have you any means of knowing the value in Elizabeth's lime ? No : 
 I filed an information in the year 1810, against tht mayor, aldermen, and 
 burgesses, at the relation of Thomas Allnutt, Esq. and others ; when I 
 filed the information, they sent me and the relatois to the Rev. Mr. Bay- 
 ley, a most respectable and conscientious clergyman, to Coventry ; and 
 one of the aldermen dismissed another of the relators, who was a trades- 
 man, from his employ. The conduct of the corporation was infamous 
 in this respect. The town beiiag generally of a different way of thinking, 
 they treated us with every possible^ in ark of disgrace that could be ; if 
 we had committed any crime in the town, they could not have treated us 
 worse than we were treated. 
 
 Did the corporation then drive you to a commission ? I was under the 
 necessity, in order to get an answer, to attach them, and to seize the mace 
 before I could get the answer. 
 
 What did they swear by their answer, as to the rent? They swore 
 that it never exceeded 163/. 
 
 Was there a commission issued in this suit to set out the lands ? No ; 
 with great labour and anxiety I lound out the lands which the corporation 
 had embezzled in their commons ; I filed affidavits of the value to save 
 expense ; they took exceptions to those, because the evidence charged 
 was not viva voce, and drove me to a commission to examine witnesses. 
 What did it appear the improved rent was ? 791/. odd. 
 Were any parcels not settforth in the defendants answer? Yes, a 
 great many indeed ; we are driven to an issue next assizes.
 
 BtTNTtNGDON SCHOOL* 
 
 Is the value greater or less than that, now ? To the parties thera?ei res ; 
 they hold them thernsehes ; there are not above two tenants out of the 
 whole number who are not corporators. 
 
 The Committee observe, the quantity of the new pasture is T5 acres, 
 3 roods, and 15 perches; what is the actual rent of thrit? It \vn> 20/. at 
 the time of filing the information ; they have raised it to 601. ; and I 
 proved under the commission that it was worth 334/. 
 
 Where does this 1 e? Close to the town of Huntingdon. 
 
 Da you consider 334/. an extravagant rent? Land oqnal to that was 
 1st for an equal rent, but that 75 acres is stiH more valuable by being 
 added to the commons ; they have added it to their c<>mmons, and that 
 increases the privileges ofaburgpss; and the consequence is, that this 
 charity has greatly aided in returning two members for the borough, for 
 they have increased the value of their commons by it ; the other burgesses 
 have been suffered to build upon the charity estates, and retain the same 
 as tenants at wil, at rents very inferior to the value. Substantiating this 
 inquiry has already cost me, 1 dare say, 1200J. out of my own pocket. 
 
 Is the Reverend Mr. Edwards the schoolmaster ? Yes. 
 
 How many boys does he teach ? He teaches nofie upon the foundation 
 of the hospital ; they have suffered him to build a large boarding-school, 
 and chambers and other things, to make it convenient for a boarrling- 
 school ; he contends he has nothing to do but to teach Latin ; and then 
 he charges them for other things. 
 
 Is there any limitation in the foundation ? No; it is for a free grammar' 
 acliool. 
 
 Is he a burgess ? Yes, he is. 
 
 And a voter? Yes, he is ; and they have taken out of the rents of the 
 hospital for the mayor's feast, 30/. a year. 
 
 The school close is valued at 22/. ; is any rent paid ? No, he has it 
 with the school. 
 
 The Committee observe 14/. a year paid by Mr. Dawes, for that worth 
 40/. ; is he a burgess ? Yes, he is a burgess, whom they have suffered to 
 build upon this land as a tenant at will ; and if he did not follow what 
 they wished, they would turn him out, with all this money upon his 
 head. 
 
 Upon what leases have the burgesses the property ? As tenants at will 
 to the corporation ; the hospital ought to appoint a ir.aster, in whom the 
 estates would be vested ; then the corporation are the visitors of the hos- 
 pital ; they are special visitors; they appointed one of their own body, 
 namely, the mayor for the time being, always master of the hospital, and 
 he applied 30'. a year towards his own entertainment ; afterwards they 
 found it necessary to proceed against one of the tenants on the question 
 respecting some hospital land ; and then they found it necessary to ap- 
 point another alderman, from whom they took a bond t< re-ign, but he 
 never acted ; the master receives the rent up to the present time. 
 
 What is done with the rent ? That I know nothing of; the hospital 
 was founded as well for a school as the support of poor persons who were 
 travelling through (pilsrrims and others) it is supposed to the shrine at 
 Ely; and the corporation, instead of applying this money to the poor 
 vagrants ho come, levy constables disbursements on the inhabitants for 
 more than the rents of this estate. 
 
 To what purpose are the 160/. rents applied ? Thry pay the school- 
 master's salary. I do not know what he has; but I suppose altogether 
 120/. a year, as they state ; n their answer valuing the land and the rents, 
 and so on ; he has 251. a yep.r salary. 
 
 What is done with the rest of the 1637. ? Thirty pounds the mayor 
 has takeu for his own entertainment, and that, with the land tax and
 
 94 HUNTINGDON SCHOOL, 
 
 repairs, probably is all that there is ; there are two old women who hare 
 J8c/. a week ; and there is a bath, but it is rarely used. 
 
 Is there any difference of opinion upon political matter-, among the 
 corporation and burgesses ? No, not any ; they are all under the iu- 
 flnence of Lord Sandwich. 
 
 Is there ever in the borough of Huntingdon, what is commonly termed 
 an opposition ? No, the right of voting has never been defined ; it has 
 never been tried ; it is a maiden borough. 
 
 In whom does it, by reputation, exist ? They say it is in the bur- 
 gesses. 
 
 How many bur-gcssos are there ? About 200. 
 
 How are men admitted burgesses? By the mayor and aldermen; 
 there are twelve aldermen 5 if a burgess's child is born in the borough, 
 he is a burgess ; otherwise it is conferred by the mayor and aldermen. 
 
 Do non-resident burgesses vote ? There has nevc:r been a contest, so 
 that it has never been ascertained ; they claim the right of voting. It 
 is the report of the town, that the members sent by Lord Sandwich pay 
 the rent of the new pasture land ; indeed I have old letters proving that 
 members were abked to pay it, 
 
 In what dots Lord Sandwich's interest consist ? In laud, near the 
 common ; when they takt the stock off the common, they turn it into 
 Lord Sandwich'* land for wintering. 
 
 You mean to say, that the influence is exerted by the accommodation 
 of that land to those burgesses who have the town common ? -Exactly so. 
 
 Does the town common belong to the charity ? Tmy have usurped 
 eighty acres of it. 
 
 Does any part of the town common belong to the town itself ? No, 
 only to the burgesses. 
 
 To whom does the town common belong ? To the burgesses ; but I 
 entertain a very strong doubt upon that subject. 1 consider that every 
 householder, who has cattle levant and couchant, has the right; the 
 burgesses claim a sort of personal right, as burgesses, in the common 
 land, which I do not understand. 
 
 Does any part of the common belong to the hospital ? Eighty acres 
 they have usurped ; the corporation have laid this hospital land to their 
 common ; they have completely laid it open, the metes and bounds 
 have been defaced; I have been obliged to find them out. 
 
 In what way do you conceive the appropriation or leasing or letting of 
 the lands belonging to the charity, influences the election of the mem- 
 bers ? By increasing the value of their commons ; they are more de- 
 sirous to havs the privilege of a burgess, and being a burgess they are 
 obliged to have Lord Sandwich's land. 
 
 How are they obligtd to have Lord Sandwich's land ? Because they 
 could do nothing with their cattle in the winter, when their commons 
 are shut; hut there are other burgesses who live in the centre of the 
 town, who rent this land as tenants at will, who would be turned out, if 
 they did not go as the aldermen chose. 
 
 Are the leases or permissions to occupy at will, granted by the mayor 
 and aldermen ? Yes ; all the efficient duties are performed by the 
 mayor and aldermen, not at all by the master. 
 
 Has Lord Sandwich, or his family, anything to do with the mayor and 
 aldermen ? No doubt he appoints them. 
 
 How does he nominate them ? By having the corporation in his own 
 interest ; Lord Sandwich himself names them. 
 
 Has he himself any office in the borough ? -He is recorder. 
 
 Has he a vote as recorder ? He can attend the counsel, but he is not 
 eligible for recorder, for it must be a man learned in the law.
 
 HUNTINGDON SCHOOL. 95 
 
 Does lie exercise a veto on nominations ? I cannot say; I am not a 
 
 Has there ever been a contest in Huntingdon. I believe there was an 
 attempt at a content when the borough changed hands from General 
 Handyi.ide to Lori Sa-idwich. 
 
 What has been the issue of the proceedings in Chancery ? We 
 obtained an order .vithin these two months, to take the rents away from 
 them, and to appoint a receiver. 
 
 Is that receiver appointed ? He is now upon the eve of being ap- 
 pointed, but they have thrown so many obstacles in the way, that it n 
 most harassing and expensive. 
 
 Is the object of that proceeding to turn out the present occupants of 
 the land ? The object of the proceeding is, to have the land let for the 
 benefit of the inhabitants of the town 
 
 Is the new pasture part of the common ? It is thrown all together, it 
 is stocked altogether; but there are metes and bounds of it $ and there 
 are pieces of charity land intermingled with the common, which they 
 have stocked also. 
 
 How many acres are there all together? 145 acres, one rood, 2S 
 perches. 
 
 [The witness delivered in a Schedule ; it/hick was read, as follows.] 
 
 (B.) 
 
 In Chancery. 
 
 The Attorney General on the relation of Thomas ?/-,__,. 
 Allnutt, Esquire, and others - - - J Complainants. 
 
 o' 
 The Mayor, Aldermen and Burgesses of the Bo-T 
 
 rough of Huntingdon, Sir John Arundel, Knt. > Defendants. 
 and Henry Sweeting, junior - - j 
 
 SCHEDULE of the several Estates belonging to Saint John's Hospital, 
 in the Borough of Huntingdon, with the several Rents thereof, as 
 set forth in the Answer of the Defendant*, and an Estimate or 
 Valuation of the improved Rents, made by Messieurs Humphries 
 and Wandfoy ; with the names of the present Tenants. 
 
 Schedul
 
 9(5 
 
 HUNTINGDON SCHOOL. 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 i 
 
 
 <u . 
 
 t 
 
 i 
 
 4 
 
 
 f. 
 
 
 
 fi CD 
 
 fi S 
 
 
 p v 
 
 Q t 
 
 fi u 
 
 
 
 
 oo 
 
 
 B 
 
 . ^ 
 
 
 S ^ 
 
 .S a 
 
 ji 
 
 S fc 
 
 
 - 1 
 
 Pi 
 
 
 fi 
 
 'a I 
 
 
 43 B 
 
 *j re 
 
 w * 
 
 "tf ^ 
 
 !a c 
 
 ^M C3 
 
 
 43 B 
 
 <j 
 
 
 < .2 
 
 o <2 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 S *5 
 
 < *2 
 
 O en 
 
 
 2 " 
 
 H 
 
 
 .- 3 
 Q; Cd 
 at -y 
 
 *- c 
 
 + ett 
 
 s 
 
 
 v *- 
 
 'aj 5 
 
 'cu rt 
 in -a 
 
 <J C 
 
 *J C 
 
 o n 
 
 
 J 
 
 PX 
 
 
 f . Q 
 
 *J B 
 
 
 *-> *- 
 
 4^ S 
 
 B 
 
 *J B 
 
 
 -*J CN 
 
 
 
 tSJ 
 
 
 
 
 
 O ,0 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 ^y-^, 
 
 2^ 
 
 
 5,>. 
 
 Z "" 
 
 *x~<^ 
 
 R* 1 
 
 ' Vrf~->^ 
 
 > >-w 
 
 1 
 
 5u- 
 
 1 
 
 -a 
 
 O 
 
 0> .* -f> t- 
 
 t- <o 
 
 CO 
 
 
 
 O OOOOOOO 
 
 O 
 
 O 
 
 o 
 
 > ^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 *^ 
 
 
 
 
 2 P 
 
 4 
 
 O 
 
 t- CO CO O O CO 
 
 'O 
 
 J2 
 
 o 
 
 01 22 = oooo 
 
 O 
 
 o o 
 
 o 
 
 rH 
 
 |-ft5 
 
 
 O 
 
 * *> <> <0 W r- 
 
 co eo 
 
 
 
 <0 
 
 e ooooocc* 
 
 *0 
 
 O 
 
 
 
 
 J*j 
 
 *""* 
 
 CO .-H 
 
 
 
 
 o t- * o 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 -^ 
 
 1 
 
 <-n^< V--Y-W 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 c2 "S 
 
 
 
 O O i 
 
 O 
 
 1 
 
 t 
 
 . o o .000 < 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 C3 ^ 5r 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 B B 
 
 
 
 
 S 5 * & 
 
 <t 
 
 1 
 
 O O , 
 
 est o 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 g iO , 
 
 1 
 
 , 
 
 1 ' 
 
 m -* S ii 
 
 .^ C B 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 O o 
 
 
 
 
 g'~/S< 
 
 
 
 ' 
 
 ex o< 
 
 1 
 
 - 
 
 Z, O fi ^ * C7> >O ( 
 
 J 
 
 o 
 
 C< 1 
 
 1 
 
 (S q 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 r^* <+.** 
 
 
 
 
 ^A- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 * 
 
 
 
 "j co O O 
 
 r CO i ' CO 
 
 NS 
 t- * 
 
 t- 
 
 
 
 s 
 
 <N CO CO CO . . -f . 
 CX ' ' CO ' ' 
 
 <^ 
 
 ^_ i 
 
 1 
 
 "B 
 
 x 
 
 
 
 CO O O O CO r- 
 
 O O) 
 
 
 
 o 
 
 o >-i o o i | ex | i 
 
 o 
 
 o , 
 
 1 
 
 eo 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 .. <y 
 
 4 
 
 01 
 
 *0 r T-I O O 
 
 rH r- 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 o eo o o i i o i i 
 
 o 
 
 O ( 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 1 1 1 1 1 
 
 1 1 
 
 i 
 
 . 
 
 i i t i i i i i i 
 
 
 
 1 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 1 1 1 1 1 1 
 
 I 1 
 
 i 
 
 1 
 
 i i i i i i i i i 
 
 1 
 
 1 1 
 
 
 
 
 H 
 
 H 
 
 
 
 lll.lt 
 
 1 1 
 
 i 
 
 I) 
 
 1 W> ' en ' ' ' ' ' 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 ro 
 
 H 
 
 w 
 
 bO 
 
 3 
 
 pa 
 
 1 1 < V. 1 1 
 
 I S? i bO I I 
 
 CU O 
 
 *1 
 
 3 * 
 
 i 
 i 
 
 "S 
 
 B 
 n 
 
 (H S bO * 
 
 8 w ' = ' | ' , ' 
 
 1 
 
 s 
 pa , 
 
 1 
 1 
 
 S 
 
 K 
 
 3 
 
 (8 
 
 bo s 
 
 M^ 
 
 
 -3 
 
 "o * bo w o u"C 
 
 
 a 
 
 
 ^; 
 
 B 
 cj 
 
 
 J, = ' w ' ' 
 
 M " 
 
 rt -3 
 
 en 
 
 B 
 
 
 
 -S .5 'S ^- 5 rt 
 
 12 
 
 fc~ ' 
 
 tr 
 
 M 
 
 B 
 
 H 
 
 cu PQ fj 
 
 
 en 
 
 
 O e 3 5 S 3 
 
 i5 
 
 o 
 
 c3 
 
 E-i 
 
 
 <: 
 
 S 
 
 'n ct) *^ 
 
 .5 S 
 
 |! 
 
 o 
 
 co fe B 'y ^ -^ rt IP 
 
 *r ~ j ^ p- 
 
 w 
 
 CO ' 
 
 w 
 
 
 x; 
 
 a 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 bo I m i i 
 
 2^ 
 
 
 
 3 
 P 
 
 rt 
 CO 
 
 |p4^ jrfoll 
 
 1 
 
 o 
 
 c ' 
 
 oT 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 B 
 
 ^ g Q y 
 
 . i-j 
 t- t^ 
 
 U 
 
 
 
 ^^ueu^Cu -43 
 
 CO 
 
 c fi 
 
 w 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 r- W C5 
 
 jS b 
 
 2 co 
 
 fZ 
 
 
 
 I^SScSsS^^ 
 
 B 
 
 
 
 Q 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 C B 
 
 - OS 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 1 1 1 1 1 1 
 
 i 
 
 i 
 
 i 
 
 * I t i Q t i I 
 
 eo 
 
 1 ' 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 53 "S 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 i 
 
 1 1 1 1 1 1 
 
 i i 
 
 i 
 
 i 
 
 , i ^ i i i i 
 
 jr 
 
 1 1 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 
 en 
 
 
 
 
 * Q ^1^ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 .,,,>.. 
 
 S s 
 
 ' 
 
 i 
 
 o -f d jj ; ' ' ' 
 
 " 
 
 1 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 
 
 H^ 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 +P a *^ *3J 1 I 1 
 
 ^* 
 
 1 
 
 i 
 
 REMISES 
 
 
 1 
 
 | 
 
 1 u ' 
 
 1 ' ' ' 3 ' 
 
 en 
 
 <i> i i J! - * 
 
 Stanton B 
 ail's Mead 
 
 1 
 
 ! 
 
 *o 
 
 g 
 
 "E 
 
 CO 
 
 o 
 
 t) 
 
 B 
 
 w ^ S ^ u /v 
 
 between Ri 
 
 ."S 
 
 (S 
 
 i . 
 
 n 
 
 
 3 
 
 "^ J2 _2 cd Q o 
 
 |3 
 
 S3 
 
 n 
 "S 
 
 ^ 1 i 1 8, ' ' ' 
 
 oo 
 
 1 s 
 
 a 
 
 
 
 '5, 
 
 CO 
 
 4) 
 
 ^ 'M ~rt 
 
 J g 
 gj 
 
 S 
 o 
 o 
 
 neme 
 
 Hi*! (444 
 
 en 
 en 
 
 if 
 
 1 
 O 
 
 
 
 H 
 
 !s J O a- < < 
 
 H < 
 
 ft 
 ca 
 
 g 
 
 SQ H o Q H ^ 
 
 -Jj 
 
 tc o 
 
 J _ 
 
 i 
 
 1-1 CO -^ IO <O t- 00 O 
 
 o 
 
 - 
 
 ex o * ^ 5 ^ t- 
 
 CO 
 
 C7> O 
 rHCH 
 

 
 HUNTINGDON SCHOOL. 
 
 tt 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 s _ 
 
 
 
 M 
 
 
 
 S 2 
 
 <* 2 ! e "oo* ^ o n ^ 
 
 VS 
 
 a. s 
 
 ^-- ' " " * *"^ 
 
 
 
 ^OO^-fO^ ~* - g 2 
 
 t- 
 
 _. 
 
 ' wnr w~r 
 
 o 
 
 '. *> 
 
 o o o 
 
 
 52 1 - 
 
 e 
 
 
 
 
 Q> CO O O 
 
 
 * ** F * 
 
 ** T-l ^ ^^ ^ *^ _ 
 
 CO 
 
 - "S < 
 
 * oo o e> o< o 1-1 - o *o S5 ^ o 
 
 2 
 
 J Q 
 
 ^^ "^^ 
 
 r ^ 
 
 
 2T i * "" "*' 2 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 * 
 
 c 
 
 ^woo-ooSo' -S wc< 
 
 *~ 
 
 A 
 
 *" C) CO t~ CO 
 
 u^ 
 
 9 
 
 .-<iOOO'-'OOiO<i-) O 
 
 
 
 
 
 J 
 
 
 '''' W 1 s ' ' ' P . i 
 
 1 
 
 
 * 8 1 SS '' 'S, . 
 
 5" S M U 1 > 1 ' W 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 E 
 
 < 
 
 fc 
 
 wbO'll'Sjl' 1 * 1 ._ ^ft 4t CS s. 2 K. | 
 
 " a ? , , , , - _ J; ^ w - a , i , 5 
 5 d er ' "S ' ce e ' 2 3 - ' | '|, g ' S ' ' g . 
 
 I 
 
 M 
 
 z C*p M *P *^C<!n tJ -c Q ^^' 1 0^-^ljoo * *** 
 
 
 F 
 
 1 ^"l"l*ils Us %'^l^i 1 . S'! 
 
 
 
 ||Sll||I^ s> _i ?S 3 rf o^ s '' 
 
 
 
 ****"_ i"S ^"oS .3 S 
 
 
 
 i . . > ' u ' < _^7 ' ' 
 
 
 
 O ^"^tk.* '' ' * 
 
 
 
 iiii|if'' 
 
 
 
 43 1 ^ ' ' ' ' ' 
 
 
 
 
 
 c/5 
 M 
 
 12 
 
 !*!,'1!so|. . .| -ls 3,5 
 
 , B 1 ,0|1 ' i5 S 'pi 8>| |^ 
 
 
 i 
 
 1 *E * ' '"I* ' ^o !' C ^Q Is * ^ *r' 
 
 
 fti 
 
 5 
 
 K 
 
 5^ |S '*' ^S> -3^>^>: ?* 03 
 )e o H -2,^ _a 2 ^ 5 J B S ^ 2 1 ' 
 
 
 
 *<_, ' "2 >t ^ * Cfl -^_: * c < n 
 
 c !o .o*?S _jo s^^ o %^ < 
 
 _o**Sd-Jo5 w "2m ^ MfH . P G g c > 
 
 
 o 
 * 
 
 1 cisss*c} ** ^ "-'" 

 
 98 HUNTINGDON SCHOOL. 
 
 George Inn, HUNTINGDON, 7th August, 1815. 
 
 In Chancery. BETWEEN 
 
 His Majesty's Attorney General, at the relation of} 
 Thomas Allnutt, Esquire, Edward Skey Bailey, > Informants, 
 James William Pocock, and John Wright - - j 
 
 AND 
 The Mayor, Aldermen and Burgesses of the Borough } 
 
 of Huntingdon, Sir John Arundell, Knight, and > Defendants. 
 Henry Sweeting, the younger ----- } 
 At the execution of a commission for the examining of witnesses in 
 this cause, this Parchment writing marked (B.) was exhibited to us, 
 and shown to Thomas 'Lovell, William Wandly, Charles Homfrey and 
 Samuel Wells, the younger, and by them deposed unto at the time of 
 their examination, to the first, second, third, fourth and fifth interroga- 
 tories on the part of the informants. 
 
 George Ptatff. 
 King John. Haggerslon, 
 Edward Randall. 
 Wi/liam Morley. 
 
 Have you found the expences of the proceedings in the Court of Chan- 
 cery to be very great ? Yes, enormous, above 1000/. ; in addition to 
 the attempts they have made to make me miserable, they have reni 
 dered my life very uncomfortable during the proceedings. 
 
 Are there other charities in the town ? A great many others; there is 
 a considerable charity in the grant of the Mercer's Company. 
 
 In whose hands is it? The corporation rent it of the Merners. 
 
 Are the lands near Huntingdon ? I do not know exactly of what it 
 consists, but I know one thing, that the Mercer's Company ought to ap- 
 point a proper person to preach the lecture ; but the rector takes it, 
 and pays his curate, without preaching the lecture ; it is 50/. or CO/, a 
 year. 
 
 Are the lands of that charity under-let ? Not that I know of; I be- 
 lieve they are well let. 
 
 Is the rector a burgess ? Yes. 
 
 Does he vote always for Lord Sandwich ? Yes. There is also a consider- 
 able charity for education at Ramsay, Mr. Fellowes is lay-rector; the 
 trustees ought to be the principal inhabitants of the town, but are, in 
 fact, his inferior tenants; they have built a very considerable house and 
 school-room, into which he has put the clergyman of the parish, and he 
 pays the curate, no doubt. ; the clergyman ought to have more payment, 
 if it were not for that circumstance. 
 
 What is that worth ? 120/. a year I should think. 
 
 What is the object of that charity ? To teach poor children. 
 
 Are there any taught ? Yes, there are some taught by the clergyman, 
 who lives in the house. 
 
 Do you know of any other charity in Huntingdon, which has large 
 estates ? No, no other which has large estates; there many others. 
 
 Are the corporation trustees for the estates ? Yes, they are trustees of 
 all of them; they have got more or less into all the trusts. 
 
 Does that, increase the interest of the corporation ? No doubt of it. 
 
 Are the fun Is of those charities generally applied according to the 
 uses of the foundation? Yes; but with favoritism whenever it can be 
 done, I have no doubt.
 
 99 
 
 MR. BROUGHAM'S ACCOUNT 
 
 AN 
 
 ESTABLISHMENT IN SWITZERLAND. 
 
 I CONSIDER that I shall render an acceptable service, and assist the in- 
 quiries of this Committee, by giving an account of a very important in- 
 stitution, connected intimately with the instruction and improvement of 
 the poor, at Hofwyl, near Berne, in Switzerland, under the management 
 of the owner of that estate, Mr. Fell:nberg, a patrician of that canton. 
 
 Happening to be in Switzerland in the autumn of 1816, I went to 
 Berne, for the purpose of visiing Mr. Fe llenberg's institution, which is 
 situated in a pleasant country, about four miles from the town. I was 
 received by him with great courtesy ; be showed me himself every part 
 of bis establishment, and appeared anxious to have the whole details of 
 its management investigated. My intention was to return, and pass a 
 few weeks there for the purpose of acquiring further information re- 
 specting the system, anu more especially the extraordinary economy 
 which prevails, and which enables Mr. F. to tffprt so much with sch 
 slender means. This can only be learnt by a daily examination of nv- 
 nute particulars : to facilitate which Mr. F. was kind enough to offer me 
 the use of a chateau in the neighbourhood of nis own residence ; but the 
 state of the weather for many weeks, and of my own health, made it de- 
 sirable that I should proceed to tta!y, without accomplishing my pur- 
 pose. I cannot, however, avoid strongly recommending a residence at 
 Hofwyl, to any one who may interest himself in thfse important in- 
 quiries ; and I can venture to engage for Mr. Fellenberg, that he will 
 give such a one, if properly recommended, the same facilities which he 
 so readily offered to me. 
 
 Several tracts have been written upon the subject ; the best of which 
 is entitled, " Rapport fait a S. M. I. L'Empereur Alexandre, sur VEtahlisse- 
 ment de Hofwyl." It purports to he the work of the Count of Capo 
 D'lstria, but was in fact written entirely by ivlr. C. Pictet of Geneva, 
 who has paid great attention to the plans of Mr. Fellenberg, and examined, 
 them carefully in different stages of their progress. The work of Mr. 
 Rengger deserves also to be consulted ; and Mr. F. himself has published 
 some tracts in German. All these publications are to be had at the 
 bookseller Paschoud's, in Geneva and Pars. 
 
 The groundwork of the establishment is a farm of moderate extent, 
 from 210 to "220 posen, answering nearly to our English acres, which Mr. 
 F. cultivates himself with great assiduity and success. Upon this he has 
 ingrafted the other branches of his institution, which consists of a Se- 
 minary for the education and moral ami religious improvement of the 
 jxr ; an Academy for the richer classes of society ; an Agricultural In- 
 stitution for a limited number ol- pupils; and a Manufactory of agri- 
 cultural implements. 
 
 N2
 
 100 HOFWYL INSTITUTION. 
 
 The Academy consists^ fifty or sixty pupils, who are taught every 
 branch of useful learning, from Latin and Greek (which last they are 
 peculiarly well grounded in, from the plan adopted of beginning with it)- 
 to the higher branches of the mathematics and of physical science. 
 These pupils are chiefly of patrician families. When I was there, I 
 found seven or eight German princes among them, beside several sons 
 of German nobles ; and the Prince and Princess of Wirtemberg (the 
 present King and Queen) were expected in a few days to visit the place, 
 with the design of prevailing on Mr. F. to make room for another young 
 prince under their care. All these pupils go through the same discipline ; 
 eat at the table with Mr. F. and his family ; and pay about 60/. sterling 
 a year for all expenses, exclusive of clothes. I ought to add, that when 
 the troubles upon the Continent had reduced so many families to great 
 distress, Mr. F. kept above a dozen of the young men for nothing during 
 two years. This part of the establishment creates the principal expense, 
 as about twenty eminent professors belong to it, whose salaries amount 
 to between 2.000/. and 3.000/. a year. On the other hand, they form a 
 very interesting society, and render a residence iu the neighbourhood 
 alike instructive and agreeable. 
 
 The Agricultural Institution is peculiarly under Mr. F.'s own care, and 
 consists of about twenty pupils more advanced in years than the former 
 class. They are taught practically in the farm ; and hare likewise hours 
 of scholastic instruction, aud of meetings for discussion with Mr. F. 
 They are separately lodged and boarded at Buchsee, a chateau about a 
 mile distant from Mr. F.'s house. The Manufactory of agricultural im- 
 plements is extremely beautiful, from the neatness and excellence of the 
 workmanship, but especially from the valuable improvements in mecha- 
 nism which Mr. F. has introduced. Among these may be mentioned his 
 horse-hoe, his scarifier or extirpator, his root and straw cutters ; and above 
 all, his drill, which has been highly admired by all competent judges, 
 and, I believe, been honoured with the approbation of the Board of Agri- 
 culture in this country. 
 
 The branch of the establishment, however, which is more particularly 
 deserving of attention, and with which all the others are more or less 
 connected, is the seminary for the poor. Mr. F. having long remarked 
 the extreme profligacy of the lowest orders in the Swiss towns, and the 
 habits of ignorance and vice in which their children were brought up, 
 formed many years ago the design of attempting their reformation, 
 upon principles equally sound and benevolent. His leading doctrine 
 was, that to make those poor people better, it was necessary to make 
 them more comfortable ; and that this end would be best attained by 
 forming in their earliest years habits of industry, which might contribute 
 to their subsistence, and by joining with them a greater degree of intel- 
 lectual cultivation than has ever yet been extended to the labouring 
 classes of the community, or been imagined to he compatible with their 
 humble pursuits. He began his experiments upon a small number of 
 children, which he has now increased to between thirty and forty ; and 
 this may be reckoned the utmost limit upon a farm of so moderate an 
 extent. Those children were taken from the very worst description of 
 society 5 the most degraded of the mendicant poor in Berne and other 
 Swiss towns. With hardly any exception, they were sunk in the vicious 
 and idle habits of their parents, a class of dissolute vagrants, resem- 
 bling-the worst kind of gipsies. The complete change that has been 
 effected in them all, is one of the most extraordinary and affecting sights 
 that can be imagined. When I saw them, there were some who had 
 been there for several years, and had grown up towards manhood ; but 
 the reformation in almost all took place during from one to two year*,
 
 HOFWYL INSTITUTION. 101 
 
 r a very little more, according as they were taken at an earlier or 
 more advanced age. The remark which 1 made, is that which imme- 
 diately strikes all who visit Hofwyl ; the appearance of the children 
 alone, their countenance and manner, impresses you with a conviction 
 of their excellent dispositions. To describe all the steps of the process 
 by which this reformation has been effected, would be impossible, as 
 much depends on minute circumstances, and upon the great skill and 
 judgment of Vehrli, a young man who has devoted his life, under 
 Mr. Fellenberg, to the supfrmtendance of this part of the establish- 
 ment, and to whose extraordinary virtue and ability its success is prin- 
 cipally owing. But I shall endeavour to give the Committee some idea 
 of the mode of treatment pursued. 
 
 The first principle of the system is to show the children gentleness 
 and kindness, so as to win their affections, and always to treat them as 
 rational creatures, cultivating their reason, and appealing to it. It 
 is equally essential to impress upon their minds the necessity of indus- 
 trious and virtuous conduct to their happiness, and the inevitable effects 
 of the opposite behaviour, in reducing them from the comfort in which' 
 they now live to the state 08 misery from which they were rescued. A 
 constant and even minute superintendance, at every instant of their 
 lives, forms of course part of the system ; and, as may easily be sup- 
 posed, the elder boys, who have already profited by the care of th 
 master, aid him in extending it to the new comers, who for this purpose 
 are judiciously distributed among them. These are, I am aware, very 
 general principles, and upon their judicious application to practice in 
 each particular instance, according to the diversities of individual cha- 
 racter, their whole virtue depends. But a somewhat more specific notion, 
 of the plan may be formed by observing, that it is never allowed for a 
 moment to be absent from their thoughts, that manual labour, in cul- 
 tivating the ground, is the grand and paramount care which must 
 employ their whole lives, and upon which their very existence depends. 
 To this every thing else is made subordinate ; but with this are judici- 
 ously connected a variety of intellectual pursuits. At their hours of 
 relaxation, their amusements have an instructive tendency ; certain 
 hours are set apart for the purposes of learning; and while at work in 
 the fields, the conversation, without interrupting for a moment the ne- 
 cessary business of their lives, is always directed towards those branches 
 of knowledge in which they are improving themselves during the inter- 
 vals of labour. Beside writing and cyphering, (at which they arc 
 very expert,) they apply themselves to geography and history, and to 
 the different branches of natural history, particularly mineralogy and 
 botany, in which they take a singular delight, and are considerable pro- 
 ficients. The connexion of these with agriculture render them most 
 appropriate studies for those poor children ; and as their daily labour 
 brings them constantly into contact with the objects of those sciences, 
 a double relish is thus afforded at once to the science and the labour. 
 You may see one of them every new and then stepping aside from the 
 furrow where several of them have been working to deposit a specimen,, 
 or a plant, for his little hortug siccus, or cabinet ; and Mr. Fellenberg 
 rarely goes into the field where any of them are labouring, without 
 being called upon to decide some controversy that has arisen upon 
 matters relating to mineralogy or botany, or the parts of che- 
 mical science which have most immediate relation to agriculture. 
 There is one other subject which is ever present to their minds ; I mean 
 a pure and rational theology. Mr. F. is deeply imbued himself with the 
 i use of religion ; and it enters into all his schemes for the improvement 
 of society. Regarding the state of misery in which the poorest classes
 
 102 HOFWYi INSTITUTION. 
 
 live, as rather calculated (if T may use his own expression) to make them 
 believe in the agency of a devil than of a God, his first care, upon 
 rescuing those children from that wretchedness, is to inspire them with 
 the feelings of devotion which he himsek' warmly entertains, and which 
 he regards as natural to the human heart, when misery has not chilled 
 nor vice hardened it. Accordingly the conversation, as well as the habits 
 of the poor at Hofwyl, partake largely of religious influence. The evi 
 deuces of design observable in the operations of nature, and the be- 
 nevolent tendency of those operations in the great majority of in- 
 stances, form constant topics of discourse in their studies, and during the 
 labours of the day ; and though no one has ever observed the slightest 
 appearance of fanaticism or of superstition (against which, in truth, the 
 course of instruction pursued is the surest safeguard) yet ample testimony 
 is borne by all travellers to the prevailing piety of the place. One of 
 these has noted an affecting instance of it, when the harvest once re- 
 quired the labourers to work for an hour or two after night-fall, and the 
 full moon rose in extraordinary beauty over the magnificent mountains 
 that surround the plain of Hofwyl. Suddenly, as if with one accord, 
 the poor children began to chaunt a hymn which they had learnt among 
 many others, but in which the Supreme Being is adored as having 
 " lighted up the great lamp of the night, and projected it in the fir- 
 mament." 
 
 The details which will be found in the works I have already referred to, 
 give minute and satisfactory illustrations of the virtuous habits of these 
 labourers, and of the happy and contented lives which they lead. 1 trust 
 that one or two of them, such as the " Rapport," will be translated into 
 English. That the complete education which it is Mr. Fellenberg's prin- 
 ciple to give the children, interferes in no degree with the business of 
 tin ir lives, but rather forwards it ; and that the farm cultivated by them 
 succeeds perfectly, the inspection of his accounts (which he lays open to 
 every visitor as a matter of course) clearly demonstrates. The profits of 
 th'farm, consisting of 2I4J posen (nearly equal to our acre) for the 
 four years ending 1814, were annually 14,176 Swiss livres, or about 886Y. 
 sterling, being above 4/. an acre, including the interest on the original 
 purchase money of the land. The cattle concern is entirely kept out of 
 this account, which therefore exhibits more clearly the success of the 
 cultivation depending upon labour. It is to be observed, that Mr. Fel- 
 lenberg has had to contend with powerful prejudices on the part of his 
 countrymen, and has certainly received neither encouragement nor coun- 
 tenance from the government of (he Canton. On the contrary, the belief 
 very universally prevails, that he is regarded by them with an unfavour- 
 able aye, and that strangers are not much encouraged to visit Hofwyl. 
 The first impression, propagated with some industry, was, that his vision- 
 ary schemes would be his rain. When the undertaking seemed to pros- 
 per, the attack was changed, and he is now upbraid d with amassing a 
 large fortune; an accusation equally unfounded, as the account which I 
 have given of his great liberality and charity may serve to show. The 
 patrician order (to which he belongs) also took umbrage at his devoting 
 himself to what was termed " a schoolmaster's life," (vie p<mlagogique ) '. 
 But I trust that these prejudices are now wearing away ; and certainly 
 he is, in this respect, largely indebted to the enlightened assistance of 
 M. de Bonstetten, M. Pictet, and the other men of letters at Geneva, 
 who have always zealously favoured Ms undertaking. 
 
 That the habits of common labour are perfectly reconcilable with 
 those of a contemplative and even scii ntific life; and that a keen relish 
 for the pleasures of speculation, may be united with the most ordinary 
 pursuits of the poor, seems to be proved by this experiment of Mr. Pel-
 
 HOPWYL INSTITUTION. 103 
 
 I am quite aware that he has only made it upon a small scale; 
 that its application to a populous district may be difficult ; and that a 
 subst'tutioii nf manufacturing tor ajrricuhural labour would greatly aug- 
 ment the difficulty. Nevertheless, before we say that little can be effected 
 in this way, we ought to consider now limited have been Mr. Felleuberg's 
 meat's. The farm on which he has done so much \s under 2 1 20 acres; 
 and his income, independent of the profit he derives from the breeding of 
 horses, in which he is very skilful, and his manufactory of husbandry 
 implements, does not exceed five hundred a year. The extraordinary 
 economy which reigns in his establishment, is indeed requisite to explain 
 the existence of such an institution; for although the Academy and In- 
 stitute are supported by the richer pupils, these pay a very moderate 
 sum; and the family, who arr> lodged and wholly supported at Hofwyl, 
 amounts to 180 persons. These dine at six different tables; and their 
 food, though simple, is extremely good. 
 
 Before concluding this statement, I must add that Mr. Fellenberg's 
 principal object in establishing the Academy for the wealthier classee, 
 is to teach them their duties towards the poor ; and above all, to 
 inculcate the propriety of their adopting, each iu his own sphere, the 
 system pursued with respect to the poor children at Hofwyl. As they 
 learn that system in all its details, and as they almost all become 
 enthusiasts in it, there is reason to hope that its benefit may spread 
 into other parts of the world. The primary difficulty, no doubt, is to 
 find such admirable superintendents as Vehrli. But we may confi- 
 dently trust that some of the youths trained at Hofwyl will be able to 
 carry the methods adopted there into practice elsewhere. And I may 
 add, that I believe nothing would give Mr. Fellenberg more satisfaction 
 than to receive a pupil sent there to learn those methods. In order to 
 profit immediately by his stay at Hofwyl, such a person should under- 
 stand German, as that is the language spoken by Vehrli and the 
 labourers. 
 
 Mr. Fellenberg having observed the general defects in the education 
 of youth in Switzerland, arising from the ignorance of the school- 
 masters, (whose emoluments are inferior to the wages of ordinary 
 labour) adopted a very judicious plan for remedying this evil. He 
 assembled about forty of them one summer, and kept them at Hofwyl 
 during their vacation of three months. He tijere had them instructed 
 by the professors of the place, in various branches of knowledge. Being 
 men of industrious habits, and sufficiently anxious to learn, they made 
 great progress, and still farther improved themselves on their return to 
 their homes. Mr. Felhnberg invited them all to assemble the next year, 
 but the Government for some reason which I cannot pretend to explain, 
 took umbrage at this proceeding, and prohibited the meeting. However, 
 the neighbouring canton of Zurich, encouraged their teachers to resort 
 to Hofwyl, where a number of them were accordingly maintained and 
 instructed in the same manner as the Bernese masters had been the year 
 before. 
 
 There is another institution for education, at Yverdun, which I also 
 visited in August, 1816. It is under the direction of Mr. Pestalozzi, and 
 consists of above a hundred boys, who are taught every branch of 
 lea-nmg, by different masters, upon a principle quite new and deserving 
 of notice. Mr. P. observes, that the received methods of instruction 
 are too mechanical ; that children are taught by rote, and that their 
 reasoning faculties are not sufficiently called into action. Accordingly 
 all his pupils are taught in a way that excludes mere mechanical 
 operations, and certainly tends greatly to exercise the mind. No books 
 are allowed ; but the master standing before large board or slate, o
 
 104 HOFWYL INSTITUTION, 
 
 which he writes, cyphers, or draws, (as the case may be) explains or 
 demonstrates to the boys who sit around him ; and whose attention is 
 kept awake to every step of the process by constant examinations, in 
 which they are obliged to go through the s>teps themselves vivfi voce* 
 I saw many of them who had gone a considerable way in the mathe- 
 matics, without having ever used a book. One only had reached the 
 flnxional calculus, of which, from a question I gave him to work, he 
 appeared to have an imperfect notion; although in afar shortei time 
 than lie had been learning, the young men in this country acquire great 
 expertness in the highest branches of analytical science. But he and 
 the others whom I examined, had certainly a very accurate knowledge 
 of the rationale of all the operations which they had learnt, and their 
 minds were much s' rengthened, I doubt not, by the constant exercise of 
 thought unconnected with notation. I conceive that analytical investi- 
 gations might be rendered more useful, and might approach more to 
 those of geometry, in their beneficial effects upon the reasoning powers, 
 Were somewhat of M. Pestalozzi's principle adopted. That he carries 
 it too far, seems equally clear to me, and I have been informed that 
 his pupils when they come to mix in the business of life, in counting* 
 houses, &c. are very much thrown out, at least at first, by their having 
 been unaccustomed to the use of books. I should however wish to be 
 understood as speaking with diffidence on this subject, from my imper- 
 fect examination of it. I understand that a gentleman from Ireland has 
 made it his peculiar study, with the view of introducing it there ; and; 
 he may, I trust, before long, give the public an account of it in detail, 
 
 THE END. 
 
 H. Bnjer, Printer, BridwcU Hospital, London.
 
 LETTER 
 
 TO 
 
 H. BROUGHAM, ESQ. M,P. F.R.S. 
 IN REPLY 
 
 TO THE 
 
 Strictures on Winchester College^ 
 
 CONTAINED IN HII 
 
 LETTER TO SIR SAMUEL ROMILLY, M. P. 
 
 FROM 
 
 THE REV. LISCOMBE CLARKE, A. M. 
 
 FELLOW OF WINCHESTER COLLEGE. 
 
 WINCHESTER; 
 
 PRINTED AND SOLD BY W.JACOB, HIGH-STREET; 
 
 Sold also bj J. Bobbins, College-street ; and may be had of R. Bliss, 
 Oxford ; S. Mill* and Messrs. Mottley and Co. Portsmouth ; Johnson, 
 Gosport; Mason, Cbichester; Fletcher and Skelton and Co. Southamp- 
 ton ; Brodie and Dowding, Salisbury ; and Hatchnrd, Piccadilly, London. 
 
 1818.
 
 LETTER, &c. 
 
 Sifc, 
 
 ON learning that you had 
 addressed a Letter to your distinguished friend 
 Sir Samuel Romilly, on the subject of the 
 Abuse of Charities and of the Bill introduced 
 into Parliament last Session by yourself, as 
 Chairman of the Education Committee, I 
 expected to find in it the expression of much 
 dissatisfaction and disappointment ; and, con- 
 sidering the active part you had taken in the 
 prosecution of an inquiry, of which I cor- 
 dially approved in its primary objects as ori- 
 ginally avowed, I expected that you would 
 complain of not being appointed a Member of 
 the Parliamentary Commission instituted by 
 your Bill. 
 
 I expected to find in it symptoms of con- 
 siderable uneasiness under the wholesome 
 restraints necessary to be imposed upon thft 
 powers of the Commission from a due regard
 
 to ancient and vested rights, from an impar- 
 tial consideration of the great changes in the 
 circumstances of the times, and from a de- 
 termination not to suffer the titles to a con- 
 siderable portion of the property of the country 
 and the foundations of the Constitution to be 
 shaken, if not entirely destroyed, by an intem- 
 perate zeal in the investigation of abuses and 
 malversations, \vhich, even if they might be 
 proved to exist to a certain degree, would 
 be but as trifles in comparison with the irre- 
 mediable injury to be apprehended from the 
 precedent, once established, of conferring on 
 any persons whatsoever, powers unlimited and 
 authority undefined. 
 
 With expectations such a$ these I entered 
 upon, the perusal of your Letter, and I was 
 disposed to allow to you, as to a person* 
 "involved in the contests of Parliament," a 
 fair latitude in your remarks on the conduct 
 and measures of Ministers. Neither was I 
 inuch surprised to observe, as I proceeded, 
 that you did not scruple to insinuate, in terms 
 not very equivocal, that those amongst them 
 whom you imagined to have been principally 
 instrumental in restricting the powers with 
 which it had been intended that the Com- 
 missioners should be armed, were not only 
 
 * Mr. Brougbam-'s Letter, p, 4-.
 
 5 
 
 altogether hostile to the proposed investigation, 
 but disposed also to justify and to perpetuate 
 the Abuses which might be brought to light in 
 the course of it. A mode of argument, un- 
 happily too often adopted by political antago- 
 nists, might perhaps be looked for in a Letter, 
 written by the leader, or reputed leader of 
 the party usually opposed to his Majesty's 
 Government, on a subject which had particu- 
 larly interested him. 
 
 But, Sir, I did not expect to find in any 
 part of your Letter, the avowal of principles, 
 of which, if reduced to practice, the direct 
 tendency would be the subversion of many of 
 the established and most highly important 
 institutions of the country. For the admission 
 of your position, that, because the Will of the 
 Donor may be in some respects better com- 
 plied with by a deviation from the letter of his 
 directions, therefore it is enough to employ 
 Funds left for charitable purposes, in works of 
 charity, without regard to the specific objects 
 or the particular persons originally in the con- 
 templation of those from whom the Funds were 
 derived, would be pregnant with the most 
 appalling danger, and would inevitably lead 
 to innovations and inroads upon rights and 
 property, of which it is impossible to foresee 
 either the extent or the termination. 
 
 B 2
 
 6 
 
 Again, I did not expect to find in jom\ 
 Letter any expressions, from which I might 
 fairly infer that you are inimical to the System, 
 of Education pursued in the Universities; and 
 that you look upon all the public Schools with 
 an eye of jealousy and suspicion, and consider 
 them as so many Institutions, supported by the 
 abuse and perversion of their original En- 
 dowments. 
 
 I did not expect to find that from among 
 those public Schools you had singled out, as 
 the object of attack and peculiar animadver-v 
 sion, one which has, for some years past, held, 
 a distinguished place in the estimation of the 
 country, for the strictness of its discipline, the 
 soundness of its system of instruction, and the 
 inculcation of moral and religious principles ; 
 insinuating, not to say openly alleging against 
 the principal ]\ienibers of its Foundation a 
 wilful misappropriation of funds, and a 
 wanton violation of oaths. 
 
 But least of all did I expect to find that you 
 had condescended to mis-state and misrepresent 
 the Evidence and Statutes, by whicji you en- 
 deavour to make out a case against that So- 
 ciety, who think they have some reason to. 
 complain, that in your conduct towards them 
 you have been actuated by a considerable 
 degree of prejudice, and a strong feeling of
 
 preconceived suspicion. You need not be told 
 that I allude to that part of your Letter in 
 which you make mention of Winchester Col- 
 lege. I am aware that the charge which I 
 bring against you is a heavy one, but I hope 
 to be able to shew that it is not ill-founded, 
 and, in doing so, to vindicate the Society to 
 which I have the honour to belong from much 
 unmerited aspersion. It is my wish not to 
 give offence to you nor to any person, but I 
 am compelled by a sense of duty to attempt 
 the vindication of my College : I cannot help 
 feeling deeply for its honour and credit, which 
 must Buffer in the public opinion if such misre- 
 presentations are permitted to pass uncon- 
 tradicted ; and our enemies would not be 
 backward to interpret our silence as a pre- 
 sumptive argument of our guilt. These con- 
 siderations must plead the apology for an 
 humble individual, unknown to you but in the 
 Committee Room of the House of Commons, 
 obtruding himself upon your notice. 
 
 It would be superfluous at this time to enter 
 into the question, whether the Committee were 
 or wer.e not justified in venturing to consider 
 the Public Schools of the Kingdom within 
 their jurisdiction, to investigate their . present 
 state, and to publish their private affairs, in 
 the execution of instructions, which might seem
 
 8 
 
 to have restricted them to establishments pe- 
 culiarly destined for the education of the 
 lower orders only the Inquiry, whether right 
 or wrong, has been made, and its result com- 
 municated to the country. But I must be al- 
 lowed to notice the very different spirit which 
 seems to have dictated that passage in the 
 Third Report of the Education Committee 
 which relates to the Schools of Eton and 
 Winchester, and that part of your Letter to 
 which I have felt it to be my duty to reply. 
 The difference is so striking as to render it 
 almost impossible that the same person could 
 have been the author of both. I must, there- 
 fore, conclude that I had erroneously attributed 
 to you, as the Chairman of the Committee, 
 the drawing up of that Report ; or, I am, 
 driven to the necessity of suspecting that the 
 unanimity which you state to have prevailed 
 amongst its members in all their proceedings 
 and sentiments, was not quite o real and 
 complete as you would have us suppose, (a 
 surmise for which other reasons also might be 
 found) and that being somewhat restrained in 
 the Report by the more qualified opinions, not 
 to say the sounder judgment, of your coadju- 
 tors, you have availed yourself of the oppor- 
 tunity afforded by the Letter to give circula- 
 tion to the unfavourable opinion which you seem
 
 9 
 
 to have imbibed against those and similar 
 establishments, and \vhich you take no pains 
 to disguise. 
 
 The passage of the Report alluded to says, 
 it is true, " that considerable unauthorised de- 
 " viations have been made, in both Eton and 
 " Winchester, from the original plans of the 
 " Founders ;" but then it admits and acknow- 
 ledges that " in some respects they have 
 " proved beneficial on the whole to the Insti- 
 " tutions," and " acquitting the present Fellows 
 " of all blame," recommends to them to do 
 " themselves honour by correcting the abuses 
 " that have crept in, as far as the real interests 
 " of the Establishments may appear to require 
 " it." And if the matter had rested here I 
 should have acquiesced in silence ; nothing 
 would have remained for me but to co-operate 
 cordially with my brethren in pursuance of a 
 recommendation discreetly and impartially 
 given, and in doing that to which I have ever 
 been most sincerely disposed. But, Sir, not 
 only is the general tenor of the sentiments 
 contained in your Letter, so far as they have 
 respect to the great public Foundations for 
 Education, of a very different nature from 
 those intimated in the Report, but you also go 
 farther than the Committee had thought them- 
 selves warranted to go; for their remarks apply
 
 10 
 
 equally to both Institutions. You not only 
 say, that you " have no right to determine'' 
 that which the Committee had already deter* 
 mined, viz. " whether the deviations made have 
 " been made beneficially or not ;" but you intro- 
 duce the mention of Winchester College, in 
 particular, for the purpose of " shewing that 
 " such Endowments are not less liable to *per- 
 " version ' than more obscure charities.'* 
 Whether you have made good your charge of 
 perversion of Endowments remains still to be 
 proved ; not indeed from the partial and narrow 
 view which you have taken of our Foundation, 
 or the hasty and detached extracts which you 
 have made from our Statutes, or the misrepre- 
 sentations of the Evidence as given before the 
 Committee, which you have brought against us 
 for then the question were already decided; 
 but from a full, fair, and candid consideration 
 of the several points involved in it, and an 
 earnest desire to establish, as far as I have the 
 means of establishing, what were the intentions 
 of our Founder, by an examination and com- 
 parison of such parts of his Statutes as throw 
 light upon each other ; due regard be.mg paid, 
 at the same time, to the changes of Times, 
 Religion, and Manners, which have occurred 
 since the Foundation of his Colleges.
 
 I stop not then to inquire into the reasons 
 why you did not leave us where the Report 
 
 V tf : . - 
 
 li.ul left us, associated with Eton College, 
 which was most distinctly included' in what- 
 ever censure, as well as extenuation of censure, 
 the Committee were pleased to express. I. stop 
 not to ask whether you really thought, after a 
 fair perusal and impartial consideration of tin; 
 Evidence, that the one was so pre-eminently 
 distinguished above the other for its deviations 
 from the Founder's original intentions as to 
 deserve such particular animadversion' : : I am 
 unwilling for obvious reasons to enter into 
 these or similar inquiries and I am averse* 
 
 f . ' A* 1 L '-* t ' ''"Jf^ >-,',> J \f>\ 
 
 from supjposmg that you were influenced by 
 motives of a more unworthy nature. I can- 
 not bring myself to believe that because we do 
 not reckon in the List of Boys' not oh the 
 Foundation the names of so man^ of 'tne No- 
 bility of the Land, because we arc more re- 
 mote from the metropolis, because we pursue 
 the noiseless tenor of our way more humbly, 
 
 f V * 
 
 but, I 'trust, not less usefully, an attack upon us 
 might therefore be made with greater safety' as 
 well as with greater effect, and that you miglit 
 venture with less risk of offending high poli- 
 tical connexions to direct against, us a shaft, 
 intended, in its ultimate effects, to take fire, 
 
 liKe the arrow of A'cestes, 
 
 ' magnoque futuruqa 
 
 Auguria monstrum,* 
 
 * Virg. ^o. lib. v, 53S.
 
 12 
 
 : 
 
 to kindle a flame which should involve 'both in 
 one indiscriminate conflagration ; such con- 
 siderations were, I trust, as foreign, from your 
 mind, as they would have been unworthy of 
 your character. My object is rather to e:\a- 
 mine the. allegations brought against us in your 
 Letter ; and I am not without hope that if I 
 should have the good fortune to succeed in 
 convincing you and the public that you have 
 taken an hasty and erroneous view of our Foun- 
 dation I shall be entitled to your gratitude 
 rather than to your displeasure. For, if you 
 are really desirous, of eliciting the truth, and 
 are not more sharp-sighted and better pleased 
 to detect abuse than candid to acknowledge 
 error, (and on no other supposition can your 
 exertions in the pause be worthy of any praise 
 or support) you will applaud the attempt tq 
 elucidate a point, which it is particularly de- 
 sirable for the public as well as for our society 
 should be rightly understood, an.d x if possible, 
 set at rest. 
 
 Neither is it necessary to enter into a de-. 
 tailed consideration of the question, whether 
 the public at large would or would not be be- 
 nefited by the exclusion of the children of, all 
 persons above the lowest classes from the adt 
 vantages of a liberal Education conducted on 
 the plan of our public Schools, Arguments.
 
 la 
 
 brought forward on cither one or the other side 
 
 . 
 
 bf such a question would, I conceive, be en- 
 tirely thrown away ; and it would only be a 
 loss of time to attempt to convince you of the 
 serious detriment which might arise to the 
 national mariners, habits, and even religion 
 from the adoption of such a measure. You 
 have yourself prevented the necessity of such 
 o discussion; arid have reduced the matter at 
 issue between us to the mere" simple question 
 of "Perversion of Endowments, and Vi\ '. -\fion of 
 "Statutes." Oh this ground you have rested 
 your strictures on Winchester College ; upon 
 this ground therefore I have to meet you. 
 
 Your first allegation has respect to the qua- 
 lifications of the children to be admitted on 
 the Foundation. 
 
 In justification of the Committee for push* 
 ing then- inquiries into the State of the public 
 Schools you ground your argument on the in- 
 tentions of the several Founders as collected 
 jfrom the designation given by them to their 
 respective Foundations. And your words as 
 applied to Winchester College in that passage 
 of your Letter are, " Pauper es et indigentes 
 " Scholares, say the Statutes qf Winchester 
 *' College ,*" evidently meaning it to be under- 
 stood that these words contained the true sta- 
 tutable designation of the Scholars. But it is 
 
 c 2
 
 14 
 
 not correct so to designate them, and you 
 ought in common candour to have added 
 another word "clericif for in the Preamble 
 prefixed to the Statutes in which the Founder 
 very explicitly declares his views in founding 
 both his Colleges, (and it is remarkable that 
 Charity is not mentioned among them) he thus 
 particularly describes his Establishment here ; 
 
 , 
 
 ' Et quoddam aliud Collegium per pet mini alio- 
 " rum panperum et indigent ium Scholar ium 
 " CLERICORUM Grammaticam addisccre deben- 
 
 " lium, prope civitatcni Wintonice, Saint Marie 
 
 . . . '- - 
 
 '* College oj' Winchester, simililer ntuicupatum" 
 
 You niay not perhaps think the addition 
 
 .jDir 8 l 
 
 material ; my reasons for thinking it impor- 
 tant will appear hereafter. But I should Jiave 
 
 -p,7 v ~, ' * * 
 
 considered the omission of the word entirely 
 JL) : - i c <JJ y 
 
 accidental on your part, if 1 had not disco- 
 
 v ' 
 
 vered tha.t the same omission occurs in your 
 -re.il ' iQi pj.i f f .\ ' i-> Hi . -".Vr-* 
 
 designation of the Scholars both 01 Kings 
 
 ih v ' n iV'\ ^' 
 
 College, Cambridge, and Eton College. And 
 
 "~ . ' 
 
 in this case it is the more worthy of notice 
 
 because you give their titles at greater length. 
 Now on referring to that * Copy of the Sta- 
 tutes oi? Eton College, contained in the Ap- 
 pendix to your third Report, which you state 
 
 * It must be obvious to the most ordinary understanding, as 
 well as to every unbiassed mind, that unless it is distinctly and 
 satisfactorily proved that the Provost and Fellows of Eton Col- 
 lege regulate their proceedings and administer their oaths in a 
 nfahner according w'rtb the Statutes as they would stand after the
 
 15 
 
 to have been printed "with singular accuracy* 
 tinder the direction " of Mr. Ellis, of the Bri- 
 " tish Museum, who has been employed for 
 " some months in correcting the press," I find 
 that the word " Clericorum" occurs after the 
 word " Scholarium" in both instances, and is 
 applied to both Colleges alike. 
 
 But I proceed to that part of your Letter to 
 which I wish more particularly to draw you* 
 attention. 
 
 You affirm that " the Statutes require in the 
 *' most- express terms that only the poor and in- 
 " digent shall be admitted on the Foundation.^ 
 
 o 
 
 But, Sir, when you make this unqualified' 
 affirmation, and so peremptorily limit and 
 restrict the qualifications of candidates to 
 those of poverty and indigence, are you 
 aware that poverty is only one among many: 
 
 omissions, mutilations, and erasures^-exhibited in the copy Iiere 
 alluded to, its publication establishes nothing against them be- 
 yond the comments of an angry Individual. For myself, I have 
 no hesitation in declaring that I require more satifactory proof of 
 their doing so than is to be obtained from the Provost's Exami- 
 nation before the Committee. And I cannot reconcile the ran- 
 sacking of the British Museum for a Document of so suspicious 
 a character to liberality of Spirit, or to a desire to publish for 
 useful purposes only the Result of an Inquiry, of which Candour 
 and Impartiality ought to have been the characteristic principles. 
 If any additional expense has been incurred by printing it in its- 
 present form with the abbreviations, marks, &c. such appears- 
 to me to be an unnecessary expenditure of the public money.
 
 16 
 
 others which are declared to be equally ne- 
 cessary.? In order it does indeed stand first, 
 but it does not appear to me to be so clear 
 that it exceeds all the rest in importance. Are 
 you aware that the same Statute- which enjoins 
 that Boys " in Scholar es eligendi" must be 
 " pauperes et iudigentes" requires also and in 
 the succeeding words of the same sentence, 
 that they must be " bonis moribus et conditioni- 
 " busperornati?" that they must be " adstudium 
 " Jiabiles ?" that they must be- " conversations 
 " honesti?" that they must be " in lectura, 
 " piano cantu, et antiquo &onato competent er 
 " instructi?" 
 
 The terms in which the second qualification 
 
 is expressed are particularly strong,; "bonis. 
 
 " moribus et conditionibus perornati" not 
 
 merely boys of good manners and morals, for 
 
 both are included in the word " moribus" but 
 
 bonis moribus " PERORNATI," distinguis/ied, 
 
 pre-eminently distinguished for those qualities* 
 
 and not for those only, butalso "conditionibus" 
 
 for their dispositions and habits of life, and so 
 
 much I think the word fairly implies, without 
 
 pushing its meaning to the utmost : it being 
 
 always remembered that "perornati"is applied 
 
 alike to " moribus," and " conditionibus" B,ut, 
 
 will not an impartial person at least pause be* 
 
 fore he determines that for a supply of boys
 
 17 
 
 answering' to such a description we are to look 
 only to the lowest orders ?. That such is the 
 interpretation which you wish to have affixed 
 to " paupcres et indigentes"' to ths entire exclu- 
 sion of even the middling' classes, however 
 poor, no one who has read your Letter and 
 attended to its scope can entertain a moment's 
 doubt. 
 
 Again, Candidates are required to be "ad 
 *' stadium habiles, et in lectuni, piano cantu ct 
 i'antiquo * Donato campetenter instruct if which 
 requisites may, I think, without .going intd 
 minute questions about words, be fairly under- 
 stood to comprehend an4 to n^ean, competent 
 proficiwy in the rudiments of classical learning, 
 reading, and \chanting'. And here I may ask 
 whether the state of general Education and the 
 history of the Times in which William of 
 \Vykeham lived authorise us to suppose that 
 Boys qualified for Scholarships in those -several 
 particulars were to be sought only from -a class 
 pf parents, who did not possess even the 
 . 
 
 * Donatus was a Grammarian and Commentator of ancient 
 times, whose Book, written in the Latin language, was, I 
 suppose, much in use about the time of the- Founder. 
 
 f This qualification has reference to the particular profession 
 for which the Founder intended the Scholars', in general, should 
 be educated, viz. Holy Qrilers, and the part which tkey wera 
 to take in Divine Service according to the Ceremonies ojt the 
 Church of Hume,
 
 IS 
 
 means of maintaining- them, much less of bo-. 
 Slowing a portion of their goods, howeve* 
 small it might be, on their previous' education. 
 I admit that it is expressly required thai 
 children to be admitted on the Foundation as 
 Scholars shall be " pauperes et indigent rs,^ 
 poor and indigent, within the amount limited 
 by the Founder. But I contend that it is ab- 
 solutely necessary, before we can form a cor- 
 rect notion of his meaning in those words, to 
 divest ourselves entirely of the idea conveyed 
 by the modern use of the term pauper, and 
 not hastily to suppose that they are used to 
 designate the *class of people in which the 
 poor are more commonly to be found. It is 
 One thing to enjoin that " only the poor and 
 " indigent" as distinguished from every other 
 Class of Society, are to be admitted ; it is 
 another simply to require that children to be 
 chosen must not, among other qualifications be 
 possessed of fortune (beyond a specified 
 amount) and farther than this the primary arid 
 .legitimate sense of the words does not seem to 
 go. But it is obvious, that the impression likely 
 to be produced upon, the reader's mind by one 
 
 * At tbe time when the College was founded the Feudal 
 System and Vassalage prevailed ; it is unnecessary to dwell on 
 the change of manners and of society in general produced by 
 by their abolition.
 
 19 
 
 of the two affirmations will be very different 
 from that produced by the other ; to me, at 
 least, such a consequence appears to be ine- 
 vitable, and I must think that you had such 
 a consequence in view. 
 
 But it is important to remark further that 
 your construction of the Statute goes to the 
 entire annihilation of the discretion indispu- 
 tably allowed to the Electors in the selection 
 of Candidates with respect to their other qua- 
 lifications. For according to that, nothing 
 would remain for them to do beyond simply 
 putting the question to all who might present 
 themselves, whether they were poor; and 
 to nominate indiscriminately, in succession, till 
 the vacancies were filled up, those who an- 
 swered to that description. But by no esta- 
 blished rule of Interpretation that I know of 
 are they obliged to be guided only by one. 
 among many other qualifications required in 
 terms of equal authority. On the contrary, 
 the Statute expressly makes the Election of 
 Scholars to depend on their being duly qua- 
 lified in all the particulars specified: "sisecun- 
 " dum quali tates et condit tones superius et infe- 
 " rius recitatas habiles et idonei repertifuerint" 
 
 The foregoing observations constitute a part 
 of the inferences necessarily to be drawn from 
 your interpretation of that particular Statute 
 
 B
 
 20 
 
 more immediately relating' to the qualifications 
 of Children offering themselves as Candidates 
 for Admission. But there is still another 
 mode of arriving at the Founder's meaning, 
 viz. that of endeavouring: to make him explain 
 himself, by bringing together into one view 
 such other passages in his Statutes as may 
 appear to assist us in our inquiry. This you 
 must allow to be a reasonable and impartial 
 criterion to guide us in coming to a decision ; 
 it is a canon of Criticism universally admitted ; 
 and in many cases, as in the case before us, 
 supplies not only an unexceptionable but evn 
 the surest means of deciding correctly. 
 
 o / 
 
 ! On turning then to the Oath which the 
 Scholars are required to take after they have 
 completed their fifteenth year, I find in it the 
 following very remarkable passage : "-Item quod 
 *' non ero detractor, susurro, seu Jaciens oblo- 
 " quia, out provocans odium, iram, discordias, 
 44 INVJDIAM, contumelias, rixas, veljurgia, aut 
 
 *' SPECIALES, vel PRjECELLENTES PR^ROGA* 
 
 ** TIVAS NOBILITATIS, GENERIS, scientiarum, 
 *' facultatum, aut DIVITIARUM allegans, nee 
 ** inter Socios Presbyteros ejusdem Collegii, aut 
 "alias DICTI COLLEGII SCHOLARES, Austrahs > 
 ** AquilonareSj seu Boreales, aut Patrice ad 
 *' patriam, GENERIS AD GENUS, NOBILITATIS 
 
 .** AD JSOJJJLITATEM, wl AD lONOBILITATEM,
 
 21 
 
 ^ * 
 
 " sen alias qualittrcnnque COMPARATIOWES, 
 " qua odiosa stint, in verbo vel in facto, causa 
 " commovcndi malitiose socios vel SCHOLARS j 
 " fnciam quovismodo tctcite vel expressed 
 
 In die Oath taken by every Fellow Elect t 
 before lie can be admitted to his Fellowship, 
 precisely the same Clause occurs. It occurs 
 also, with a slight and immaterial variation,, in 
 that which the Warden, after being elected* is 
 required to take. 
 
 But neither was the Founder even thus $& 
 tisfied with binding' the principal Members of 
 his College individually nml separately to the 
 observance of a rule of co-id act on which the 
 internal tranquillity and peace of every Society 
 so much dc-pends. He therefore devotes aa 
 entire and distinct Rubric to the same subject^ 
 viz. the 19th, in which he also specifies . the 
 penalties to be imposed upon offenders against 
 it. In that Rubric I find the following en- 
 treaty and injunction addressed in the most 
 earnest and affectionate terms to all collec- 
 tively: " Statuimus, ordinamus, et volumes, 
 " etiam jirmitir pracipimus Custodi, omnibus 
 " que Slociis et SCHOLARIBUS ac aliis quibus 
 4 * cunqwe personis dicti nostri Qottegii prope 
 " Wintoniam prasentibus etfuturis, ac in vis- 
 " ceribus Jesu Christi obsecramus etiam et ro- 
 u gamus, ac sub obtcntu felicitatis mice y*^- 
 '* sentis pariter et sterna, ac sub obtestation* 
 
 D 3
 
 22 
 
 *v 
 
 ** divini judicii, ut in omnibus et super omnia 
 " unitatem et muttiam inter se charitatem, pa- 
 " cem, concordiam, ac dilectionem fraternam, 
 " ex quo inter socios quoddam genus fraterni- 
 " tatis esse dignoscitur, semper habeant, teneant 
 " in omnibus et observent, et pro eis nutriendis 
 " et fovendis anhelent pro viribus atque zelent, 
 <l quodque omnes et omnimodw scurrilitates, 
 u verba invida, contumeliosa, et brigosa, con- 
 *' tentiosa, rixosa, damnosa, susurria, jurgia, 
 " turpiloquia, derisiones, atque alia verba no- 
 " civa, tcediosa, scandalosa et opprobriosa quce 
 " cunque, COMPARATIONESQUE GENERIS AD 
 
 " GENUS, NOBILITATIS AD NOBILITATEM VEL 
 
 " AD JGNOBILITATEM, necnon SPECIALES aut 
 4* PR^ECELLENTES PREROGATIVE, in ore om- 
 " nium et personis singulorum cessent omnind" 
 lit. 
 
 There is also another Rubric, entitled, 
 " Quod nonfiat acceptio personarum per aliquem 
 ** in Collegio" which is introduced by the fol- 
 lowing solemn appeal to the Word of God, 
 " Item quia in lege divind noscitur esse scrip- 
 ** turn, Ita magnum judicabis ut parvum, nee 
 *' erit apud te acceptio personarum," and enacts 
 that the Warden and other Officers of the 
 Society, " Scholaresque et Socii Presbyteri vm- 
 "' versi CUJUSCUNQUE GRADUS, STATUS VEL CON- 
 
 " DITIONJS EXISTANT, absqUC
 
 23 
 
 M GENERIS, aut patria accept ione quacunque se> 
 " invicem diligant," fye. 
 
 From these different extracts then it appears 
 indisputably that it was an especial object with 
 the Founder to guard against Feuds and Dis- 
 sensions in his College, and that to prevent 
 these as far as human foresight could prevent 
 them, he enjoins all its Members to cultivate 
 above all things, unity, mutual charity, goodwill, 
 and brotherly affection, He enjoins them un- 
 der the solemn sanction of oaths often repeated, 
 to abstain from all malicious abuse, slander, 
 and calumny. He also in a still more parti- 
 cular manner (and this is most important for 
 our present purpose) prohibits all invidious 
 comparisons between family and family, be- 
 tween rank and rank, and even between nobi- 
 lity and ignoble birth. 
 
 But where was the necessity of an oath so 
 often repeated, where was the necessity of such 
 especial caution and care, if all were to be of 
 one rank and degree? Why so especially pro- 
 vide against a contingency which could not 
 possibly occur, if all the Members of the 
 College were to be chosen from the lowest 
 Classes ? If none were to be distinguished 
 above others, why enjoin that comparisons 
 should not be made between them ? If among 
 the Scholars none were to be of good family
 
 24 
 
 (^ nobilitalis vel generis'), if none were tcrb 
 the children of Parents in easy circumstances, 
 if none were to be possessed of the smallest 
 fortune whatever (*' divitiarum") if all, in short, 
 were to be equally destitute and indigent, we 
 tire reduced to the dilemma of supposing that 
 the Founder took a great deal of gratuitous 
 and unnecessary trouble in framing laws 
 which must for ever remain a dead letter. 
 Happily every thing which we know of his 
 public and private life, as well as the sound^ 
 ness of his judgment and his good sense, from 
 history, from authorities undoubted, nay, from 
 the very Statutes which he has left behind 
 him for the government of his two Colleges, 
 tears the most decisive testimony to the im- 
 probability and absurdity of such a surmise. 
 Is it not a much more reasonable conjecture, 
 that anxious for the honour of his College, and 
 foreseeing that it would become the resort of 
 persons of various degrees and ranks, he con- 
 tented himself with limiting the amount of 
 actual property which each Scholar might hold 
 in his own right, and protecting the poorer 
 and more humble Members of the Society from 
 insult and injury ? And that he expected it 
 would be so composed of persons of different 
 degrees, states, and conditions appears clearly 
 from the 44th Rubric mentioned above in
 
 25 
 
 tvhich we find the words " cujuscunrjue 
 " status vel conditionis" applied indiscrimi- 
 nately to the Warden, Fellows, and Scholars ; 
 and all are alike enjoined to love each other 
 with mutual and becoming affection, " absque 
 " jMsonarum, GENERIS, out patrice deception 
 *' quacunque" 
 
 Neither can the force of this argument be 
 weakened by the supposition that these strong 
 injunction.- were intended to have reference 
 only to the behaviour of the Scholars in their 
 intercourse with the world and general society. 
 For he has most distinctly guarded against thq 
 possibility of such an interpretation of his 
 meaning, by expressly enjoining, in the 19th 
 Rubric before-mentioned, the maintenance of 
 harmony and goodwill, and by prohibiting 
 strifes, quarrels, and the invidious comparisons 
 specifically therein detailed " in ore omnium el 
 " personis singulorum onmind ubique, TAM IN- 
 
 *' FRA DICTUM COLLEGIUM QUAM EXTRA, in, 
 " publico ET PRIVATO." 
 
 Nor will it be contended that they have re- 
 ference to the few Sons of persons of rank 
 and power, the special Friends of the College, 
 whom he permits by a clause- in the 16th 
 Rubric to be instructed in Grammar in it, but 
 expressly on the condition that they bring no 
 expense or detriment upon it or its members*
 
 26 
 
 " absque onere Collegii" He seems from the 
 words of the Statute rather to give his per- 
 mission than much encouragement to such ; 
 they were to form no constituent part of his 
 Society, and no provision is made respecting 
 their board or even lodging ; in short, it is 
 not possible to conceive how they could be of 
 sufficient importance in his view to induce him 
 to lay down so many and such strongly ex- 
 pressed regulations for the behaviour of the 
 Members of his College towards them exclu- 
 sively. On the contrary, a more natural sup- 
 position is, that if the children of only the 
 lowest classes were to be found within his 
 College even the small number to which he 
 limited the indulgence would not have been 
 filled up, nor would a large School so com- 
 posed have been considered a suitable place 
 of Education for the children of Noble Fami- 
 lies ; such a Society could possess no advan- 
 tages either as to the formation of their man- 
 ners and habits, or the acquisition of learning 
 and ideas at all consistent with the high sta- 
 tions to which they might be destined in their 
 more advanc'ed life. 
 
 But besides the Warden and Fellows, 
 the Masters, the Chaplains and the Clerks, 
 and in addition to the seventy Scholars, the 
 ^Founder lias also placed upon his Establish-
 
 27 
 
 ment 1 6 boys called Choristers, to attend in the 
 Chapel, to chant, as their name imports, to assist 
 the Priests in their daily celebration of Mass, 
 and to minister in divine Service. Their other 
 statutable duties are of a menial nature, an4 
 consequently so much is not required of them, 
 at their admission, as of Scholars. My rea-> 
 son for introducing the mention of them at all 
 is on account of an expression the Founder 
 has used in relation to them; he says that they 
 are to be admitted into the College, for the 
 purposes indeed above-mentioned, but " m- 
 " tuitu charitatis" Now this expression is 
 not used in respect to the admission of any 
 other Member of the Society whatever ; and, I 
 think, that as on the one hand it declares the 
 operation of a motive as influencing him in 
 their particular case, of which he is silent witli 
 regard to the Scholars, so, on the other, it 
 seems to afford substantial ground for con* 
 eluding that he contemplated a difference in 
 their conditions and circumstances in life; 
 consequently, the Scholars were not necessa- 
 rily to be of the poorest and lowest orders. 
 
 But considerable light will be thrown upon 
 this part of our subject, if we constantly bear ia 
 

 
 mind the chief object which the Founder had 
 in view ii* founding hktwo St. Marie Winton 
 Colleges, but which we may probably lose, 
 eight of, if we suffer ourselves to be misled by, 
 jour unqualified assertion, tha.t only the poor 
 and, indigent" were to be admitted into them.; 
 NOW i^ is fortunate that, no mistake can be. 
 i$a4e on, this point by any person, who will 
 ta^e. the trouble of examining with proper' 
 attention the Preamble which our Founder 
 himself prefixed to his Statutes, The part im- 
 mediately to, our present purpose, runs thus:, 
 " Nos Willidmus de Wykehayi permissione di- 
 *f f vind Wintoniensis Episcopus, de mmmi rerum 
 *\ oplficis bonita.te confisi, qui vato cunctorum m 
 *[eq fidentium, .cognoscit, dirigit et di&ponit, de- 
 " bonis fortune qv>(E npbis in hdc vitd de sua? 
 *[pkniMi*m gratia tribult abundanter, Duo 
 "ypqrpetya (JplfcgiQ) unitm videlicet Collegium 
 . perpetuiim pauperum et indigentium Scholar ium 
 Mudio Uriwerstiatis Oxonia, 
 D'mceseos, in diversis Sdentiis et j 
 studere ac proficere debentium, 
 * l Sain$ Mmiz College of Winchester inOxenfor$ 
 *'i!vulgaritr nuncupa&um, et qwddam aliud Col- 
 *' legium perpetuum aliorum pauperum et indi- 
 " gentium Scholarium Clericorum, Grammaticam 
 ? c addiscere debentium, propc civitatem Wintonice,
 
 29 
 
 '"Saint Marie College of Winchester iimiliter 
 " nuncupafum, ad tandem, gloriam, et honorem 
 " NobiiftiS crilcifivi, tie gloriosissimce Mar ice 
 " M&trU tf&s, SugTEktATioNEM et EiALf At 1- 
 
 ' OKfcM FrDEl CrtRISttANJE, ECCLESI& SANfc-' 
 ** T.E PROFECTUM, DlVINI CllLtUS, If BERA- 
 ** LIUMQUE ARTlufo, SciENTlAfiUM, Et 
 
 " TATUM AuGMENTUM, auctoritate Regid 
 " dinavimus, instituitnus, funddvimus, el stabi- 
 " livimus ;" fyc. fyc. 
 
 Can any one after reading this passage teii- 
 ttlre to assert, that it was his intention to found 
 a mere Charity School, a 1 mere Seminar^ of 
 instruction for the children of tlie Poof? Cart 
 any one so far shut his eyes to the light as tfot 
 to perceive the^ di/fefence between such &ft 
 Establishment, and one, Which was declared iii 
 the * Charter of its Foundation to f>e erected 
 ^ by virtue of an Act to cohfirme atnd enable 
 '* the erection and establishment of an Hos- 
 " pitctt and FREE Grammar Scho&i, and sundry 
 " other godly and charitable actes and uses, 
 * ikitended to be done and performed" by its 
 Fouwfe^. I mean not to cast any reflection 
 6n that highly respectable School, but it surely 
 *H;wj, >JK ?fr*T ,r>jhjrj ofVi "j^ ^ a i ; ^u^"i W^J - ;r:1 
 
 * See tba attested Copy of the Charter of the CharterHouie. 
 Ftrst Education Report, page 226.
 
 30 
 
 must be evident to every unprejudiced per- 
 son that William of Wykeham intended to take 
 a different ground, and to found two Esta- 
 blishments which should be more immediately 
 dedicated to the honour and service of God, 
 and the Encouragement of the higher Branches 
 Of sound Learning. And we have good 
 reasons for concluding that his principal, if 
 not only object was to accomplish this by re- 
 medying, as far as he was able, the deplorable 
 State of the Church at that time, by relieving a 
 Certain number of poor Scholars, intended for 
 Holy Orders, in their Clerical Education ; in 
 short, by establishing and founding two Col- 
 leges of Clerical Students ; purposing that the 
 One at Winchester should be, as it were, a 
 perpetual Nursery for that at Oxford, supply- 
 ing it with proper Subjects, and laying the 
 Foundations of Science which were after- 
 Wards to be raised and completed, on a plan 
 at once munificent and uniform. Nor let it be 
 Supposed that such a design was without its 
 benefit and use. " The Foundation of his 
 l< Colleges," it has been well observed by his* 
 learned Biographer,* " was as well calculated 
 " for the real use of the public, and as judi- 
 
 * $ee Bishop Lowth's Life of Wykeiiam, p. 307.
 
 " ciously planned, as it was nobly and gene- 
 " rously executed. Whatever Wykeham's at- 
 *' tainments in letters were he had at least the 
 " good sense to see that the Clergy, tho' they 
 " had almost engrossed the whole learning of 
 M that age, yet were very deficient in real and 
 " useful knowledge ; besides that by the par- 
 " ticular distresses of the times, and the ha- 
 <* voc that several successive plagues had made 
 " in all ranks of the people, but especially 
 " among the Clergy, the Church was at a loss 
 " for a proper supply of such as were tolera- 
 " bly qualified for the performance of the 
 c * common service. It was not vanity and 
 " ostentation that suggested this design to 
 " him; he was prompted to it by the notorious 
 " exigencies of the times, and the real de- 
 " mands of the public." 
 
 But if any doubts can still remain on this 
 point, they may be removed most satisfactorily 
 by considering various passages in the body of 
 his Statutes which incontestibly prove that hisr 
 Colleges were principally intended to afford a 
 place of Education for Holy Orders, and the 
 learned professions, rather than a mere elee- 
 mosynary Asylum for the Destitute. In the 
 second Rubric it is enacted that if any Scholars 
 at the time of their admission had not the 
 
 '
 
 32 
 
 *'clerical Tonsure they were to take it within 
 the year next following, on pain of expulsion; 
 nor were even the Founder's kin exempted from 
 this condition, they were only allowed a 
 longer time within which they were to do it. 
 The succeeding Clause of the same Rubric 
 goes still farther, and declares in express 
 terms, that " any Candidate who shall labour 
 *' under an incurable disorder, or suffers from 
 " any uncommon and apparent mutilation of 
 " limbs or any bodily or other defect, caused 
 ** by his own act or fault r whereby he ifr 
 " disqualified for taking Holy Orders, shall 
 " on no account be admitted into Wht J 
 " ton College." In another Rubric it is or- 
 dered, that " no Scholar is on any account 
 "to wear clothes, Ordini clericali minimi con- 
 * l gruentibus." 
 
 And in the third Rubric, entitled, " De 
 " Electione Scholarium" &c. he disclaims, by 
 implication, the idea of his C ollege being a 
 Heceptacle for the Poor. For, considering 
 as an ineffectual and useless expenditure of 
 its goods, and one directly contrary to his in- 
 tentions (" ne bona dicti nostri Collegii IN- 
 " EFFICACITER expendantur CONTRA NOSTRI 
 tr.i^' 'n li Jrjfft j.)diD/}ff* y- 
 
 . -* It is almost needless to obierve, that the Change of RelU 
 gion introduced at the time of the Reformation entirely super* 
 sedcs the observance of this injunction in the present day.
 
 33 
 
 '? INTENTJONIS. PROPOSITUM) whatever sums 
 4t might be spent CIRCA PERSONAS QU^E LITE- 
 " RARUM STUDIO ad profectum sc/io/asticufn el 
 * Divini cult&s augmentum INSISTERE NON 
 *< INTENDANT," he not only requires that every 
 Scholar, before he can be admitted into New 
 College for the two years of probation shall 
 swear that he proposes and firmly intends to 
 reside there for five years at the least, but he 
 also requires of any one who shall quit the 
 said College before the expiration of the said 
 period of five years, without sufficient and rea- 
 onable cause to be approved by the Warden 
 and certain Officers, that he shall make due 
 satisfaction and payment for his Commons and 
 all the other emoluments whatsoever which he 
 may have received therefrom, either by his own 
 hands or in his name. But if the Scholars were so 
 poor as you would have us suppose they ought 
 to be, how were they to make that satisfaction?' 
 Can then any stronger proof be required that 
 Poverty was, in the mind of the Founder, not 
 SQ indispensable a qualification in a Candidate 
 for admission into his College, as the intention 
 to apply to Learning and the promotion of 
 God's Service and Worship ? 
 Similar too in import, but still more deci-
 
 34 
 
 ive of the point in question, is the *Rubric, 
 entitled " Quomodo succurritur Scholar ibus cl 
 " Consanguitieis Fundatoris tempore infirmi- 
 *' tatis eonmdem." It enacts that if any Scholar 
 shall happen to be taken ill, he shall be allowed 
 during the first month of his sickness, if it 
 should last so long, to receive his Commons 
 in and from the College, as if in health. But 
 if his sickness should last longer than a month, 
 and there should be at that time no well- 
 founded hope of his speedy recovery, and if 
 he is NOT POSSESSED of any BENEFICE, or 
 INCOME by which he can be supported (" nee 
 " BENEFICIUM haleat ve/REDiTUM, unde pote- 
 44 rit sustentari"), nor of Friends who may be 
 willing and able to assist him ("quieidemvelint 
 " et valeant subvenire" ) then he is to be re- 
 moved without the College to some reputable 
 place (" in honesto loco') receiving IN MONEY 
 (" in pecunicT) in and from the College during 
 the three months then immediately succeeding, the 
 Commons usually allowed to Scholars (" Com- 
 " mwlaspro Scholaribus assignatas"). But all 
 those whose sickness shall last for a longer time, 
 if there shall be no hope of their speedy reco- 
 very, shall from thenceforth cease to be Scholars, 
 and others shall to all intents and purposes be 
 
 * Rubric, 21,
 
 35 
 
 admitted into their place as soon as possible 
 (" aliiqueloco eorundem, quam citiiis fieri poterit t 
 " realiter admittantur" ) "that the number of the 
 " Fellows and Scholars of New College may be 
 " always completed, upon any vacancy happen- 
 " ing, by Scholars from Winchester, duly qua- 
 " lifted and instructed" (sufficientcr instructiset 
 " idoneis). 
 
 It is impossible, I think, to conceive a case 
 that militates more strongly against the notion 
 of the relief of poverty being the object 
 uppermost in the Founder's mind at the time 
 when he determined on founding his Colleges. 
 We may almost imagine that we hear him dis- 
 missing the afflicted Scholars just referred to 
 in some such terms as the following : You 
 are sick indeed, and you are poor, and you 
 have no visible means of support ; the dic- 
 tates of Charity anl Religion alike move me 
 to commiserate your case (" quum debilibus et 
 " infirmis humanitatis prcebere presidium ju- 
 " beat charitas et pietas interpellate Rub. 21) 
 I will not therefore hastily turn you adrift, nor 
 suddenly keep back your wonted allowances 
 at the first attack of sickness ; I allow you the 
 chance of recovery ; but I cannot swerve from 
 the great object I have in view, viz. a due 
 supply of ministers properly qualified for the 
 Church, and of persons duly educated for the
 
 learned professions ; if you arc not restored to 
 health at the expiration of three months I can 
 no longer suffer the business of my College 
 to be interrupted ; however I may deplore the 
 hardship of your case, yet as you are no longer 
 competent to answer the purpose of your 
 being placed in it, you must make room for 
 others who are. 
 
 But enough has been said to satisfy every 
 reasonable mind on this head ; and the fore- 
 going Extracts from the Statutes have clearly 
 shewn for what purpose Scholars were to be 
 admitted into his College. Nor would it be 
 an easy matter for you to prove, what the na- 
 ture of the case itself by no means affords you 
 quay just reason for supposing, that the lowest 
 glasses of Society must necessarily supply 
 children more suitably or properly qualified for 
 being brought up to the learned Professions 
 than their Superiors ; or that the public would 
 be in any degree benefited if they alone were 
 to fill all the great public Establishments of 
 Education. Be it however always remem- 
 bered that I am not arguing in favour of the 
 Exclusion even of the poorest I only wish 
 the matter to rest, where the Founder seems td 
 me to haye left it, and not to have the terms 
 " pauperes et indigentes" understood to mean 
 juore tha they were intended to mean.
 
 37 
 
 That the Founder, when he used those word* 
 did not mean absolute and complete poverty, 
 without any respect to property whatever fer, I 
 think, proved by his having fixed a particular 
 sum, the possession of which, or any sum 
 above it, should render the possessor ineligible 
 to a Scholarship. For it may be safely in- 
 ferred, that he meant to allow the possession 
 of property or income to any amount midget it ; 
 if he did not, why say any thing at all about 
 the matter ? 
 
 But there is also a second case which would 
 Suggest itself to him as likely to occur in respect 
 of property, viz. that of a boy possessing nothing 
 at th time of being admitted as a Scholar, 
 but succeeding, after admission, yet previously 
 to being required to take- the oath usual upon 
 having completed his fifteenth year, to a for^ 
 tune- of the amount which he had declared 1 'to 
 be a disqualification for a Scholarship. In 
 both tlrese eases we find the sum to be specified, 
 and every Scholar is allowed to possess from 
 spiritual and temporal possessions an annual 
 income not exceeding five marks* The 
 
 * The relative value of money at the time of the Founder 
 and the present time "is a question into which J do not feel myself 
 to be competent to enter, pt least not sufficiently so as to aclvanc? 
 any positions on the subject on my own authority. But I hav% 
 
 F 2
 
 38 
 
 Founder's Kinsmen are allowed to possess an 
 annual income of twenty marks. 
 
 Hence then it is clear that the Founder ac- 
 knowledged the probability, and even admitted 
 the propriety of some among the Scholars 
 being possessed of property of their own ; he 
 only thought it necessary to limit the amount. 
 Add to this that there are other Statutes from 
 which it follows, by direct implication, that 
 the Scholars must have possessed property, or 
 they could not have complied with them. 
 Such, for instance, is the 16th, in which he 
 gives his full consent that any Scholar, whose 
 Father, or Brother, Kinsman, or Friend should 
 come to see him, may receive, entertain, and 
 feed such Guest, after leave had of the War- 
 den, for two days, in the College Hall or 
 Chamber, " suis SUMPTIBUS PROPRIIS, SINE 
 " ONERE COMMUNITATIS, athisown cost, with- 
 " out bringing any charge on the Society." 
 If the Society were not to defray the charge, 
 
 seen a statement to this effect, that " all the writers upon money, 
 
 " such as Adam Smith, Fleetwood, &c. have taken corn as the 
 
 " standard measure. Wheat about the time of the Foundation 
 
 ' was four or fire shillings the quarter j five marks, or three 
 
 'pounds, six shillings, and eight pence, would then purchase 
 
 about fifteen or sixteen quarters of corn. Taking wheat at four 
 
 ' pounds per quarter, as the present average price, we shall find 
 
 ' that agreeably to the intention of the Founder, a boy may be 
 
 " possessed of sixty pounds per annum."
 
 where was the money to come from, except 
 from the Scholar's own pocket? 
 
 But it may not be superfluous to shew fur- 
 ther that the Injunction as to the possession of 
 property is to be applied solely and specifically 
 to the Scholar himself, For much misappre- 
 hension and confusion seem to have arisen 
 from the circumstances of the Children being 
 improperly and without due consideration 
 identified with those of their Parents or 
 Friends. Now I assert, that it never was the 
 intention of the Founder so to identify them. 
 He lays down no rule whatever as to fortune 
 in expectancy, nor as to the fortune of parents; 
 an omission too remarkable and too important 
 to have arisen from inadvertency, if he had 
 intended to make it a standard, whereby to 
 judge of the scholar's pretensions to admission 
 into his College. Actual possession of property, 
 and actual possession alone, constitutes the 
 disqualification. But to prove this I shall pur- 
 sue the method which I have before pursued 
 with success, and shall endeavour to eluci- 
 date in this, as in every other case, the 
 Founder's own meaning from his own Statutes* 
 
 In the second Rubric, entitled, " Qui et 
 " queries sint eligendi in Scholares ad nostrum 
 ' Collegium prope Wintoniam" occurs the
 
 40 
 
 first mention that is made of the possession of 
 property being a disqualification for a Scholar- 
 ship. The Clause runs thus ; " Ordinantes in- 
 " super, quod NULLUS habens terras, tenementa, 
 " vel alias possessiones Spiritual.es vd Tempo- 
 " rales, quorum proventus quinque Marcarutn 
 " Sterlingorum valorem ANN HUM excesserint, in 
 " ipsutn Collegium prope Wintoniam eligatur." 
 This, I confess, appears to me to be suffici- 
 ently decisive of the question not a word is 
 said of parents here ; " nullus" no individual, 
 irrespectively of his connexions. And I can 
 see no more reasonable ground for supposing 
 that the Founder had in his contemplation the 
 circumstances of Parents in that than in the 
 concluding part of the clause, in which he ex- 
 tends two distinct indulgences to his Relatives, 
 one in respect of their property, the other in 
 respect of their age. The words are, " Con- 
 " sanguineis nostris duntaxat exceptis, quos in 
 " dictum Collegium prope Wintoniam a SEP- 
 " TIMO cetatis SUCR anno, usque ad VICESIMUM 
 " QUINTUM cetatis suce annum completum, ctiam 
 " si possessiones habeant ad VALOREM ANNtuai 
 " VIGINTI Marcarum, supportatis oneribus, re- 
 *' dpi volumus et adriiitti" No one can ever 
 for a moment suppose that in these words he 
 had regard to the Parent's Age, then why to 
 the Parent's Circumstances ?
 
 41 
 
 Let us now turn to the Oath which the 
 Scholars are required to take, and to which 
 \ou have alluded in your Letter. It seems to 
 
 be equally satisfactory. '" EGO in Col- 
 
 " legium Sanctce Marios, prope Wintoniam ad- 
 " missus, j-uro, quod non habeo aliquid, de quo 
 " iwhiconstat, wide possum expendcre ANN u ATIM 
 " ultra quinque Marcos Sterlingorum" Which 
 I would render, not according to your inter- 
 pretation, 1 have not 3 6s. a year to spend, 
 for that probably many of the Scholars have 
 from the liberality of their friends ; but, I have 
 not any property ("aliquid"), or, as the Founder 
 jelse where (Rub. 21) expresses himself, any in- 
 come ("reditum") which I can so call my own 
 ("de quo mihi constat") as to be able to spend 
 from it yearly above the sum of iive marks. 
 This is the interpretation which has been 
 usually given to the Founder's Words, and I 
 verily believe that it is the only true meaning 
 that can be conveyed by them. 
 
 The same limitation to the Scholar himself, 
 without any reference whatever to his Parents, 
 is expressed in terms even stronger, if possi- 
 ble, in the 23d Rubric, entitled, " Propter 
 " quas causas SCHOLARES adictoCollegiodebeant 
 " amoveri? wherein it is enjoined that " POST- 
 " QUAM aliquis Scholariwn prxdictorum, nos-
 
 42 
 
 " tris Consanguineis cxceptis, possessiones spi~ 
 " rituahs vel temporales annui valoris centum 
 -t solidorum pacific^ ADEPT us FUERIT, ex tune 
 " a dicto nostro Collegia expellatur" 
 
 But let me refer once more to the 21st Ru- 
 bric, that containing the very remarkable ex 
 pressions, " nee BENEFICIUM habeat, ncc RE- 
 
 " DITUM, UNDE POTERIT SUSTENTARI," a* 
 
 applied to a Scholar. From this expression 
 we may fairly infer that it was not a thing 
 wholly beyond the Founder's contemplation 
 that a Scholar should be possessed of Income 
 sufficient to afford him a maintenance ; and 
 that the distinction between the Scholar and 
 his Parents was full in his view is very clear 
 from the words, which immediately follow; 
 " nee amicos, qui eidem velint et valeant sub- 
 " venire" 
 
 But I repeat them more particularly, as they 
 seem to afford a satisfactory solution of what 
 Las been considered a difficulty, and supply 
 an answer to the question which it appears, 
 in. the Evidence taken before the Committee, 
 you put-to the Rev. D. Williams, viz. Whether 
 he apprehended " that it was the custom of 
 *' England, in the time of William of Wyke- 
 ** ham, for children of eight years old to have 
 " fortunes of their own,, spiritual or temporal %
 
 43 
 
 " those being the words of the Statute." For 
 as we cannot possibly be at a loss how to 
 translate the words " beneficium" and "redituw? 
 we may safely conclude from them that it wag 
 the custom, If it were not so, how came the 
 contingency to enter into his contemplation ? 
 And happily History enables us to return the 
 same answer ; for it is a matter of historical 
 record that infants were in those days 
 appointed to Benefices. As early as in the 
 thirteenth Century we find Robert Grouthead, 
 Bishop of Lincoln, a man of high attainments 
 and inflexible integrity, resisting the Mandate 
 of Pope Innocent IV. which ordered him to 
 bestow a considerable Living in his gift upon 
 the Pope's nephew, who was an infant, and 
 declaring his solemn protest against such pro- 
 ceedings in the following bold and manly lan- 
 guage : " Those who bring such unqualified 
 " persons into the Church and debauch the 
 " Hierarchy, are much to blame ; and their 
 " crimes rise in proportion to the height of 
 " their station."* And somewhere about the 
 year 1320, only four or five years before the 
 birth of William of Wykeham, Archbishop 
 Reynolds was impowered by a Bull of Pope 
 Clement V. among other things to allow 
 
 / li fjoi'-iH o) b-jTislsi vhataioi za<" Lie ,';io visJrtuio* 
 Henry's History of Great Britain, Book 4, cb, 3, i, 1.
 
 twelve Clerks under age to enjoy Benefices 
 with cure of soul*.* These instances serve to 
 ehew that the appointment of Youths to Bene- 
 fices was, at the period alluded to, no very un- 
 common thing. 
 
 The ground then being thus cleared, we can 
 no longer be at a loss to discover the error 
 which you have committed throughout in con- 
 found ing the circumstances and property of the 
 Scholars with those of their parents ; and the 
 Sting is at once drawn from the bitter sarcasm 
 which you have directed against the custom at 
 present prevailing for ten guineas to be paid to 
 the Masters ;t for you do not require to be told 
 that that sum, as well as their other extraordi- 
 nary expenses, is defrayed by their parents. 
 
 It will be obvious to every reflecting mind 
 why I have dwelt so long on the expression 
 in your Letter, to which the foregoing remarks 
 are intended to apply ; and why it is, above all 
 things, important that a clear understanding 
 should be entertained with respect to the qua- 
 lifications, the condition, and the class of life 
 y;fj 9'ioltfJ / 07 ft 10 * rln*) ,0fI fi^> i " 
 
 * Henry's History of Great Britain, Book 4* cli. 2, s. 2. 
 
 f I do not wish to be understood as arguing in favour of that 
 particular custom ; but it may be proper to observe that it is a 
 matter of sufficient notoriety that the payment in question is a 
 voluntary one, and was formerly referred to a Bishop of Win- 
 chester, who pronounced in favour of its continuance.
 
 45 
 
 of the Scholars to be admitted on the Founda- 
 tion. It appears, I think, clearly, that the 
 Founder never intended his College to be only 
 a receptacle for the children of paupera ; nor 
 is there any direct evidence, as far at least as 
 I can judge, of an intention to exclude the 
 children of the middling, and even upper 
 classes of Society, provided the children them- 
 selves were not in actual possession of income, 
 or property producing a certain income, beyond 
 a given amount ; and I have shewn that there 
 are many clauses in particular Rubrics, which 
 lead us to a directly contrary conclusion ; his 
 pri&ipal object being to estaMish a Seminary, 
 or Preparatory School, for suc-h poor Scholars 
 as intended to proceed afterwards to Oxford 
 to be admitted, in due course, into Holy 
 Orders, or the other learned professions. Ami 
 hence it appears why \ think it itaportafrf: that 
 the word " Cleric? should not have been 
 omitted in the designation given of the Scholars 
 to be received upon his Foundation. 
 : I now cofflfte to a part of my undertaking 
 whic'h will not require much trouble, or 
 lengthened discussion viz. to expose tlie un- 
 founded assertions and to correct the misre- 
 presentations which you have made against us. 
 
 G 2
 
 46 
 
 - First, then, you assert that " ALL the 
 " Scholars on the Foundation are the children of 
 "persons in easy circumstances" This is not 
 true ; there are some who are not so : and I 
 may say many are not so, unless all persons 
 earning their livelihood and supporting their 
 families by laborious trades and professions 
 (not to mention Clergymen with little or 
 tiothing to depend upon but their benefices, 
 and these, in some instances, small) can be 
 fairly said to be in easy circumstances. And 
 a reference to the Evidence taken before the 
 Committee would have enabled you to make a 
 more correct statement on this subject; for it 
 there appears that in answer to your question, 
 "whether the Boys, in general, were Gentle- 
 men's Sons, the Rev. D. Williams replied, that 
 *they were "principally" so ; and when asked 
 whether all paid the ten guineas before men- 
 tioned, he answered, and answered truly, 
 " NOT ALL." ., no 
 
 Again, you assert that " it is STRICTLY 
 " enjoined that no Soy shall be admitted ABOVE 
 " TWELVE years of age this is ivholly disre- 
 " garded?' The truth, Sir, is, and event tne 
 Extract which appears in the printed Report 
 
 * See Minutes of Evidence, 1818. 
 f See Minutes of Evidence, 1818.
 
 47 
 
 of the Evidence shews it, that the Statute ex- 
 pressly and distinctly allows a very great lati- 
 tude in this respect. For to the declaration of 
 the ages, viz. eight and twelve, between which 
 Boys are, in general, to be admitted, imme- 
 diately succeeds the following exception; 
 
 "NISI INFRA SEPTIMUM DECIMUM CBtatlS SUCC 
 
 " annum constitutus, taliter forsan in Gram- 
 " maticafuerit informal us, quod ante decimum 
 " octavum cztatis suce annum completum, JUDICIO 
 " ELIGENTIUM in Grammaticd sufficienter poterit 
 " expediri, nostris consanguineis duntaxat ex- 
 " ceptis ;" unless a Boy being under SEVENTEEN 
 years of age shall (at the time of offering 
 himself as a candidate for admission^ have 
 made such proficiency in Grammar as to afford 
 reasonable ground to expect that he will be 
 perfected in Grammar according to the opinion 
 of the Electors, before he shall have completed 
 his eighteenth year, the usual time of superan- 
 nuation for all but Founder's Kinsmen. It is 
 hardly necessary to add that no Boys above 
 the age of twelve years are known to offer 
 themselves who have made such slender pro- 
 gress in Grammar, or, to say the least, such 
 improvident preparation for examination in the 
 Election Chamber, as to be entirely disquali- 
 fied from having this privilege with respect to 
 age extended to them.
 
 48 
 
 The construction that is put upon the Statute 
 which requires that if a Boy comes into the 
 possession of property to the amount of five 
 marks per annum, his Scholarship shall be 
 declared vacant, must be admitted to be a de- 
 viation from its literal sense. But, Sir, I have 
 your own authority for the opinion that *- " the 
 <* Will of the Donor, which ought to be closely 
 "pursued, may often bebetter complied with byf 
 <* a deviation from the letter of his directions :** 
 and it appeal's that in the regard that is in this 
 instance paid to the diminished value of money 
 the same mode of Calculation has been 
 observed with that which, as I have before shewn 
 in a note, is adopted by all Writers upon the 
 Subject. But to your Authority I may also 
 add, by implication, one that I consider still 
 better, viz. that of the Founder himself, who 
 iai the concluding Chapter of his Statutes, and 
 m the very next sentence to one in which he 
 
 * Mr. Brougham's Letter, page 57. 
 
 * It is remarkable, and it may be mentioned here as a proof 
 that every deviation from the Founder's Statute is not an Abase, 
 tliat there are documents which shew that even in his own time, 
 and from the earliest periods subsequent to his death, the pre- 
 ference given to the Diocese of Winchester, and then to other 
 Counties specified in the second Rubric, was not observed in the 
 Election of Scholars. I have been informed that the same is 
 true with respect to the nomination of Scholar* to New 
 College.
 
 49 
 
 expressly enjoins the literal observance of them 
 according to their plain, grammatical meaning, 
 uses words which, in my opinion, are sufficient 
 lo authorize the deviation in question. The 
 words are these ; " JEt si contra prcemissa, vel 
 " coittra INTENTIONEM NOSTRAM in prcemissis 
 ** vel eorum aliquo" fyc. fyc. fyc Now who 
 will undertake to say that in the case before us 
 we are acting in a manner contrary to his 
 intentions? Who will undertake to say that if 
 he had lived in the present times he would 
 not have fixed the sum constituting the dis- 
 qualification for a Scholarship according to 
 the depreciated value of money T The pro- 
 bability is that he would, and we are therefore 
 justified in acting upon that presumption. For 
 it is very clear that the liberal construction put 
 upon the Statute indicates no wish to restrict, 
 and confine within narrower bounds the ad- 
 vantages of a Scholarship, or to exclude any 
 persons from them ; on the contrary it enlarges 
 and extends the sphere of the Founder's bounty ; 
 and while in that respect it is beneficial, it 
 does injury to none, for it deprives none of 
 any privilege they before possessed. On the 
 whole I am satisfied that no charge of abuse 
 in re&pect to Scholars being admitted who are 
 disqualified on account of property ean be
 
 50 
 
 maintained; and I may add in this place thaf 
 an instance occurred lately of a Boy relin- 
 quishing his Scholarship, on succeeding to 
 property above the amount tenable with it 
 subsequently to his admission into the College. 
 You do not scruple to assert that " the Fel- 
 ** Io,wships are augmented in revenue by a 
 "' liberal interpretation of the terms describing 
 <fc their money payments ; while THE STRICTEST 
 *' CONSTRUCTION is OBSERVED as to the pay- 
 " ments to Scholars, including even the 
 *' Founder's Kin, the peculiar objects of his 
 " bounty." But, Sir, you will perhaps be sur- 
 prised to learn that no construction at all, 
 liberal or strict, is observed, and none is 
 necessary to be observed. For no money pay- 
 ments are made to Scholars and none are rer 
 quired to be made by the Statutes, except in 
 the special case, to which I have before re-, 
 ferredj viz. that of a Boy being obliged tp re- 
 linquish his Scholarship through sickness, and 
 then such payment is only to be made/br thre$ 
 months. Neither do the Statutes require any 
 money payment to be made to the Founder's, 
 Kin, except, as before, in the case of sickness. 
 It is possible that your mistake as to the 
 Founders Kin may have arisen from the answer 
 whiqh I was obligeu 1 to : give, ,to your question,
 
 51 
 
 whether the sum of twenty pounds usually 
 paid to them was so apportioned by virtue of 
 the Statutes, viz. *that " I understood it to be 
 so" and that was the impression upon my 
 mind at the time ; for the truth is, the provision 
 of the Statute with respect to that particular 
 point was not sufficiently in my recollection 
 to enable me to give a more direct answer. 
 To your question, whether the money pay- 
 ments to be made to the Warden and Fellows 
 are not regulated by the Statutes just in the 
 same way that the money payments are regu- 
 lated to the Founder's Kin, and whether they 
 are not specified in the Statute, -\l distinctly 
 replied, as it appears, that " I did not know 
 " and was not competent to judge at that 
 " time." 
 
 I have since consulted the Statutes with 
 greater attention on these points, and the result 
 is that I find it expressly required that the 
 expense& of the Founder's Kin, specially incurred 
 on their particular account, in every way what- 
 soever, over and above their ordinary allow- 
 ances as Scholars, shall never stand the Col- 
 lege in a sum exceeding twenty pounds in one 
 and the same year. But it is not require4 
 
 , ju} nl' $ < i?'j:...-:e'bQii) 1 :i J J ui._- 
 
 * See Minutes of Evidence, 1818. 
 t See Minutes of Evidence, 1818. 
 H
 
 52 
 
 that they shall always necessarily reach that 
 sum ; and the only money payments allowed 
 are a weekly sum of two shillings paid every 
 year to such only of them as are obliged to quit 
 the College and relinquish ftieir Scholarships 
 in consequence of protracted sickness. These 
 Annuities afford one among other proofs that 
 the Founder's Kin were the peculiar ob- 
 jects of his Bounty, but even these are to l>e 
 included in the twenty pounds before-men- 
 tioned, as constituting the maximum of their 
 special Expenses. I am informed, that th6 
 payment of twenty pounds, according to the 
 present custom, has no reference to the pro- 
 vision made in that particular Statute, but is 
 made in the way of a gratuity. The passage 
 of the *Rubrie alluded to is as follows : "Si 
 " autem infirmitatem perpetitam, seu morbum 
 " contagiosum iidem nostri Consanguinei habu- 
 ** Mint, ipsos tune extra Collegium in loco honcsto 
 >" quern clegerint, volumus commorari et eorum 
 " cuilibet, "\possessiones aut reditus spirituals 
 -v/v>!i ft yi&iitfc'io if^rft 97odfi bffs T^VO /IVHO* 
 
 * Rubric 21: 
 
 f Another proof this, by the way, that JZ the Scholars at 
 least were not required to be equally poor and indigent, since 
 the Founder allows additional privileges to such among his Kin 
 as had not an annual income of one hundred shillings, in those 
 days no inconsiderable sum. 
 
 to viJoaiM .<3 f 
 H
 
 53 
 
 1 * aut temporales ad valorem annuum centum soli- 
 " dorum, ut prcemittitur, non habenti, pro 
 *' victualibus et aliis sibi necessariis duos solidos 
 " duntaxat singulis septimanis, quoad vixerinf, 
 V annuatim persolvi per manus Bursariorum 
 " Collegii supradicti. PROVISO, quod expenses 
 " circa Consqnguineos nostros, vigor e praisentis 
 " nostri Statuti, ceu alter ins cujuscunque ex spe- 
 " ciali prtcrogativa quomodolibet faciendte, ipso- 
 " rumque perceptiones annuce^ pr&ter et ultra 
 " omnia alia quce, ut cceteridicti Collegii Scho- 
 " lares, &unt in et de eodem Coj/egio alias per- 
 " cepturi, in uno et eodem aniw viginli librarum 
 *' summam aliquatenus non tra tscendant" 
 
 The ordinary Allowances to Scholars are to 
 be made only in the way of Commons, at the 
 rate of 8d. per week to each Scholar ; and it is 
 expressly enjoined that the aforesaid sum shall 
 be expended (" expendi") and their Commons 
 supplied ("ministrari" ) to theiri*"nonpereorum 
 " manus , sed per manus Bursariorum qui pro 
 '* tempore fuerint" Money payments were 
 therefore evidently not intended ; and Com- 
 mons constitute the whole of the ordinary 
 statutable allowance to Scholars, with the ex- 
 ception of one gown annually. It is furtner 
 remarkable, that in their case the Founder 
 does not allow the Sum apportioned for Cora- 
 
 ,. i > i ^ -, 
 
 * Rubric 13. 
 
 H 2
 
 54 
 
 mons to be advanced according to the Sea- 
 sons and the Price of Corn, as he does in 
 that of the other Members of the Society. 
 Neither is there any annual Salary or Stipend 
 whatever apportioned to them, as there is to 
 the Warden, Fellows, &c. 
 
 It may be proper to add here, that the 
 *Bread, Meat, and Beer Bills alone of the year 
 1817, for the Establishment, exceeded two 
 thousand seven hundred pounds, and my Evi- 
 dence will shew, that the portion which the 
 Fellows had of that was so trifling, as hardly 
 to be worth notice. The annual Expense which 
 each Scholar stands the College in at the pre- 
 sent time cannot, I think, be reasonably esti- 
 mated at less than forty pounds. The amount 
 allowed to each| for Commons by the Founder, 
 is under one pound fifteen shillings per ann. 
 
 Your assertion that the Scholars are not 
 allowed by the College the convenience of 
 knives and forks, spoons and plates, &c. I am 
 unable to contradict, in fact}: I have already 
 
 ion .vijiiol/ir.* jioivjoaf 
 
 * See Minute* of Evidence, 1818. 
 
 f There were occasions on which Boys were even to be dis- 
 commonedand breakfasts were only to be allowed to certain 
 among them on certain days. 
 
 J See Minutes of Evidence, 1818. 
 
 It may not be superfluous to add here that the Fellows are 
 only allowed these accommodations when they dine in public. 
 Such articles are expressly prohibited from being taken to the 
 
 i- 11
 
 55 
 
 Acknowledged it before the Committee. I 
 think it right however to inform you that certain 
 improrements in this as well as other respect^ 
 had been in the contemplation of myself and 
 gome of my Brethren previously to the inquiry 
 into the management of the College lately 
 made by the Committee of Education, and I 
 have reason to think that the best mode of 
 effecting such improvements will ere long be 
 considered by the Society in general. When you 
 add that the Scholars are refused those conve- 
 niences " on the ground that such articles of fur- 
 " niture were unknown in the time of William of 
 ** Wykeham," I must beg again to refer you 
 to the Minutes of Evidence, and you will there 
 find that to your question whether they were 
 refused on that ground I distinctly declared my 
 inability to reply in this instance therefore 
 ^you have hazarded an unauthorized statement. 
 Equally unauthorized and equally unfounded 
 is that also which you make when you affirm 
 that " the Founder obviously intended that the 
 " whole yearly expense of the Foundation 
 " Scholars, as now borne by their Parents, 
 
 Fellow* private apartments. They have therefore to provide 
 them at their own expense j they have also to furnish their apart- 
 ments at their own expente.
 
 56 
 
 ** should be defrayed out of the Revenues, 
 ' and the School thus restored to its original 
 f ' State." *The Statutes afford you no ground 
 whatever for such an affirmation ; on the con- 
 trary I assert, that the half-yearly Bills include 
 items which either never were in the contem- 
 plation of the Founder, or were left to be 
 defrayed by the Boys or their Parents. That 
 the essential Article of Clothes was so left is, 
 I think, clear. For as I have shewn above, 
 the only allowance that is expressed is for 
 Commons, and a Gown. And as in the f Rubric 
 in which this article of Dress is ordered to be 
 worn by way of Livery, and directions' are 
 given as to the quantity, colour, price, and qua- 
 lity of the cloth of which it was to be made, 
 he has specified no other article of apparel 
 whatever, it is evident he meant that nothing 
 more should be allowed ; otherwise why did he 
 give no particular directions as to the quality, 
 price, &c. in the one case as well as the other? 
 But it is worthy of notice, that he specifically 
 r'>itebmit)'d od; 'to o^n-jq/o 'tkt&V, stodir '* 
 
 * This remark is not intended to apply to those of the 
 Founder's Kin, for whom provision is made in respect of clothes, 
 &c. by the 2d Rubric. But is not this special provision for 
 certain only of the Scholars an argument that he did not intend 
 a similar provision to be made for all indiscriminately ? 
 
 t Rubrics?.
 
 57 
 
 prohibits certain fashions, colours and forms 
 of dress ; and these are such as constituted 
 the very top of the mode in the reign of 
 Edward III. If the Scholars were to be 
 all equally abject and poor, why prohibit the 
 use of that which they could not afford and 
 which it would probably never enter into their 
 wishes to purchase ? And \whence, I may 
 ask, do you infer that he " tibviously intended" 
 that their Tradesmen's Bills, their Books, and 
 their Journies should be defrayed for them? 
 Whence too have you acquired your knowledge 
 of " the original state of the School?" That 
 you know as little of it as I have endeavoured 
 to shew you did of the design and intent with 
 which it was originally founded, I fully believe. 
 Neither, as far as I can learn, have you had 
 any means of coming at an exact knowledge 
 on these points ; your assertions therefore 
 respecting it are merely gratuitous assertions, 
 and I leave the public to decide, from the 
 many instances of inaccuracy which I have 
 already proved against you, upon the degree 
 of credit to which they are entitled. 
 
 . Your suggestion respecting the increase of 
 the number of our Scholars is calculated to 
 mislead ; inasmuch as it might have the effect 
 of raising expectations which the Statutes do
 
 58 
 
 not by any means require us to fulfil. The 
 only *Rubric to which the Suggestion can have 
 reference contains the following Clause, " De- 
 '* mum si post hcec, injortuniis, quod absit, inva- 
 * ( lescentibus mtmerus s u PR A D i CTU s de reditibus, 
 *' exilibus, et proventlbus possessionum dicti 
 " nostri Coltegii tune existentibus, informdprce-* 
 *' (HctA non potent suslentari, permittimus qudd 
 " tuiic, et non ant&> nee alias quovisniodo, juxta, 
 "deer tscentiam diet or um redituum et proventiium, 
 M DECRESCAT SUCCESSIVE numerus Sociorum et 
 *' Seholarium nostri Collegii supradicti." And 
 then, after the insertion of a Sentence inti- 
 mating a particular obligation to the obser- 
 vance of that Clause, follows another in these 
 words: " Ordinantes ac etiam statuentesut si 
 " necessitatibus et inforluniis supradictis ces- 
 " smttihus tempora mutmtur in melius, possession 
 " nevqiM, reditus, et proveutus dicti nostri Col* 
 " hgii jper Dei gratiam iteratd feUeia recipiant 
 11 increment, juxta ipsorum ereseentiam numerus 
 " f SUPRADICTUS sic ut fnamittitur in dictis 
 " easibiLS mmucjtdus augeatur etiam et accreseat t 
 " ac alias in omnibus pereipiaut, SICUT PRIUS^' 
 Surely very little penetration is necessary to 
 perceive that the Founder, as in the first Clause 
 
 46. .: 
 
 t Rubric 1.
 
 ke permits the number of the Scholars and 
 Fellows to be diminished in cases of urgent 
 necessity, in the second merely enjoins such 
 an augmentation as would restore the number, 
 unhappily so reduced, to its former Comple- 
 ment, which he had before limited in the first 
 JRubric. The first Rubric is entitled " De 
 " TOTALI Nuinero Scholarium" fyc. and con- 
 cludes with an injunction that the number 
 aforesaid " SEMPER subsistere debere" 
 
 As to the Equalization of our Fellowships 
 with those of Oxford and Cambridge I have 
 simply to observe that they do not even now 
 much exceed (if I am rightly informed) the 
 Senior Fellowships of some of the Colleges at 
 both; and that the Founder intended they 
 should exceed those of the Sister College at 
 Oxford may be safely inferred from his having 
 given a preference to the Fellows of New 
 College for supplying Vacancies. 
 
 Respecting the Visitor and the Visitatorial 
 power as applied to Winchester College you 
 seem to have rather an indistinct notion. The 
 fact is, that he is not appointed by our Statutes 
 .but by those of New College, nor is it re- 
 quired that he should make regular Visitations 
 at stated periods to Winchester ; that privilege 
 and power has been delegated by the Founder 
 
 I
 
 60 
 
 to the Warden and two Fellows of New 
 College, called Posers, who are required once 
 every year, after due notice given and published 
 for all whom it may concern, to proceed at 
 the expense of their own College to Winchester 
 College, that they may " ibidem super Re- 
 " gimine ipsius Collegii, Custodis, ac Magistri 
 " in GrammaticA Informatoris, Hostiarii sub 
 " ipso, Scholarium et aliarum personamm de~ 
 "gentium in eodem ac super informatione Doc 
 '* trince, et profectu Scholastico Scholariuwt 
 " ipsias Collegia et qualiter in Victualibus pro- 
 " viiletur eisdem, ac super aliis artictclis in Sta- 
 " tutis- ejusdem Collegii Wintonice contentis 9 
 " (liligenter inquirant, et scrutinittm faciant t 
 " corrigenda et reformanda etiam in eodem, juxta 
 *' prctfata Statuta, et SECUNDUM QUOD PRO 
 
 " Uf ILITATE, HONORE, HONESTATE, AC FELICI 
 
 ** REGIMINE prcefati Collegn prope Wintoniam 
 " et personamm ejusdem, MELIUS VIDERINT 
 41 EXPEDIRE, corrigant et reforment. A dis- 
 cretionary power is in these words distinctly 
 delegated to them, and they are to be the 
 judges of what they conceive it will be most 
 expedient for the advantage and "honour of the 
 College to have corrected and reformed. But, 
 41 si Jo f stan aliqua ibidem invemrint corrigenda, 
 $t quce dbsque>-grtim incommodo per se corrigert 
 " nonpottrinl twt debitt reformare" then, and
 
 not till then, they are to refer the Matter, 
 within a month, to the Lord Bishop of Win-* 
 Chester for the time being, or to his Repre- 
 sentative, to be by him corrected and reformed. 
 It is sufficiently notorious that this statutable 
 " Supervisio et Scrutinium" is annually helden; 
 and that it is not merely nominal in its exe- 
 cution, or ineffectual in its consequences. 
 
 The Insinuation intended to be conveyed in 
 the sentence with which you conclude your 
 remarks on Winchester College is sufficiently 
 obvious. Happily its effects will be obviated 
 by a reference to the Minutes of Evidence. 
 But I trust I shall be excused for adverting 
 briefly to the awkward situation in which we 
 found ourselves from being totally unprepared 
 to expect the inquiry to which we were sum- 
 moned. We had indeed noticed in the First 
 Report that the Head Master of Westminster 
 School had been called upon to give evidence 
 before a Committee originally appointed "to 
 " inquire into the Education of the lower Or- 
 " ders of the Metropolis, and to consider 
 '" what may be fit to be done with respect to 
 *' the children of paupers, who shall be found 
 41 begging in the streets in and near the Metro- 
 " polis," &c. and we had noticed that " a 
 " Parliamentary Commission for conducting 
 
 I 2
 
 62 
 
 " an Inquiry into the State of the Education 
 " of the Poor generally, especially in the 
 " larger towns" had been recommended by the 
 same Committee ; but we had also read a 
 Speech, said to have been delivered by yom> 
 self in Parliament, in which you expressly 
 announced the intention, or rather the neces- 
 sity, of excepting the Universities and the 
 public Schools of Westminster, Eton, and 
 Winchester, from the provisions of the Bill, 
 which you had previously obtained leave to 
 bring in, for instituting that Commission. 
 Judge then of our surprise on being informed 
 by the Head Master ^ on Sunday the 24th of 
 May, that he had that morning received a Pa- 
 per, enclosing an Order from the House of 
 Commons, to send to the Education Com- 
 mittee on the following Tuesday, the 26th, at 
 one o'clock, the Statutes of the College, with 
 some person to attend who could give infor- 
 mation respecting THE MANAGEMENT OF THE 
 SCHOOL.* The first impression upon our 
 minds was, that a Summons so uncourteous, 
 
 * The following is a true copy of the Order : 
 
 Education Committee, House of Commons, 
 
 May 23, 1818. 
 
 Ordered that the Head Master of Winchester School 
 r College do send to this Committee on Tuesday next, at one 
 o'clock, the Statutes of the said School or College with some
 
 63 
 
 not to say disrespectful, could not be genuine; 
 and we were rather confirmed in this opinion 
 'when a Letter was produced, which had been 
 addressed to a Parochial Minister by the same 
 Committee, requiring information on the State 
 of Education in his Parish, couched in terms 
 less peremptory, and containing the ceremo- 
 nious expressions of respect with which Gen- 
 tlemen usually commence and conclude their 
 epistolary communications. The first measure 
 adopted was to direct a special messenger to 
 proceed to London to ascertain that the Sum- 
 mons was genuine, and the Head Master re- 
 plied to Mr. Brougham, Chairman of the Com- 
 mittee, by return of post, stating that the Sta- 
 tutes were not in his Custody, but that he had 
 duly laid the Order before the Warden and 
 Fellows, who had the sole controul over them ; 
 and he added, that he could not conveniently 
 absent himself from' his post on so short a 
 notice, but that a person qualified to give the 
 required information " RESPECTING THE MA 
 
 NAGEMENT OF THE SCHOOL" WOuld Wait the 
 
 further orders of the Committee. On Tuesday 
 morning early, the messenger returned with 
 
 person to attend who can give informatinn to the Committee 
 respecting the management of the said School or College, if it 
 should prove inconvenient for the business of the School that 
 the Master himself should attend. 
 
 H. BROUGHAM, Chairman.
 
 64 
 
 the information that the Order must be com- 
 plied with, at least, to a certain extent. Ac- 
 cordingly in the afternoon of that day, the Rev. 
 David Williams, the Second Master, a person 
 in every respect most fully competent to in- 
 form the Committee " RESPECTING THE MA- 
 NAGEMENT OF THE SCHOOL", left Winchester, 
 accompanied by Mr. Raife, the Steward of 
 the College, to supply any information that 
 might be required respecting the management 
 of the College Property. The demand of our 
 Statutes, however peremptory, was one which 
 required more consideration, for reasons which 
 will appear presently. On Wednesday morn- 
 ing, Dr. Gabell laid before the Society your 
 *Letter, dated May 26, ^rhich, as must be 
 
 * The following is a true copy of the Letter : 
 
 " House of Commons, 26f/j May, iS18. 
 
 "SIR, 
 
 " I have to require that you will without 
 '* further delay Bend a proper person acquainted with the College 
 " affairs, and that he do bring with him the Statutes and last 
 " year's accounts of the Establishment You will comply with 
 *' this requisition without asking any person's leave to send the 
 " Statutes provided tl>ey are in yonr custody, and if they are not, 
 "you will shew this to the Keeper of them, and report to me if 
 " he refuses to give them up. 
 
 " The Committee expect that the person sent shall be 
 11 here on Thursday, at two o'clock. 
 
 " I have the honour to be, &c. 
 
 " Your's, 
 f H. BROUGHAM, Chairman."
 
 evident from the slightest perasal, contained 
 a Requisition materially different in its nature 
 and objects from that which had been before 
 received. In this we found nothing more 
 about " the management of the School ;" but 
 we were required to ' send a proper Person ac- 
 " quainted with THE COLLEGE AFFAIRS, and 
 " rtiek him THE LAST YEAR'S ACCOUNTS OP 
 " THE ESTABLISHMENT," as well as the Statutes, 
 without asking leave of the Keeper of these, 
 whoever he might be, and a refusal to give 
 them up was to be immediately reported to 
 you. What the ultimate consequences of such 
 a Refusal might have been it is impossible to 
 determine. Of this Requisition I still have 
 the same opinion which I ever had, that as it 
 was expressed in terms of absolute authority, 
 go it was also an unauthorized extension, on 
 the part of the Committee, of the powers ori- 
 ginally conferred upon them by the House of 
 Commons. It was considered to partake of 
 this latter character, as I have been informed, 
 by many highly respectable Members of that 
 Honourable House ; and that such an opinion 
 is not ill-founded may be fairly inferred from 
 this, that the public Schools generally have 
 been exempted from the inquiries of the Com- 
 mission. It is unnecessary however to dwell 
 longer on this point,
 
 66 
 
 After the requisition had been received, th* 
 first thing that suggested itself to us was the 
 impossibility of complying with it consistently 
 with our Oaths; one of which bound us 
 "Seer eta Collegii nonrevelare ad extra" j another* 
 to observe the Statutes, in which was con- 
 tained a prohibition from shewing the Statutes, 
 or any Chapter of them " alfcui persona ex- 
 " tranece, nisi propter necessariam defensionem 
 " ipsormn aut ex olid causa necessarid, <vel utili, 
 
 " PER MAJOREM PARTEM SOCIORUM ColUgU 
 
 " nostri prope Wintoniam APPROBANDA, id 
 "necessitate cogente vel utilitate poscente fieri 
 " oportebit" Our Books are always regularly 
 kept and were at that moment ready for in- 
 spection ; the Roll or Computus of the yearly 
 expenditure is always duly made up at the 
 year's end, and that for the year 1817 had been 
 completed and balanced ; our Statute Book 
 was in a state of perfect preservation, free 
 from mutilations, erasures and comments. No 
 fears therefore arising out of any omission or 
 defect in these points could have influenced us 
 in the scruples which we conscientiously en- 
 tertained with respect to a compliance with the 
 arbitrary Requisition contained in your Letter. 
 Something however was to be done and done 
 immediately, for time was scarcely allowed for
 
 
 a pei-son to reach London'at the:hcmr appointed 
 without travelling through a part of the night. 
 A predicament more embarrassing than that'in 
 which we found ourselves cannot be well con- 
 ceived. On the one hand you had given us no 
 reason to suppose that you would be backward 
 to insinuate the operation of unworthy mo? 
 tives in our unwillingness to disclose our con-? 
 cerns aud produce our Statutes (and the event 
 has fully justified our apprehensions on that 
 point) ; on the other, we were bound by po- 
 sitive oaths, which the Statutes require us to 
 take, and you had not allowed us time to 
 satisfy ourselves either that it would be proper, 
 or even that you were duly authorised to cbn> 
 pel us, to do that which was directly contrary 
 to their spirit and tenor. We were therefore 
 driven to the necessity of adopting the only 
 course left to us. Mr. Sissmore, one of the 
 Bursars for the present year, and myself, one 
 of the Bursars for the year 1817, proceeded 
 instanter to London, taking with us the College 
 Ledger and the Statute Book. The Steward 
 was directed to state our wish to give every 
 information, , that could be given consistently 
 with the oaths alluded to, but to deliver in a 
 *paper for the serious and mature considera- 
 
 * A true copy of that paper is to be seen in the Minute* f 
 Evidence, Third Report, 1818. 
 
 K
 
 68 
 
 tion of the Committee before they proceeded 
 to put questions tending to the disclosure of 
 what had been usually deemed to form a part of 
 the secrets of the College, which the Founder 
 required should not be revealed. That Paper 
 was delivered in, but the Committee deter- 
 mined to proceed in the Examination, and to 
 require the production of the Statutes and 
 other documents. Into a discussion of the 
 propriety or impropriety of their conduct in so 
 doing I shall not now enter ; but I am still at 
 a loss to conceive how one branch of the Le- 
 gislature (and I admit that the House of Com- 
 mons is authorized to delegate all the powers 
 which it possesses itself to its own Committee) 
 can be justified in assuming powers equal to 
 those of the three Estates of the Realm, em- 
 bodied in an Act of Parliament. I know 
 nothing of the nice distinctions of legal tech- 
 nicalities ; I know nothing about the issuing of 
 a " *sub pcend duces tecum ;" (though on even 
 that which you may probably consider to be 
 your strong ground, I am informed, a ques^ 
 tion might fairly and reasonably be raised) but 
 this I do know most indisputably, because the 
 plain, literal, and grammatical sense of the 
 words tells me, that the Founder gives us, in the 
 
 * See Minutes of Evidence, 1818.
 
 69 
 
 Statute cited above (Rub. 42) the entire and sole 
 power to judge of the Utility as well as Necessity 
 of the production of our Statutes, and leaves 
 to ourselves, and ourselves only, the *whole 
 discretion either of producing or not producing 
 them ; to compel us therefore to produce them 
 was to infringe our chartered rights. The rea- 
 sons why he has lodged that discretion with 
 us he has himself declared, and I now submit 
 them for your perusal, leaving the public to de- 
 termine how far they are applicable to the in- 
 stance before us. He has declared that he did 
 so, " "\Ad amputandum omnem dissensionis mate* 
 " riam; et ad tollendum occasiones discordiee et 
 " controversies cujuscunque, adremovendum scan- 
 " data, et EVITANDUM PERICULA, quce circa 
 ft verum intellectum ordinationum et Statutorum 
 " nostrorun hujusmodi exprimendum, ex opi- 
 " nionibus variis hominum MINUS UTILITER, et 
 " NIMIS forsan SUBTILITER sentientium, verisi- 
 " militer poterunt evenire" 
 
 * As a proof that this construction has been -put upon the 
 Statute in that case ordained, by the members of our. Society, 
 before an examination in the Committee Room of the House of 
 Commons could have been in contemplation, I beg to refer to 
 a pamphlet published in the year 1758 by the then Warden 5 
 from the postscript of this it will be seen that though he thought 
 it necessary for his own justification to print certain Extracts 
 from the Statutes, yet he did it not till he had obtained th 
 approbation of the Society. 
 
 t Rubric 42.
 
 70 
 
 But it is time that I should bring this Letter 
 to a conclusion. You, Sir, will probably be 
 disposed to pay but little attention to the ob- 
 servations contained in it, or to any observa- 
 tions that may be made in support and defence 
 of any one or all of our great public esta- 
 blishments for Education, if they happen to 
 liaise any obstacles in the way of your own 
 speculative tneories, or fancied Improvements 
 in the method of Instruction. You may 
 perhaps care but little for the degree of Es- 
 timation in which those Establishments are 
 held in the opinion of the Country, nor be 
 very scrupulous about adopting towards them 
 any measures however arbitrary, or harsh, 
 though the effect of such measures must ne- 
 cessarily be to tarnish their fame, and lessen 
 their influence ; but, I trust, such opinions 
 will never meet with general countenance or 
 support. I trust that " * English Gentlemen' 
 will ever feel towards the " * scenes of their early 
 *' life" and Education a sincere gratitude and 
 deeply rooted attachment, not indeed as having 
 afforded them an " * 'abode of harmless indolence" 
 during a few years, but as being the source from 
 which they derived every thing most valuable 
 and important in the human character, the 
 
 *!j b;u.'<ilw i*J 9I ' J to-i *i kl> 9 ! 
 
 .vtyao^ Jfcli V. 'U- 1 o.j;a 
 
 * Mr. Brougham's Letter.
 
 7k 
 
 Rudiments of their Knowledge, and the first 
 Principles of their Religion. 
 
 Above all, I fervently pray, that the dis- 
 tinguished School, against which you have 
 levelled your attack, may always continue to 
 send fortfc, as it has hitherto sent forth, into 
 the Universities some of their brightest Orna- 
 ments, into the Church some of its firmest 
 Bulwarks, and into the service of the State 
 some of its ablest and most upright Ministers ! 
 May it never be found unworthy of its share 
 of the high panegyric once already applied 
 to the two Saint Marie Winton Colleges, in the 
 words of a * Writer of former days : " Inde, 
 " velut ex equo Trojano, viri omni tempore vir- 
 tute excellentes prodeunt /" May it ever be said 
 with truth, " -\Neque Collegium quodvis aliud 
 *' vel plures vel ad negotia turn sacra turn civilia 
 " procuranda magis idoneos, in Ecclesiam aut 
 " Rempublicam emisisse constat" 
 
 'r*i - ' 
 
 It only remains for me to add, in justice to 
 myself, and in order to prevent the possibility 
 of a misconstruction of my motives in 
 
 * Polyd : Virg : Ang : Hrst : Lib. 19, quoted by Bishop 
 J,awth in bis Lite of VVykeham. 
 ^ A. Wood: Hilt: Univ: Oxon : Lib. 2, p, 158.
 
 n 
 
 addressing this Letter to you, that at the time 
 of my admission into Winchester College and 
 during my continuance there as a Scholar I 
 was "pauper et indigens" blessed with the 
 advantages neither of rank or fortune ; and 
 that since I have had the honour of being a 
 Fellow I have never omitted any seasonable 
 opportunity of raising my voice in favour of 
 such increased allowances, and such additional 
 comforts to the Boys as the changes of the 
 times, and the circumstances of the Esta- 
 blishment, might seem to authorize and render 
 expedient. I have resided, excepting occasi- 
 onal absences, within the College, and have 
 endeavoured to execute to the best of my 
 humble abilities the duties attached to my 
 station in the Society one of which I hold to 
 be particularly incumbent upon me, because 
 it is enjoined me under the solemn sanction of 
 an *oath, viz. not to let its reputation be 
 lowered in the public opinion by suffering 
 groundless allegations against the management 
 
 * " Item juro, quod dicto Collegio fidelis ero, damna, SCAN-* 
 *' DALA vel PRJEJUDICIA dicti Collegii, quatenus in me fuerit, 
 " nullatenus faciam nee quomodolibet FIERI SUSTINEBO j sod 
 " ilia per me et alios, raodis qnibus potero, NE FIANT IMPEDIAM." 
 Rubrics, De Electione, &c.
 
 * 73 
 
 of its affairs, and the appropriation of its 
 
 ue 
 tin* 
 
 endowments, to remain* unanswered and un- 
 co ntradic ted. 
 
 I have the honour to remain, 
 
 &c. &c. 
 LISCOMBE CLARKE. 
 
 Winchester College, 
 Oct 27, 1818. 
 
 P. S. Yonr Letter would not have remained 
 so long unnoticed by me, if I had not been, 
 for some weeks after its publication, in a dis- 
 tant County, where I could not procure it nor 
 the Minutes of Evidence ; and where I could 
 not have access to the Statutes of Winchester 
 College. It may be proper to add, that I have 
 not cited such parts of the Statutes as I have 
 thought proper to cite, withojut the approba- 
 tion of those, whom by the said Statutes I was 
 obliged to consult. 
 
 PRINTED BY W. JACOB, 
 
 Htmpthirc County Nwtpapcr Office, High-ttreet, Ifineheiter.
 
 to 
 
 
 . 
 
 'wVt.v, 
 I .TO-ViO 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 . . :.ir. 
 
 ' fjgfjorr 
 
 i if t 
 
 nol 
 
 ,
 
 A 
 
 LETTER 
 
 TO THE 
 
 RIGHT HON. SIR WM. SCOTT, 
 
 &c. &c. 
 
 M. P. for the University of Oxford, 
 
 IN ANSWER TO 
 
 MR. BROUGHAM'S LETTER 
 
 -^ 
 
 TO 
 
 SIR SAMUEL ROMILLY, 
 
 UPON 
 
 THJE ABUSE OF CHARITIES, 
 
 AND 
 
 MINISTERIAL PATRONAGE IN THE APPOINTMENTS 
 UNDER THE LATE ACT. 
 
 THIRD EDITION. 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 PRINTED FOR ). HATCHARD, 190, PICCADILLY. 
 1818.
 
 Mi .a- .a. - 
 
 A;. 
 
 LONDON: . * 
 
 PRINTED BY A. J. VALPY, 
 TOOKE'S COURT, CHANCERY LANE.
 
 LETTER, &c. 
 
 SIR, 
 
 HAVING regarded your parliamentary 
 conduct for many years as distinguished by the 
 strenuous maintenance of the best interests of the 
 church and state, and particularly for that union 
 of the two which, in my humble opinion, is the 
 best security of each, I now presume to call your 
 attention to a subject which is more nearly con- 
 nected with those interests than was perhaps fore- 
 seen or intended, by those with whom the measure 
 for inquiring into the education of the poor was 
 introduced and advanced. 
 
 I need not remind you, Sir, that the effects of 
 prejudice upon our practice are often as insensible 
 to us as the prejudice itself; and that where an 
 angry and hostile feeling exists in our minds, even 
 concurrently with a just and liberal nature, we 
 often mistake the origin of a course of conduct, 
 and justify ourselves in actions belonging to the 
 one by referring them to the other. 
 
 You most probably have seen a letter lately 
 published by an honorable member of the House
 
 2 
 
 of Commons, Mr, Brougham, addressed to Sir 
 Samuel Romilly. The subject of this letter is the 
 late Act of Parliament for inquiring into charities 
 connected with the education of the lower orders. 
 The observations of Mr. Brougham may be re- 
 duced to two heads. 
 
 First, The alterations made in the original Bill 
 in the House of Lords, by the alleged influence 
 of His Majesty's Ministers ; and, 
 
 Secondly, The abuse of their patronage, and 
 particularly that of the Secretary of State for the 
 home department, in the appointments under the 
 Act, as tending to render it in execution wholly 
 inefficient, and as actually made with that view. 
 
 I need not recal to your memory, that in 1816 
 a committee was appointed by the House of Com- 
 mons to inquire into the state of the education of 
 the lower orders in the metropolis. I need not 
 add, Sir, that His Majesty's Ministers gave every 
 assistance to this Committee, both in and out of 
 Parliament ; considering it as a part of their own 
 system for relieving the extraordinary distress of 
 that period, and of permanently ameliorating the 
 condition of the lower classes. 
 
 In the course of their investigation, the Com- 
 mittee perceived, or thought they perceived, many 
 abuses of the funds of particular charities. The 
 labors of this Committee continued x during the 
 session of parliament, and upon its conclusion 
 they published a report, in which they recom-
 
 3 \ 
 
 mended a parliamentary commission as the most 
 economical mode of bringing to light the numerous 
 cases of abuse which they presumed to exist. In 
 
 1817 the Committee did little more than meet. In 
 
 1818 they were re-appointed, and immediately 
 afterward prepared a Bill for the nomination of 
 such parliamentary commission. In the first week 
 in April Mr. Brougham introduced this Bill into 
 the House of Commons. It was therefore during 
 these three years, that a subject, at first narrow 
 and local, grew into a magnitude and importance 
 which neither parliament nor the country had origi- 
 nally anticipated. The effect followed which 
 usually accompanies circumstances of this kind : 
 many persons, not seeing the full extent to which 
 it led, were induced to encourage it in its progress, 
 and thus perhaps found themselves insensibly com- 
 mitted as the friends of a measure, which, if seen 
 at first in its present consequences, would naturally 
 have excited their alarm. The benevolent nature 
 of the object further confirmed these effects. The 
 interest of the poor, and the abuse of charitable 
 funds, were powerful appeals to the humanity and 
 honor of the House of Commons. 
 
 Under these circumstances, therefore, and these 
 feelings, the House was gradually and insensibly 
 led to a warmer and more incautious reception of 
 the measure, than a mere matter of general econo- 
 my would otherwise have experienced. The reports 
 of the Education Committee, which are necessarily
 
 4 
 
 ex-partc , statements, were successively received 
 almost as records of the abuses which they alleged 
 to exist ; and such an impression was created upon 
 the benevolence and generosity of the House, that 
 it is scarcely too much to say, that no Bill of such 
 extensive application ever passed with so little de- 
 liberation. So far indeed as respects the House 
 of Commons I would observe, (but with all due 
 deference,) that the House and the leading men 
 were in a degree surprised into their acquiescence. 
 This particular impression, as respects the House 
 of Commons, was further strengthened by the 
 nature of the Committee and its immediate rela- 
 tion to the House. So many gentlemen of high 
 character in the country coming immediately from 
 the committee-room into the House, and yet warm 
 with a generous indignation at the abuses just 
 stated to them, necessarily communicated a portion 
 of their feelings to the House itself, and thereby 
 excited that favorable prejudice for the objects of 
 the forthcoming reports, which almost precluded 
 any cautious examination into their details. 
 
 As the feelings of the Committee were thus com- 
 municated to the House, so likewise were they fur- 
 ther transfused into the body of the country, by the 
 publication and laborious distribution of the printed 
 Report of 1816. A strong public opinion was 
 thus excited, not only in favor of the expected 
 Commission, but (doubtless unintentionally) in fa- 
 vor of particular members who had stood forward
 
 as the advocates of public charities. It is certainly 
 a happy circumstance for the due efficacy of an 
 established law, when its execution is thus assisted 
 by public opinion ; but such a state of the popular 
 mind is not perhaps best suited for that sobriety and 
 deliberation, which should precede the enactment 
 of an important legislative measure. Perhaps, 
 throughout our statute book, no laws are more ob- 
 jectionable than those which have been passed under 
 this excited state of popular feeling; and it is 
 assuredly the best praise of our constitution, that 
 the several stages of a parliamentary measure, so 
 necessarily distinct, and the several interests of 
 those who have to discuss it, so necessarily diffe- 
 rent, afford a due interval for such a feeling to sub- 
 side into a state better suited for the functions of a 
 legislature. 
 
 I have heard, indeed, that some of the gentlemen 
 of the Committee, and particularly the honorable 
 Chairman, extended their notions of reforming pub- 
 lic charities to a very wide and almost indefinite 
 length. From a measure, intended at first to em- 
 brace only the education of -the lower orders of the 
 metropolis, the Committee had enlarged itself to 
 the poor of the whole island, including Scotland. 
 And as the designation (the poor) was now found 
 to be in the way of a further extent, an attempt was 
 made, under the cover of equivocal words in old 
 charters, to extend its application, and to carry the 
 inquiries into Universities and Public Schools. No
 
 6 
 
 one, I will presume to say, entertains a higher re- 
 spect for the wisdom and dignity of the House of 
 Commons and its Committees than myself. But 
 I am sure you, Sir, will agree with me, that the 
 Universities, and the high puhlic interests which 
 they represent, are of somewhat too much import- 
 ance to be thus summarily called, not to the bar of 
 the House of Commons, but to the bar of one of its 
 Committees. I think you will agree with me, that 
 such a proceeding is as little consistent with the 
 dignity of the Universities as with that solid prin- 
 ciple both of general reason and of the constitu- 
 tion, not to confound what is fundamental with 
 mere temporary politics. It was under this im- 
 pression, and the knowledge of the limited object of 
 the Committee upon its first formation, that many 
 gentlemen found themselves much surprised with the 
 general and comprehensive matter of the first Re- 
 port. They were surprised to find, that the Rev. 
 Dr. Page, the Head Master of Westminster 
 School, had been called upon to give evidence be- 
 fore a Committee of the House of Commons, whose 
 commission they had understood! to be " to inquire 
 into the education of the lower orders of the metro- 
 polis^ fyc. and to consider what may be Jit to be 
 done with respect to the children of paupers who 
 shall be found begging in the streets in and near 
 the metropolis" &c. x They were no less surprised 
 
 1 Vide first Report, 181 6, p. 1, 2.
 
 to find in the third Report a similar examination of 
 the principals and masters of the other great national 
 foundations. They thought, likewise, that the cir- 
 cular letter with which these gentlemen were sum- 
 moned was, to say the least of it, rather uncourte- 
 ous, and in no degree expressive of that respect to 
 which their professions and appointments were en- 
 titled. 1 They could not avoid the inference, that 
 not only the objects of the Committee, but the 
 spirit of the honorable gentleman whose talents 
 directed it, had gradually enlarged themselves be- 
 yond what they first professed and intended, and of 
 which the House, whilst the inquiry was silently 
 going on in the committee-room, could have np 
 idea. It is true indeed, that the Universities, and 
 the public schools of Westminster, Winchester and 
 Eton, were ultimately excepted from inquiry in the 
 Bill as presented by the Chairman to the House; 
 but it is evident, and indeed not denied, that these 
 exceptions were extorted against great reluctance ; 
 being conceded in the words of the honorable 
 Chairman, " to the romantic attachment which 
 English gentlemen feel towards the Academic 
 scenes of their early life," 1 and in no degree to his 
 conviction that such objects were too large, sacred, 
 and fundamental, for inquiry before the commis- 
 sion intended to issue. 
 
 1 See the honorable Chairman's circular to the masters 
 of schools in the metropolis. Appendix to the first Re- 
 port A. 
 
 z See Letter to Sir S. Romilly.
 
 8 
 
 Indeed, those who had observed the proceedings 
 of the more active members of the Committee, with 
 cautious attention, could not altogether silence 
 some suggestions which arose in their minds, that 
 their spirit and proceedings were not altogether 
 favorable to the existing establishments of the 
 country, and particularly to the Church of Eng- 
 land. They thought they saw something of that 
 dissenting leaven, which, under the name and pre- 
 text of liberal principles, was for relaxing that union 
 of church and state, which those educated in an- 
 cient opinions consider to be a part of the consti- 
 tution of the country as much as parliament and 
 the crown itself. They could not forget, that the 
 leading gentleman in this Committee had very emi- 
 nently distinguished himself as the advocate of this 
 liberalism, and was the avowed and eloquent pa- 
 tron of that system of education, which, under the 
 name of Lancasterian, is directly opposed to that 
 of Dr. Bell and the Church of England. It was 
 strongly impressed upon their minds, that the ho- 
 norable gentleman was one of a school and frater- 
 nity, which in passing from the condition of scho- 
 lars to that of masters to their southern neighbours, 
 was superseding all ancient doctrines and practices 
 by new modes and maxims ; reducing all useful 
 knowledge to the compass of political economy and 
 the elements of the human mind, and expelling all 
 the ancient masters, for Hume, Adam Smith, and 
 Dugald Stewart. They could not divest them.- 
 selves of a persuasion, that all the established in-
 
 fctitutions of the country, and even the constitution 
 itself, received much of their best character from 
 the existing system of British education, and that 
 the church, the law, and the state, were mutually 
 united, and therein supported, by a community of 
 feeling, taste, and instruction, originating in an 
 education under .common masters and a common 
 system. They looked, therefore, with some ap- 
 prehension to such " improvements" in education, 
 as might supplant classics by metaphysics, gram- 
 mar by political economy, and the established 
 masters of English truth and morals, by Scotch 
 lecturers on the human mind, and essayists upon 
 the errors of Bacon, Newton, and Locke. 1 They 
 had seen, and perhaps often admired, the talents 
 with which that honorable gentleman condescends 
 to embellish a periodical review, in which the learn- 
 ing and utility of the universities had been fre- 
 quently assailed, and in which more reforms are 
 recommended in the constitution of the country, 
 than probably either the King or the Parliament 
 .will be inclined to adopt. Perhaps even the. Re- 
 ports themselves, as published by the Committee, 
 reminded them rather too much of an Edinburgh 
 Review, and they saw rather more of the Chairman 
 than of the gentlemen who were associated in his 
 labors. Nor did it escape these calmer observers, 
 
 1 See the recent preface and supplement to the Encyclo- 
 paedia Britannica, written by some distinguished authors in 
 Scotland, on metaphysics and mathematics. 
 
 B
 
 to 
 
 
 
 that the Parliament was advancing to a period 
 when a new election would be necessary, and a 
 notion entered into their minds, that there might 
 be some purpose of bribing a large portion of the 
 people by a method already in practice with the 
 liberaks of other kingdoms ; that of taking from 
 one and giving to another ; that of making a better 
 application of an abused fund, and re-distributing 
 it according to the presumed intention of the first 
 dono/ ; sucn presumption to be interpreted by the 
 eight or nine gentlemen in the Commission, as* 
 sisted by the economical science of the honorable 
 gentleman ; " For the poor" (in the language of 
 the eloquent Chairman) " are not an existing body 
 of persons like the church, or any other corporation 
 who have rights of property, so that no violation 
 of property would be committed by using any fund 
 given to them in a manner different from its origi- 
 nal destination, provided the result were infallibly 
 to lessen their numbers, and still to employ it in 
 works of charity.'* ' 
 
 In the Letter to Sir Samuel Romilly, Mr. 
 Brougham states, that in the Bill, as it first stood, 
 the Commissioners were to be named in it, but 
 that the Ministers objected to this nomination, and 
 proposed that the appointment should be vested in 
 the crown. To this, adds Mr. Brougham, the 
 Committee submitted, rather than assented. He 
 
 1 Vide Letter to Sir S. Romilly, p. 54.
 
 then proceeds to vindicate this nomination of the 
 Commissioners in the body of the Bill, by the ana- 
 logy of its objects with those of the naval and 
 military Commission. But surely it cannot escape 
 the sagacity of that learned gentleman, that there 
 is a very large and palpable difference between an 
 inquiry by the House into the proper expenditure 
 of public money, granted by the House, and an 
 inquisition into the proper administration of funds, 
 in no way originating with the House ; and, in a 
 great proportion, totally beyond the control of the 
 House. 
 
 i In the first case, the House was only exercising, 
 not only its acknowledged, but its peculiar func- 
 tions, that of superintending, auditing, and con- 
 trolling, all public accounts and accountants; of 
 seeing that what it had originally granted had been 
 duly expended and appropriated. 
 
 The abuses of public charities might be as large 
 and important as even public peculations. Free- 
 schools and alms-houses might be as badly admi- 
 nistered as docks and navy-yards. But the super- 
 vision of them did not equally, and so peculiarly, 
 belong to the House of Commons. The abuse of 
 charities is properly an abuse of administration, 
 and general civil economy ; assuredly not of par- 
 liamentary trust. But it is unnecessary to say that 
 all offices of administration are parts of the su- 
 preme magistracy of the country, and as such be- 
 long to the sovereign. His Majesty's Ministers,
 
 therefore, in this demand, only maintained the pre- 
 rogative of the crown. They saw that neither the 
 functions nor objects of the Commission belonged 
 to the distinct character of the House of Commons. 
 The establishment indeed of such a principle might 
 have been a public mischief. It interposes a body 
 between the prince and the people. If the prece- 
 dent were established, we might hear of these Com- 
 missions granted under every alleged grievance ; 
 and a kind of Ephort, or Tribunitial power, would 
 grow up, to participate in the executive functions, 
 and to control both prince and people. His Ma- 
 jesty's Ministers, therefore, would have failed in 
 their duty if they had admitted this encroachment 
 on the rights of the crown. The very appointment 
 of the Commission is a presumptive accusation 
 against all the charities in the kingdom. The no- 
 mination of the Commissioners in the Bill would 
 have been an implied suspicion of the justice and 
 fair dealing of the crown. 
 
 It is an established principle of the constitution, 
 that the people should look immediately to the 
 crown in all cases of maladministration ; but it is 
 the nature of such Commission to exhibit one or 
 both of the Houses of Parliament as taking the 
 business out of the hands of the sovereign, and 
 executing it by themselves. It is in fact, pro tanto, 
 a superseding of the King's authority. 
 
 As his Majesty's Ministers were governed by 
 these public principles, in reserving to the crown
 
 13 
 
 the nomination of the Commissioners, so they acted 
 only in conformity with the same sense of duty, 
 when they resolved that this appointment by the 
 crown should be actually and not merely nominally 
 exercised ; and in pursuance of this purpose de- 
 parted from the list already made by the honorable 
 Chairman, *' to assist the legislature in its selec- 
 tion." * Nor could they think that the Chairman 
 himself (after a moment perhaps of personal sore- 
 ness) would deem such an ordinary exercise of the 
 prerogative to be unreasonable. They regarded 
 the Committee as a public investigation into abuses 
 in which the crown could have no distinct interest, 
 and which admitted no room for jealousy. In 
 some of the speeches in the House of Commons, 
 indeed, the Committee had been compared with 
 a parliamentary inquiry into the expenditure of 
 public money : but the Ministers saw no analogy 
 between an inquiry into the conduct of the officers 
 of the crown, and into that of the stewards and 
 trustees appointed by individuals amongst the peo- 
 ple for the management of charitable trusts. There 
 might be some jealousy of the power and purposes 
 of Ministers, where the object of inquiry was the 
 conduct of themselves or friends : but there could 
 be no such suspicion where the interests were so 
 wholly remote. It was not therefore from personal 
 hostility that they declined the proposed " selec- 
 
 1 Vide page 7, Letter to Sir. S. Romilly.
 
 14 
 
 lion" of the honorable Chairman, and deemed it 
 their duty to make their own. They had no suspi- 
 cion, they could have none, that a Commission, 
 proposed nominally for such good public purposes, 
 might be in fact only one of those party instruments 
 by which Ministers and their friends were to be 
 dexterously identified with all the detected abuses, 
 whilst the Committee and its active Chairman were 
 to become the popular idols, as the unwearied and 
 undaunted champions of reform. They had not 
 indeed to learn, that " private friendships often 
 blinded very respectable persons in the Reports 
 which they make," but they had yet to learn, that 
 the known equity and personal courtesy of the ho- 
 norable Chairman and his friends could justify the 
 apprehension of any proceedings (in any Commis- 
 sion of which they might be members) wanting in 
 candid and considerate language to high characters 
 and dignities. 1 Let the honorable Chairman, 
 therefore, satisfy himself that he and his House 
 " list" were not rejected from any unfounded per- 
 sonal partialities, and least of all from any illiberal 
 suspicion, that, if nominated by the crown-, they 
 could abuse the confidence and honor of its selec- 
 tion ; and could give birth to any future report or 
 proceedings, which might unsettle public and pri- 
 vate property, degrade and defame sacred and an- 
 cient institutions, and consult any private and 
 
 -. /:?; Page, 6, Letter to Sir S. Romilly.,; >.
 
 party piques at the expense of public interests and 
 gentlemanly fairness. 
 
 The other changes in the measure and Bill were 
 made when it reached the House of Lords, and the 
 first and most important was a reduction of the 
 powers of the Bill, as respected the enforcing of the 
 production of all papers, and compelling every one 
 to answer all such questions as would not immedi- 
 ately criminate himself. The House of Lords did 
 undoubtedly strike out this clause in the Bill sent 
 up to them. Nor did they exercise this constitu- 
 tional function without due reasons. It is not 
 within my present purpose to re-argue questions, 
 which, as resting upon known constitutional prin- 
 ciples, must be obvious to him to whom I now 
 address myself. The powers in the Bill were too 
 large, both for the Committee and its objects. 
 They trespassed too much upon the rights of pro*- 
 perty, the obligations of confidence, and the couiv 
 tesies of life. Amidst many abuses, and some of 
 them of the grossest kind, the great majority of 
 public trusts was undoubtedly in the hands of 
 trustees of the first rank and character. , The 
 greater part of such trusts moreover were merely 
 honorary, and strictly offices of benevolence ki 
 those who undertook them. But such persons 
 .were not the proper subjects of such an account. 
 The powers moreover were too general. In the 
 terms of the first Bill, they would have compelled 
 the indiscriminate production of title-deeds and
 
 16 
 
 charters. It was true, indeed, that a power of this 
 kind had been granted to the Commissioners of the 
 naval and military inquiry. The learned gentle- 
 man contends, likewise, that a similar power was 
 possessed by all courts of justice, and even by 
 commissioners of bankrupts. But in the naval and 
 military inquiry, the object was of a different 
 nature; the papers to be required could only be 
 matters of account ; they could extend to no inqui- 
 sition into the titles and muniments of indifferent 
 parties. It was matter of ledger, and no more : 
 and it is an error to maintain, that such powers 
 are possessed by all courts and commissioners of 
 bankrupts. It is rather indeed singular that suck 
 an argument should have originated with the 
 learned Chairman himself. There in fact exists 
 no such compulsory unqualified production by 
 third parties of any papers or documents ; and 
 least of all of that highest description of papers 
 (titles, muniments, and deeds,) which were the ob- 
 jects of the clause in question. The learned gen- 
 tleman has mistaken the scope of the 46 G. III. 
 c. 37, in the same manner as he appears to have 
 mistaken the rules of evidence. The 46 G. III. 
 merely refers to the obligation of witnesses to an- 
 swer questions, though such answer might make 
 them civilly responsible for debts. But the pro- 
 duction of muniments and title-deeds are not in- 
 cluded in the words " to answer questions? 
 
 It is true indeed that by the writ of subpcena,
 
 17 
 
 eluces tecum, it is the duty of a witness to bring all 
 papers with him which he has in his possession ; 
 but it is likewise the right of a witness to state to 
 the court that a particular paper, which he is called 
 upon to produce, is one of his titles, and thereupon 
 to put it to the discretion of the judge, whether he 
 shall be required to produce it. But this is surely 
 very different from the unlimited and unqualified 
 obligation to produce all papers. Thus, in Miles 
 v. Dawson, Lord Kenyon said, that a witness is 
 not compilable by subpoena duccs tecum, to pro- 
 duce all papers which do not tend to criminate 
 himself, but may withhold a document under which 
 he derives title. 1'Esp. 405. And my Lord El- 
 lenborougl), in explanation of this doctrine, in Amey 
 v. Long, 9- East. Rep. 485, observes in substance, 
 that the laws, foreseeing the mischief of such indis- 
 criminate production, will not put a witness under 
 the unqualified obligation to produce ; but requires 
 'him to bring his papers, and to submit to tlie dis- 
 cretion of the court, whether upon the principles of 
 reason and equity such production should be re- 
 quired. 
 
 The law, therefore, as I conceive it, here only 
 guards titles, by taking them under its own eye 
 and protection. But I apprehend, Sir, that the 
 common law would view with a very different eye 
 a board of commissioners and a high court of jus- 
 tice. With respect to the powers of commissioners 
 
 c
 
 18 
 
 of bankrupts, it merely concerns the debts to the 
 estate of the trader, and nothing more. 
 
 What in fact would not be the mischief of such 
 a matter-of-course production of the securities 
 upon which property rests ; many of those securi- 
 ties prepared perhaps in remote parts of the king- 
 dom, and by insufficient conveyancers ; and there- 
 fore, not impossibly, wanting in some of those 
 forms and technical niceties, which, however neces- 
 sary to the exactness of law, might invalidate real 
 titles, to the overthrow of ancient families ? Was 
 it not already within the memory of many noble 
 lords, that the careless exposure of a title-deed iu 
 the office of a solicitor, had led to a discovery of a 
 flaw of this kind, which, in its effects, had divested 
 a noble peer of what he had deemed, and with 
 good right, his established property, and had en- 
 joyed for upwards of twenty years ? 
 
 So sacred indeed are such securities and muni- 
 ments of property held, that where a termor sells his 
 term, and the vendee objects to the deficiency of 
 title upon the inspection of his lease, the Court of 
 Chancery, though a court of equity, will not assist 
 the vendor in requiring the original landlord to 
 produce his title. There is in fact no case in 
 which a court of justice can command the produc- 
 tion of a title. The power required was therefore 
 unconstitutional. It was equally impolitic and 
 harsh.
 
 19 
 
 It was manifestly upon these suggestions existing 
 in their lordships' minds, that the reduction was 
 made of which Mr. Brougham complains. It is a 
 matter of some regret that the debate in the House 
 of Lords upon this occasion has been very imper- 
 fectly made public. But in a House so justly dis- 
 tinguished for its legal and constitutional learning, 
 it is not too much to infer, that their lordships said 
 and thought what the law and constitution had al- 
 ready said and thought for them. It is indeed. 
 Sir, not generally known, that there are perhaps 
 between twenty and thirty thousand of these public 
 charities in the kingdom, and therefore that the 
 power of the Committee, the subject-matter of the 
 Committee, and the compass of its jurisdiction, 
 would have been concurrent with the Court of 
 Chancery itself; or rather, as I have above said, 
 infinitely beyond any power which any Chancellor 
 has ever chosen to exercise. Such is the question 
 as to the reduced powers of the original and pre- 
 sent Bill. 
 
 The next subject of Mr. Brougham's complaint 
 is, that the objects of the Bill were " as materially 
 limited as the powers of the Commissioners." 
 First, that they were prohibited from inquiring ge- 
 nerally into the state of education, and confined 
 only to the education of the poor. And secondly, 
 that they were no longer to examine the abuses of 
 all charities, but only those connected with the 
 education of the lower orders; and thirdly, all the
 
 20 
 
 public schools, down to Rugby, were excepted, 
 and generally all charities having special " visitors, 
 
 governors, or overseers." 
 
 In the first limitation, that of restricting the 
 Commission from inquiring generally into the state 
 of education, their Lordships seem only to have re- 
 verted to the original purpose for which the House 
 of Commons had appointed its Committee. By this 
 restriction they in fact assisted in forwarding the 
 practical objects of the Bill. In its larger descrip- 
 tion it had a more magnificent pretence than pos- 
 sible execution. It had an extent captivating to 
 those who did not look beyond its profession. By 
 giving it a more circumscribed sphere, the House 
 of Lords put the commission in a condition of 
 doing at least something. They saw that there 
 was a natural and palpable distinction between the 
 conditions of the rich and poor, and the necessities 
 of each. But according to the form of the Bill 
 before them, the Commissioners were to inquire 
 generally into the " State of Education." Now 
 this included all classes, and in fact the Committee 
 "had already proceeded upon this presumed exten- 
 sion of their first objects, in examining the masters 
 of Winchester, Westminster, and Eton. But the 
 Ministers in the House of Lords saw neither ne- 
 cessity nor utility in such an endless investigation. 
 It was matter of more speculative curiosity than 
 of practical result. Nor did they think that a 
 philosophical research, as it were, into the bes't
 
 21 
 
 mode of education, was altogether a suitable sub- 
 ject for Parliamentary inquiry. They might have 
 thought indeed, that the Honorable Gentleman's 
 long anecdote about Switzerland and Mr. Fellen- 
 berg, 1 in the third report of the Committee, was 
 somewhat out of place. Besides, where would 
 have been the end of the labors of such Commis- 
 sioners and of their reports ? If one village in 
 Switzerland occupied so many columns, what might 
 have been expected from the Honorable Chair- 
 man's further prosecution of his travels? 
 
 It was upon similar principles, that the Com- 
 mission was confined to charities connected with 
 the education of the poor, and restricted from the 
 larger investigation into the abuses of all charities. 
 
 It is neither a just nor candid inference from 
 this restriction, that the Ministers and the House 
 of Lords intended to deny the existence of abuses 
 in other charities, and, least of all, that it was 
 their object to stifle any suitable inquiry. But 
 the field already marked out for the Commission 
 was amply sufficient. They saw in fact no end 
 to an inquiry into the abuses of " all charities in 
 the kingdom." 4 Every town and almost every vil- 
 lage in the kingdom had one or other of such 
 chanties. ,But what commission in any reason- 
 able time, and for any practical purpose, could 
 
 1 Appendix, p. 99. 
 
 * Letter to Sir S. Romilly, p. 13, et passim. 
 
 I i < f
 
 22 
 
 report on all the alms-houses, small- pox institu- 
 tions, lunatic asylums, lying-in hospitals, and pub- 
 lic infirmaries in the kingdom ? The sweeping 
 words "ALL CHARITIES," in the original Bill, 
 would have afforded adequate matter for a score 
 of such commissions. The life of one man would 
 scarcely have been sufficient to read such reports ; 
 which, if given with impartiality, would have at 
 least equalled in number and bulk the volumes of 
 our statute law. It has been calculated, as I have 
 before observed, that there are between twenty 
 and thirty thousand of such charities ; so that 
 allowing, upon a moderate calculation, a page for 
 each, saying nothing for an appendix of charters 
 and documents, one may be admitted to express a 
 doubt, whether this Eleemosynary Encyclopaedia, 
 however charitably compiled, would have been as 
 charitably read. Another commission must have 
 followed to have reported upon the reporters ; 
 and, after another interval of about twenty years, 
 an abridgment, of about a dozen stately folio 
 volumes, might have been laid upon the table of 
 the House, but I much fear, without any reason- 
 able expectation that any honorable gentleman 
 might move to have them read by the clerk. Add 
 
 * '""* fc I * fe. 
 
 to this, the immense mass of property implicated 
 and involved in such charities so indefinitely in- 
 cluded. Let the Honorable Chairman recal to 
 his own mind a few only of those immediately 
 before his own View. What other, for example,
 
 23 
 
 except as a public charity, is the Society for Pro- 
 pagating Christian Knowledge, the Missionary 
 Societies, and the Bible Associations, in every 
 principal town in the kingdom? And allowing 
 every thing for the dignity and characters of the 
 Commissioners, would it have been altogether 
 decent and suitable, that the Archbishop of Can- 
 terbury, every one of the bishops, and many of 
 the first noblemen of the kingdom, should have 
 been personally summoned before them ; with a 
 duces tecum of all titles, wills, and deeds, and a 
 subpoena, as to time and place, at the will of these 
 gentlemen ? 
 
 It is indeed a public and a proper principle that 
 much should give way to the general good ; but a 
 suitable estimation of high character and office, 
 and a just consideration of establishments and 
 institutions, are no less a portion of such general 
 good, than the particular objects of the charities 
 themselves. I flatter myself it will be needless 
 to defend further a restriction which every one 
 must see to have been necessary for the practical 
 execution of the commission ; nor is it altogether 
 candid to insinuate any personal motives of the 
 Lords, Prelates, and Ministers, in " screening 
 (in the language of the Honorable Gentleman,) 
 "such charities from the investigation of the Com- 
 " missioners," by such a restriction of his Bill. 
 
 If the honorable gentleman had not been car- 
 ried away by the ardor of his subject, he would
 
 24 
 
 not have required to be told, that the argumentum 
 ad hominem had more dexterity than candor, and 
 more popularity than politeness. In the profes- 
 sion to which he -belongs, he need not be informed, 
 that such a style of argument would scarcely be 
 regarded as matter of toleration, to say nothing 
 of gentlemanly courtesy. He could not but have 
 known the motives of this restriction. In the 
 societies in which he moved it was the subject of 
 frequent conversation. Many gentlemen of the 
 highest rank and connexion, totally aloof from 
 party, both saw and urged the necessity of this 
 restriction. The public may therefore judge with 
 how much fairness it is imputed to his Majesty's 
 Ministers and their influence. 
 
 The third subject of complaint in the letter to 
 Sir Samuel Romilly, is, " the large class of excep- 
 tions comprehending all charities having special 
 visitors, governors, and overseers." 
 
 I need not, Sir, recal to your memory, that the 
 House of Lords, being assisted by the presence of 
 the judges, is not only one of the branches of the 
 legislature ; but is, as it were, the peculiar guar- 
 dian of those fundamental principles which belong 
 to the nature of all laws, no less than to the Bri- 
 tish constitution itself. Hence, in many cases of 
 our history, their Lordships have interposed to cor- 
 rect the loose and large powers of popular Bills 
 
 1 Letter to Sir S. Romilly, p. 16.
 
 25 
 
 sent up to them from the Commons, and to recal 
 them to principles more conformable with the 
 nature of property and establishments, and more 
 concurrent with the practice of common law. 
 They exercised this their almost peculiar character 
 in the present case. This exemption was mani- 
 festly made upon two grounds. First, that the 
 extension of the Bill to such establishments would 
 be an unprecedented interference with the original 
 rights of founders, as derivatively represented by 
 their visitors ; and, secondly, that the existing 
 law and a recent statute, had rendered it unneces- 
 sary. 
 
 Upon the first head it is unnecessary to observe 
 that visitors are of two kinds, or rather have two 
 functions,; the first, that of superintending, main- 
 taining, and rectifying the moral administration of 
 the charity committed to their care, according to 
 the will of the founder ; and, secondly, that of 
 directing, and, in many cases, of totally managing 
 the funds of the charity. 
 
 Now visitors of the first class, in the exercise 
 of their moral administration, are regarded by the 
 law as so immediately the representatives of the 
 founder, and as persons so much in trust, as it 
 were, of his own original power to the use of his 
 charity, that the law will as little interfere with 
 them as with his heirs in the management of their 
 private property. The visitor is here the -suc- 
 cessor and representative of the founder. The law, 
 
 D
 
 26 
 
 therefore, will not here say, ' Yield your charity 
 up to me, I can manage it better* The founder, 
 as the master of his own property, left it for what 
 objects he pleased, and delegated it, in after times, 
 to his visitor. No court of law, therefore, not 
 the legislature itself, can upon just principles 
 supersede or control the visitor in whatever re 
 spects the government of the charity. 
 
 But in the second function of visitors, that of 
 receiving and managing the estate of the charity, 
 the law regards them in the light of other trustees ; 
 and, as such, upon the allegation of abuse, will 
 bring them to account in the Court of Chancery. 
 Thus in Eden v. Foster. 1 
 
 Such, therefore, was the main ground of this 
 exemption. The House of Lords, instructed 
 doubtless by the legal learning always present in 
 the House, followed here only in the spirit and 
 words of the 43d of Elizabeth. This statute was 
 specially passed for correcting abuses in public 
 charities, and its powers are of the largest kind. 
 But, even in this act, it is specially provided, 
 " That nothing therein shall extend to any city, 
 town, corporate, or to any lands or tenements 
 given to the uses aforesaid, (that is to say, charit- 
 able uses,) where there is a special governor, or 
 governors appointed, to govern or direct such lands 
 or tenements ; neither to any college, hospital, or 
 
 1 2 Peer Williams, 225.
 
 27 
 
 free-school, which has special visitors, governors, 
 or overseers appointed by their founders? Vide 
 43d Eiiz. c. 4. s. 3. And Lord Hardwicke says, 
 (2 Atkins, 5.54, and 3 Atkins, 109,) " That where 
 a college, hospital, or school is founded, and a 
 special visitor appointed, or a visitor by operation 
 of law, the Commission by virtue of this statute 
 shall not interpose." 
 
 Nor could their Lordships acknowledge any 
 necessity or policy for so totally superseding the 
 remedies already existing by law. The honorable 
 Chairman has written rather a long letter to Sir 
 Samuel Romilly. If Sir Samuel should deem it 
 a due courtesy to return an answer, he will per- 
 haps repeat the information which he had the 
 goodness to give to the Committee, 1 " That any 
 private individual, who thinks that a charity has 
 been abused, may file an information in the name 
 of the Attorney-General." Sir Samuel might per- 
 haps further add, " that there is an Act of Parlia- 
 ment, the 52d G. III. c. 101, brought in at his 
 own suggestion, which enables any person to pre- 
 sent a petition to the Lord Chancellor, or the 
 Master of the Rolls, or the Barons of the Exche- 
 quer, complaining of any abuse of a charitable 
 trust." He would probably proceed to state, that 
 this act likewise " provides that the case may be 
 
 1 1st Report of Committee, 434. Sir Samuel Romilly's 
 evidence.
 
 28 
 
 heard in a summary way, upon affidavits, without 
 the forms of pleading in equity ; and all the pro- 
 ceedings upon it are by the Act exempted from 
 the stamp duties." 1 That the utmost expense of 
 such a proceeding might be 50/. ; that this would 
 be a large demand; and that, whilst on infor- 
 mation, the defendant might protract the proceed- 
 ings for a great length of time, and might increase 
 the expense very considerably : in a proceeding 
 tinder this Act he would have no means of doing 
 it. Here, therefore, is a legal remedy applicable 
 certainly to a very large head of existing abuses of 
 charitable endowments, and applicable certainly to 
 all those cases which came particularly before the 
 attention of the Committee, and which the honor- 
 able Chairman has published as the postscript of 
 his letter. 
 
 You will do me the justice to believe, Sir, that 
 I do not employ this as an argument against the 
 expediency and certain utility of the Commission, 
 but only against the necessity of giving it powers 
 of that extent which would have superseded the 
 exercise of the ordinary law, and which the legis- 
 lature could not have been justified in giving, 
 except under the presumption that the law was 
 deficient. I am sure, Sir, you will agree with me, 
 that the legislature only displays a wise jealousy 
 in this reluctance to give extraordinary powers, 
 
 1 See Sir Samuel's further Evidence, pag. seq,
 
 29 
 
 and to create Parliamentary Commissions, which 
 in their very constitution imply an inculpation of 
 the laws and courts of justice, and proceed upon 
 principles contrary to the sober and cautious prac- 
 tice of the common law. The austerity of the 
 rules of evidence, as adopted and maintained, by 
 our courts, is not the mere pedantry of a rigid 
 and technical system ; it has a good and solid 
 reason, and affords the best security not only of 
 our property, but of our reputation. I am sure 
 you will acquit me of any intention even of insi- 
 nuating a disrespect towards the report of a Com- 
 mittee of the House of Commons ; but I am per- 
 suaded you will hold with me, that the loose, 
 general, and discursive mode of taking evidence 
 in such Committees, (the witnesses being unsworn, 
 and the examining gentlemen being often unaccus- 
 tomed to professional precision,) frequently pro- 
 duces a prejudiced and partial impression upon the 
 subject. Indeed the accusation of abuse being 
 more immediately the business of the Committee, 
 necessarily stands more prominent than the defence; 
 the accuser coming forward as a volunteer, , whilst 
 the defending party has perhaps never heard of 
 the charge till the report is made by the Com- 
 mittee, and the indictment, as it were, found..-il.-4i 
 The honorable Chairman in his letter frequently 
 employs an argument, that the business of the 
 Commission under his Act was to inquire only, 
 and not to proceed to any practical remedy. So
 
 much the worse. In the ordinary jurisdiction of 
 the country, a grand jury finds its bill upon hear- 
 ing one party only, in the same manner as (effec- 
 tual] v at least) these Parliamentary Committees. 
 In bills of indictment, however, the matter is after- 
 wards investigated in all its parts by a legal trial. 
 But the reports intended to have been issued by 
 these Commissioners were not to be followed up 
 by any legal proceeding. Here, therefore, the 
 accusation would go forth, and no defence. It is 
 perfectly true that the Commissioners might have 
 impartially examined ell parties ; that they might 
 have examined the visitors, trustees, and govern- 
 ors, as indifferently as the parties complaining. 
 But let us not forget that the rights of character 
 are as absolute as those of property, and should 
 not depend upon any contingency. Many of the 
 parties accused may be absent from the kingdom ; 
 at a distance from the place where the Commis- 
 sioners meet ; occupied in important public duties 
 or private interests. Under any circumstances 
 the interest of the accused are not guarded by 
 those exact and severe rules of proceeding, and 
 maxims of evidence, which the law and courts' 
 observe in all other civil and criminal cases. 
 
 Mr. Brougham next proceeds to enumerate 
 many examples of abuses in charities under special 
 visitation. He demands whether the powers given 
 to the commissioners under his Bill would not have 
 been useful in the investigation of such institutions,
 
 31 
 
 and whether the Commission, as it now stands, Will 
 be equally sufficient. To this question an imme- 
 diate answer may be given Certainly not. But in 
 all questions upon the correction of abuses by ex- 
 traordinary powers created for the purpose, the in- 
 quiry should not be less into the nature of the re- 
 medy than into the quality of the abuse. It is a 
 proverb of daily recurrence, that the cure may be 
 worse than the disease. In all cases of administra- 
 tion, both public and private, there are innumerable 
 abuses present to the attention of all of us, and 
 which every one sees might be immediately re- 
 moved by a summary and dictatorial power. But 
 a wise and cautious legislature will rather continue 
 to suffer the partial mischief of such temporary 
 evils, until they submit to ordinary remedies, than 
 violently root them out at the expense of principles 
 which give certainty to law and security to liberty. 
 It might be easy by carrying an excise into every 
 dwelling to detect innumerable instances of petty 
 evasion from taxes. A few more strong restraints 
 upon traders might render more availing the laws 
 against illicit commerce. But the legislature, pro- 
 ceeding upon a due estimation of means and ends, 
 \vill not sacrifice the higher and more important 
 principles of liberty and property, for any particu- 
 lar good of comparatively little value. Under this 
 Commission, therefore, many charities will still 
 escape examination ; that is, will be left to the 
 vigilance and correction of the ordinary law. But
 
 32 
 
 on the other part, the public will escape the crea- 
 tion of an inquisitorial commission, alike inconsis- 
 tent with the practice of the law and the spirit of 
 the constitution. 
 
 The value of the due maintenance of these con- 
 stitutional principles (for such they are) may ap- 
 pear but little at present; but let the public ima- 
 gine what might be the future mischief of a prece- 
 dent thus established for departing from the fixed 
 maxims of the common law for any purpose of 
 mere temporary expediency. Are they prepared 
 to supersede the established and well known forms 
 of inquiry and trial by the creation of parliament- 
 ary commissions on all subjects of property, and 
 incidental abuses of it ? Have they no apprehen- 
 sion, that this new kind of tribunal, so powerful 
 and so irresponsible, may gradually grow to a 
 strength and extent, and become a kind of ambula- 
 tory tribuneship, which might unsettle the princi- 
 ples of property, and overawe establishment? 
 An extraordinary parliamentary Commission for 
 inquiry into charities to-day, may be followed by a 
 similar commission for investigating into tythes to- 
 morrow. In a word, unless a due caution be ap- 
 plied in limiting both the object and powers of such 
 commissions, the practice might grow into a most 
 dangerous extent ; and not only all bodies of men, 
 but ultimately all individuals, might hold their pro- 
 perty, not by the common law of the land, and the 
 known and fixed administration of the ordinary tri-
 
 33 
 
 bunals, but have their titles slurred and canvassed 
 at the will of a parliamentary commission, acting 
 under an equity as general as the discretion, in- 
 formation, and public and private feeling of the 
 gentlemen who compose them. 
 
 But, in truth, it is a sophism to suppose that the 
 Reports ot these Commissioners would not be fol- 
 lowed by some practical effects. The first stage 
 only is to report ; the second to act. I remember, 
 indeed, only one commission so large in its powers, 
 and extensive in its objects, as the Education Bill 
 was intended to be by the honorable Chairman. 
 This was the Commission of Henry the Eighth for 
 examining into the property of abbies. monasteries, 
 collegiate bodies, &c., and the due application of 
 their funds in charitable and ecclesiastical duties. 
 And how was this commission followed ? Like that 
 of the honorable Chairman, its professed object was 
 only to inquire and report. But it was followed by 
 a profligate and unprincipled robbery of the church, 
 abominable to all times. The King could not re- 
 sist the temptation of seizing and distributing the 
 large property which he discovered, and which lay 
 at his mercy. The excepted charities, however, 
 though they may escape from the diminished 
 powers of the Commissioners, are still within the 
 reach of the ordinary law. So many of them as 
 have no special visitors are within the statute of the 
 4Sd of Elizabeth. This statute is a most extensive 
 remedy for charitable abuses, as it enables the 
 
 E
 
 34 
 
 Lord Chancellor to award a commission, under 
 .which the commissioners in any alleged case of 
 abuse may summon all parties before them. These 
 commissioners may summon a jury to try questions 
 of fact. They may inquire into all " Abuses, 
 breaches of trust, negligences and misemploy- 
 ments ; not employing, concealing, defrauding, 
 misconverting or misgoverning, any lands, &c. 
 heretofore or hereafter to be given to any charita- 
 ble use, &c. And upon such inquiry, hearing, 
 and examination, set down such orders, judgments 
 and decrees as that the said lands, &c. may be 
 faithfully employed to the intent for which they 
 were given ; which orders, decrees or judgments, 
 being agreeable to the intention of the donors or 
 founders, shall stand good and be affirmed until the 
 same be undone or altered by the Lord Chancellor 
 upon the complaint of any party grieved, &c. &c. 
 And may tax and award costs against persons com- 
 plaining without causeV And it has been decided 
 under the construction of this act, that the Com- 
 missioners have authority to turn out trustees who 
 misbehave themselves, as by making leases at low 
 fines and small rents, &c., and may decree such 
 leases void, 2 List. 710. Duke's Char. 124. Nor 
 is there any doubt, that in a case, where a trustee 
 becomes himself a tenant of the charitable estate 
 (unless under very special circumstances), or makes 
 lease of the lands for an unusual and unwarranted
 
 35 
 
 term, that the Commissioners might turn him out 
 of the trust, and the lease be rendered void. 
 
 It may be true that this statute has become ra- 
 ther obsolete in use; but it is only because the 
 Court of Chancery, under its equitable jurisdiction, 
 exercises its powers by an easier process. The 
 practice, as respects the efficient powers of this 
 statute, is by information in the name of the Attor- 
 ney General, in which any individual, however 
 remotely connected with the charity, may become 
 the relator. This mode of proceeding, indeed, is 
 subject to the approbation of that crown officer, but 
 it is notorious that this assent is given almost as 
 matter of course, upon any reasonable suggestions. 
 But the 52d of George III. c. 101, as I have al- 
 ready observed, is a still easier remedy, and of so 
 little cost and difficulty, that any charity, however 
 inconsiderable, may have recourse to its powers. In 
 this last statute, the alleged imperfection in the 
 statute *of Elizabeth, that of its not extending to 
 charities specially visited, as far as relates to the 
 abuse of the funds, is substantially supplied. Un- 
 der the 52d George Third the parties complaining 
 of any abuse of the funds of the charity have little 
 more to do than to petition. All the proceedings 
 are exempted from stamp duties. The remoteness 
 of the place where the charity is established adds 
 nothing to the expense. The ordinary delays of 
 the Court of Chancery do not occur in a proceed-
 
 36 
 
 ing under this act. 1 The costs in few cases can ex- 
 ceed the amount of fifty pounds, and even they are 
 in the discretion of the court. 
 
 Thus neither the law nor the administration of 
 it are so difficult and deficient as the honorable 
 Chairman seems to think, and upon the grounds of 
 which defect he complains that the powers of his 
 Act have been diminished. 
 
 Where there are charitable trusts, any alleged 
 abuse of the funds, by whatever hands administered, 
 whether by the hands of the visitor, governor, over- 
 seers, or trustees, is subject to the ordinary jurisdic- 
 tion of the Court of Chancery ; and, by the last Act, in 
 a manner as speedily and summarily as can be con- 
 sistent with justice, and at an expense almost insig- 
 nificant. The court, indeed, as I have before had 
 occasion to observe, will not control the visitor in 
 his moral management and internal conduct of 
 the charity, because it will not interpose in a do~ 
 mestic government which the founder has reserved 
 for his heirs or entrusted to his nominee. But, in 
 the letter of our ancient tenures, a little land in 
 capite brings the whole estate into wardship. As 
 long as the visitor confines himself to mere visito- 
 rial functions, within the compass prescribed to 
 him by the original endowment, and the will of the 
 founder, expressed or collected from his statutes, 
 he is responsible only to God and his own con- 
 
 1 Sir Samuel Romilly's Evidence, first Report 434, 435. 
 See likewise the Statute 52 Geo. III. c. 101. Appendix.
 
 37 
 
 science; but if he once meddles with the funds, 
 the jurisdiction of the Court of Chancery imme- 
 diately attaches upon him, and he is then, like any 
 other trustee, liable to account. 1 
 
 It is not therefore a correct inference of the 
 honorable Chairman, that gross abuses in charities 
 are left still to flourish in the shade, and silently to 
 work the ruin of the institutions to which they 
 cling, because the House of Lords by the above 
 restrictions have " screened" a portion of such en- 
 dowments from the inquiry of the Commissioners. 
 Such charities are only left to the ordinary laws^ 
 which, being passed with a view to their possible 
 abuses, and, at the same time, with a due consi- 
 deration of their peculiar constitution, are capable 
 of reaching them in almost every case of malad- 
 ministration . 
 
 In an Appendix^ in which the learned Chair- 
 man condescends to edit the evidence laid before 
 the Committee, he has collected the principal cases 
 of alleged abuse, in order to justify the language 
 which he uses in his Letter to Sir Samuel Romilly. 
 Now, Sir, I do not find that the Committee of the 
 House of Commons have expressed in their report 
 any opinion upon these particular cases. They 
 have left them to make their own impression ; and 
 I cannot think the abuses are such as to warrant 
 the language of Mr. Brougham's Letter. For ex- 
 
 1 Berk ham stead Free School, 2 Vesey and Beames 138. 
 The Foundling Hospital case, 2 Vesey Junr. 42. Attorney 
 General T. Dixie, 13 Vesey 319.
 
 38 
 
 ample, the case of St. Bees School, which has. oc- 
 casioned the attack upon the Earl of Lonsdale. 
 Surely the alleged management of this school is not 
 a case of so much manifest peculation, and rank 
 mal-administration, as to justify, not the insinuation, 
 but the direct accusation, against so many persons 
 of rank and character. What is the mismanage- 
 ment imputed to the trustees ? I speak of it as it 
 appears from the evidence which the learned Gen- 
 tleman himself has published, and upon which 
 his Letter is a commentary. Ex-parte evidence, 
 no doubt. I might add, indeed, that it is evidence 
 of a very suspicious kind. The only witnesses 
 examined as to the alleged abuses are an attorney 
 of the name of Brooks, resident in London, and 
 who seems to have had no connexion with the 
 school, and who, when examined as to some points, 
 with great candor confesses to the Committee 
 "that he speaks only conjecturally ;"* and the Rev. 
 William Wilson, who was formerly the school- 
 master, but who resigned the situation, and whom 
 the Bishop of Chester, according to his own evi- 
 dence, refused to license. 21 Dr. Satterthwaite was 
 indeed examined; he was called for another pur- 
 pose, and it did not occur to the honorable 
 Chairman to examine him with much minuteness as 
 to the question of St. Bees. He is one of the go- 
 
 1 Appendix, p. 14. 
 
 4 Appendix, p. 29. I believe there was not the slightest 
 moral imputation on the character of thia gentleman.
 
 39 
 
 vernors of the charity, but having the misfortune to 
 hold the livmg of Lowther, which is in the gift of 
 my Lord Lonsdale, his evidence was of course en- 
 titled to no credit. 
 
 But what, in fact, is the gross and malignant 
 abuse of this charity, the " screening " of which 
 from the inspection of the Commissioners is such 
 an incurable evil ? 
 
 It appears that there was a grant by King James 
 I. of seventy tenements to the school of the manor 
 of Sandwath and St. Bees : I cannot say in what 
 year of his reign : that in the year 1 608 (I know 
 not whether this was the year of the donation ; 
 it could not have been long after, and was un- 
 doubtedly during the life of the donor) a lease 
 of thirty acres of land was granted for the term of 
 1000 years, upon a reserved rent of 15*. or 
 15s. 8d. annually. 1 Who were the parties to this 
 lease I know not ; whether the king, the patron 
 of the charity, was himself the grantor by letters 
 patent, I cannot tell. I presume from the evi- 
 dence, that the land had once belonged to Sir Tho- 
 mas Chaloner, and had fallen to the crown. But 
 whether the king himself granted the leases of the 
 seventy tenements at the augmentation of the school, 
 or- whether they were made by the trustees, they 
 were evidently made during the life of the king, 
 
 1 The whole seventy tenements were leased iu a like 
 manner, and for a like term. Appendix, p. 18.
 
 40 
 
 and must be presumed to have been within his 
 knowledge, and with his express consent. But 
 will Mr. Brougham contend that such leases, under 
 such circumstances, are an abuse of the charity ? 
 Surely the donor had a right to make such leases 
 of the land. He cannot be said to have abused 
 his own charity. I think the presumption is greatly 
 in favor of these grants; and I much doubt 
 whether the Court of Chancery would set them 
 aside ; provided there be (as I think there is) cogent 
 ground for believing, that they were contempora- 
 neous with the donation to the school, and made 
 with the express assent of the royal donor. At 
 any rate, it would have been a very harsh proceed- 
 ing on the part of the trustees to have annulled 
 leases which had subsisted unimpeached for more 
 than 200 years. 1 
 
 The Honorable Chairman, however, might easily 
 have ascertained the fact ; for it appears by a let- 
 ter of My Lord Lonsdale to the Rev. Thomas 
 Bradley, the correspondent and friend of Mr. 
 Brougham, dated May 2^1818, and published in 
 the Honorable Chairman's Appendix, that his 
 Lordship offered to deliver for the inspection of 
 
 1 Archbishop Grindall was the founder of St. Bees 
 School. Since the Second Edition, the 4th Report of the 
 Committee has been published, by which it appears that 
 these leases were granted at the instance of Archbishop 
 Bancroft, as the arbitrator between the governors and the 
 tenants. 4th Report, 340.
 
 41 
 
 the Committee all such papers as the Committee 
 should require. Dr. Satterthwaite and Mr. Arme- 
 stead expressed an equal willingness to deliver all 
 documents that should be required. Now, Sir, I 
 have only to observe, that I think it is much to be 
 lamented that the Honorable Chairman could not 
 avail himself of this polite offer, because I have a 
 very strong belief that it would not only have re- 
 moved his doubt upon the one thousand years' 
 leases, but might have further conduced to satisfy 
 him upon another point on which I am about to 
 speak. 1 
 
 My Lord Lonsdale is himself charged with par- 
 ticipating in the funds of this Free School, and to 
 be supported in his management of it by the trustees, 
 " a majority of whom are clergymen holding livings 
 under him." * The insinuation is, that his lordship 
 is now working valuable coal-mines, the property 
 of St. Bees School, of which an ancestor of the noble 
 lord contrived to possess himself by an illegal lease ; 
 that the governors of the charity have long been ac- 
 quainted with this fact ; that it was communicated 
 to the official governor Dr. Collinson, the venerable 
 Provost of Queen's College, Oxford, more than 
 eleven years ago ; that he has declined to move in 
 it ; and that his lordship, by the supineness of this 
 
 1 No extracts are inserted in the Appendix, either from 
 the lease of 1000 years, or from any of the School leases, 
 deeds, grants, &c. &c. 
 
 * Letter to Sir Samuel Romilly, p. 18.
 
 42 
 
 venerable person, and with the sanction of the 
 trustees, is confirmed in his spoil, and daily adding 
 it to his present wealth. 
 
 This is the charge against his lordship. How 
 does it appear upon the evidence which the Honor- 
 able Gentleman himself has published ? 
 
 It appears that, in the year 1742, a lease for 
 867" years was granted to Sir James Lowther, an 
 ancestor of my Lord Lonsdale, of whatever coals 
 might be found in the Manor of Kirby Beacock. 
 at the yearly rent of three pounds ten shillings. 
 Now this manor of Kirby Beacock is stated to be 
 a manor within a manor, that is to say, within the 
 manor of St. Bees. The surface of the lands was 
 let at the time, to other tenants, who appear to have 
 had no connexion with Sir James Lowther. At 
 the distance of seventy-six years it is difficult to 
 say what inducement -Sir James Lowther had to 
 take this lease. It appears by one of the questions 
 put in the Committee, that the representation was, 
 that Sir James Lowther took it more for the benefit 
 of the School property than his own ; that there 
 was a doubt whether there existed such a manor, 
 or manoral rights, as Kirby Beacock ; and, even if 
 there did, whether there was any coal in that 
 manor. But whatever were the motives of Sir 
 
 1 It appears by the 4th Report, that (perhaps under the 
 questionable right of the coal-pits) no one would farm them 
 in 1721 but James Lowther, Esq., at that time not a trustee. 
 The lease was made to him in 1742, for 867 years, that it 
 might be commensurate with the leases of the surface of the 
 land.
 
 43 
 
 James Lowther, whether convenience or profit, 
 small as was the rent reserved, and long as the 
 term is, it does not appear to have been a very advan- 
 tageous bargain to him. There is not the slightest 
 evidence that it has been turned to any account what- 
 ever. There is no proof that any coals were ever 
 raised under that lease. There is not one word of 
 evidence that my Lord Lonsdale, or his ancestors, 
 ever opened a pit or worked any collieries in or under 
 the lands belonging to the School, by virtue of that 
 lease, or that the lease has yielded them any benefit or 
 return. Mr. Wilson, though he lived some time upon 
 the spot, and though he was as much occupied in this 
 inquiry (from very sufficient motives no doubt) as 
 in the other duties of his school, does not venture 
 to state, except from mere rumor, that this lease 
 has ever yielded the slightest return to my Lord 
 Lonsdale. 1 And yet, in this absence of all proof, 
 even upon an ex-parte inquiry, the Honorable 
 Chairman could insinuate that his Lordship 
 "enjoys" a beneficial lease of great value and 
 unascertained profit ; that he is supported in this 
 management of the funds of the charity " by a 
 decided majority of clergymen holding livings un- 
 der him :" and that the venerable head of Queen's 
 College, Oxford, " was deterred from exposing the 
 St. Bees case by the dread of a conflict with his 
 powerful colleague before a tribunal where a long 
 purse is as essential as a good cause." '' 
 
 1 See his evidence. Appendix, p. 25, 26. 34. 
 * Letter to Sir Samuel Romilly, p. 28.
 
 44 
 
 But although there was no evidence before the 
 Committee to warrant the insinuations of the 
 Honorable Gentleman, yet there is evidence that 
 considerable improvements have been made at the 
 School of St. Bees, at the expense of Lord Lons- 
 dale, to the amount of seven or eight hundred 
 pounds. 1 But be the original lease valid or invalid, 
 it is clear that my Lord Lonsdale had nothing to do 
 with the grant ; that he received it as he did Low- 
 ther Castle from his ancestors, and though his 
 Lordship may be desirous to hold it, surely no one 
 will be disposed very severely to censure him, when 
 it does not appear that he is struggling for any 
 beneficial interest, and when the Honorable Gentle- 
 man has perhaps heard that the most serious doubts 
 are entertained whether the lease be valid or not.* 
 
 1 Appendix, p. 26. 
 
 * Long leases of mineral estates are under very different 
 circumstances from leases of the mere surface of land. 
 Long terms of the former kind are not always and necessa- 
 rily beneficial to the tenant. A few years may exhaust the 
 mines, and leave the lessee a long term without any return of 
 profit, but still subject to the obligation of rent. Long 
 leases of land are set aside upon the principle that they are 
 quasi alienations of the estate, and are always the subject of 
 suspicion in the Court of Chancery. It is thus likewise a 
 general rule that. a trustee shall not be a tenant of a trust 
 estate, but the learned Chairman's correspondent would have 
 informed him, that there are many circumstances which in- 
 duce the court to depart from this rule. The court, in fact, 
 regard it only as a presumption, unfavorable indeed, but 
 which the allegation of particular circumstances may explain 
 away.
 
 45 
 
 I hope it will not trespass too much upon yoqr 
 time, if I call your attention to a slight review of 
 the evidence upon which the Honorable Chairman 
 reports this charge against the Lord Lieutenant of 
 Westmoreland. 
 
 The first witness in the St. Bees case, Mr. 
 Brooks, states that his information was principally 
 derived from Mr. Wilson the School-Master. As 
 Mr. Wilson was himself examined before the Com- 
 mittee, the evidence of Mr. Brooks is thus neces- 
 sarily superseded. Mr. Brooks however says, " I 
 saw in the provost's possession (Dr. Collinson, of 
 Queen's College, Oxford,) a letter from Mr. 
 Hodson, who, I believe, is now the legal agent of 
 my Lord Lonsdale, and in that letter, which was 
 dated several years since, (I think in 1807,) he 
 states expressly to the provost, that, at that time, 
 coals were being got in the manor of* St. Bees, 
 otherwise Kirby Beacock, by Lord Lonsdale. 
 Since the date of that letter, Mr. Hodson has be- 
 come my Lord Lonsdale's agent, as I under- 
 stand." ' 
 
 Every one must perceive that this evidence is 
 far from being satisfactory ; that it is hearsay evi- 
 dence of a very loose description. You will not 
 suppose, Sir, that I would wish to reduce the con- 
 stitutional power of a parliamentary Committee to 
 the technical rigor of legal evidence ; but in all 
 inquiries it is. a part of natural justice to in- 
 
 1 Appendix, p. 14.
 
 i$ 
 
 vcstigate every question so as to arrive at the 
 whole truth. Mr. Hodson was not examined. 
 He must, one would have thought, have been a 
 most material witness, and it is astonishing that 
 the learned Chairman had so far forgot his legal 
 habits as not to require this evidence. The powers 
 of the Committee were extensive ; there was no 
 want of time or means of information. The exa- 
 mination was going on in the Committee, whilst 
 the honorable Chairman's friends were busily em- 
 ployed in canvassing in the immediate neighbor- 
 hood of the alleged abuse ; and as this single case 
 occupied ten days of the valuable time of the Com- 
 mittee, and as some of the witnesses were examined 
 twice over, positive evidence of the fact, one way 
 or the other, might, one would have supposed, have 
 been procured, if it had been quite convenient at 
 that period to have searched it out. 
 
 Mr. Wilson is the next witness. There was un- 
 doubtedly no precipitation with him ; for his evi- 
 dence seems to have engaged the Committee three 
 entire days, and it occupies no less than nineteen 
 pages of the honorable Chairman's Appendix. 
 Mr. Wilson resided some years on the spot ; and it 
 was to be expected that very decisive evidence to 
 the fact, whether my Lord Lonsdale was actually 
 working collieries in the School-lands of St. Bees 
 or not, by virtue of that lease, would be obtained 
 from this gentleman, who, to say the least of him, 
 was not an unwilling witness. 
 
 To a question, what was the nature of the lease
 
 47 
 
 granted to Sir James Lowther in 1742 ? he replies, 
 that it was of the coals of the School, and he believes 
 that the lease was of the two manors of St. Bees 
 and Sandwath. Dr. Satterthwaite, who, as one of 
 the governors, had once the possession of the lease 
 in question, states in his evidence (page 37), that 
 he believed the lease was only of the manor of 
 Kirby Beacock. Lord Lonsdale had offered to 
 produce all papers to the Committee ; no doubt, 
 therefore, need to have existed on this point. Mr. 
 Wilson, indeed, in his subsequent evidence, limits 
 his first statement, adding, that he believes the lease 
 was only of the coals belonging to the manor of the 
 School. But not one word of evidence does Mr. 
 Wilson give as to the fact of any coals having been 
 worked under this lease to Sir James Lowther, 
 from its commencement to the present time. To 
 a question, whether any coals had been worked 
 under it ? he says, that there are no pits sunk in the 
 manor so demised, but, " that it is generally un- 
 derstood that two, or at least one of the pits (be- 
 longing to the Lowther estate) are worked into the 
 manor of Sandwath'" l 
 
 The School of St. Bees is described to be the 
 school of the manors of Sandwath and St. Bees. 
 He is then pressed again with reference to the 
 beneficial exercise of this lease by the Lowther 
 family ; " You say there are no pits sunk within 
 
 1 Appendix, p. 19, and following pages of Mr. Wilson's 
 evidence.
 
 48 
 
 the manor ?" Answer, " I believe not." " Are 
 there remains of an old pit having been sunk within 
 the manor ?" Answer, " I have never seen any." 
 He is then asked, " how far the pits, which he 
 has described, are from the boundary of the ma- 
 nor ?" Answer, *' I should suppose within a 
 quarter of a mile, or less." He is then interro- 
 gated to whom the pits belonged at the time of the 
 granting of the lease in 1742. This is indeed a 
 material question ! The honorable Chairman an- 
 swers it by a note in his Appendix. " It appears," 
 says Mr. Brougham, " that the collieries belonged 
 to Sir Thomas Chaloner" not to the Lowthers, 
 at the time of the grant. Mr. Wilson is then 
 asked, if he has any information which he can rely 
 on, that any coals have ever been worked from any 
 manor, or any lands, belonging to the School of St. 
 Bees. What is his answer ? does it amount to any 
 thing like evidence of the fact? He admits that 
 there are neither new pits, nor the remains of old 
 pits sunk in the manor ; but he says there are two 
 old pits (which at the time of the grant belonged to 
 Sir Thomas Chaloner) within a quarter of a mile 
 of the boundaries of the manor of Sandwath. But 
 you will please to recollect, that the manor demised 
 to the Lowthers was the manor of Kirby Beacock, 
 and not the manor of Sanclwath : whether these 
 pits belong to my Lord Lonsdale at the present 
 time, I do not know ; I believe they do, and the 
 insinuation of the honorable Chairman is pretty
 
 49 
 
 clear, that he is working from these pits under the 
 School-lands, and protecting himself by the lease of 
 1742. But what I beg you to observe is Mr. 
 Wilson's answer to the question. " It is com- 
 monly reported" (he says) " that the works of the 
 coal-mines proceed as far underground as to one 
 estate called Byersteads, which formerly belonged 
 to Mr. Younger, and is part of what is generally 
 called School-lands." " And the works extend 
 under that r" ' " Yes, iti is so reported" This is 
 the whole evidence of Mr. Wilson to the alleged 
 abuse, which is so roundly charged by the honora- 
 ble Chairman. But what says Dr. Satterthwaite ? 
 He is one of the governors of the charity, and to a 
 question put to him by the Committee, he replies, 
 " When Mr. Wilson, the master of St. Bees, made 
 inquiries respecting the coal property, I then in- 
 quired of Mr. Peel, Lord Lonsdale's coal steward, 
 whether he knew that there were any workings by 
 which they were procuring coal out of the manor 
 of St. Bees ? His answer to me was, that he be- 
 lieved there were none." * 
 
 Every one at all acquainted with mining, knows 
 how difficult it is in underground excavations to 
 observe the precise boundaries of property. Tres- 
 passes and encroachments are in consequence com- 
 mitted often and most innocently. The boundaries 
 of the School-lands, and the manors comprised in 
 it, are not perhaps very exactly ascertained; ma- 
 
 1 Appendix, p. 37. 
 G
 
 50 
 
 tiorial boundaries are not like those of parishes, 
 which are guarded by public and periodical peram- 
 bulations. 
 
 I 'cannot say whether my Lord Lonsdale's miners 
 have passed the boundary mark of the School-lands 
 or not. Mr. Peel himself could not say. Dr. 
 Satterthwaite however knew where to inquire ; but 
 as the labors of the Committee continued so long, 
 it is rather to be regretted that it had not occurred 
 to the honorable Chairman to examine Mr. Peel. 
 But all I intend to assert is, not that my Lord 
 Lonsdale has not, in fact, passed beyond the 
 dividing mark of his own property into Byersteads 
 and the School-lands ; but that there was no evi- 
 dence before the Committee that he had so done : 
 that the evidence, upon the testimony of Dr. Sat- 
 terthwaite, was the contrary way ; that it was evi- 
 dence, as to that gentleman's means of information, 
 claiming as much regard as the evidence of Mr. 
 Wilson ; and, with respect to the quality of inde- 
 pendence and character, fully entitled to as much 
 estimation. 
 
 Such, Sir, is the case of St. Bees, as respects 
 the evidence before the Committee. But in justice 
 to my Lord Lonsdale I will not rest it here. I 
 need not inform Mr. Brougham, that though many 
 cases may seem full and irrefragable, when stated 
 by the evidence of one party only, the examination 
 of a single witness upon the other side will fre- 
 quently cast up a circumstance which is a complete
 
 answer to them. May there not be something of 
 this kind in the case of St. Bees ? The grant, as I 
 have said, of the seventy tenements, was in the 
 time of King James the First. But King James 
 could of course only grant what he possessed. 
 Now might there not have been some grant (I 
 of course speak it hypothetically), might there 
 not, I say, have been some grant by a previous 
 sovereign, severing the surface and the royalties of 
 these lands, and of course divesting the royalties 
 and the mines from his majesty King James ? I 
 request the honorable Chairman's attention to this 1 
 conjecture Of course, too, if this former sovereign 
 (Queen Elizabeth, suppose, to whom we know Sir 
 Thomas Chaloner's estates had been assigned for 
 debts due to the crown,) had made this previous 
 grant of the royalties, those who hold under her 
 grantee would possess the mines and royalties of 
 St. Bees by a much better title than a lease from 
 the governors ; and might only choose to confirm 
 them by a lease, in order to oppose a kind of second 
 title to the irregular grant of his Majesty King 
 James. 
 
 I do not know whether this conjecture is con- 
 tained in Strype's memorials; which, as appears 
 by the Appendix, the Hon. Gentleman has read 
 with so much laudable diligence. But as it is cer- 
 tainly a possible case, I think it not undeserving 
 of his consideration. 
 
 As to the objection of a trustee being tenant, I
 
 52 
 
 need not remind the learned Chairman, that it 
 constitutes only what the Court of Chancery 
 regards as a presumption; that, in his profes- 
 sional language, it makes a contract only fast and 
 loose ; not necessarily bad, but which the Court 
 of Chancery may set aside if it be bad. As 
 the Honorable Gentleman himself sees, no one 
 in 1721, under a title in the School known to be 
 doubtful, would take the coals but Mr. James 
 Lowther. But is an estate to lose the advantage 
 of a beneficial lease because the tenant who offers 
 happens to be a trustee? The trustee of an 
 Individual, and why not of a charity ? may be the 
 best friend of the individual or charity. It is un- 
 necessary to press the reason and exceptions of 
 so plain a rule of law, It occurs daily in the much 
 stronger case of executors. In the case of St. 
 Bees, the trusteeship is a merely honorary burthen, 
 and was doubtless assumed by my Lord Lonsdale, 
 from the duty of his rank and contiguous property. 
 The case of Pocklington School is next in order 
 in ; the abuses enumerated by the learned Chair- 
 man. The complaint under this case is, that a 
 most gross abuse of large funds has been permitted 
 to exist, notwithstanding the visitorial power as- 
 signed by the founder to St. John's College, Cam- 
 bridge. It is impossible to deny that this chanty 
 does not seem to have accomplished the benevolent 
 intentions of its founder ; but it is only candid to 
 add, what I wish the Hon. Chairman had not over-
 
 53 
 
 looked, that the omission of the master and felloes 
 of St. John's to exercise their visitorial powers, has 
 originated rather in the uncertainty of their right, 
 than in any neglect of their duty. This is manifest 
 from the first sentence of the evidence of Dr. Wood. 1 
 And here I must be allowed to express my regret, 
 that the honorable Chairman, in his Narrative and 
 his Letter, has cast a censure on the conduct of 
 the College, in which neither the evidence nor 
 the transaction itself can bear him out. Nor 
 do I think, Sir, that either you, or any one of due 
 feeling, can have read without much regret, that 
 part of the interrogatories which appears to have 
 been put personally to Dr. Wood. 
 
 \JThe object of tlie Committee was, as I under- 
 stand, to inquire into the charities connected with 
 the education of the poor : but what relation to 
 this purpose had the senior and junior fellowships 
 
 ,.-> -. h ;- f A.. " ; *T ' - ><-- ' '. 
 
 ' To a question put by the Committee, whether St. John's 
 
 College was visitor of Pocklington School 1 the Rev. Dr. 
 Wood replies : " I can hardly answer that question. I will 
 tell the Committee what I conceive to be the authority. It 
 is said, if the master should Happen to be in the neighbour- 
 hood of Pocklington, or should send any fellows of the col- 
 lege thither, they might go to the school, and examine the 
 master, and see whether he was doing his duty or not; if he 
 is not, then the original power was to remove him, and the 
 master of the guild or fraternity, which was established at 
 that time, was to look out for another. That, I conceive, is 
 the whole visitorial power of the master of St. John's." Ap- 
 pendix, p. 42.
 
 of St. John's ? I need not observe- to you, Sir, 
 that there should be one way of examining suspi- 
 cious witnesses in a criminal court, and another 
 mode of interrogating gentlemen of rank and re- 
 spectability before a Committee of the House of 
 Commons. I must confess, that the catching and 
 cross-examining mode employed in this interroga- 
 tion of Dr. Wood excites an unpleasant feeling. 
 I would ask, whether the insinuation in the follow- 
 ing question had any thing to do with the object of 
 the Committee, or whether its want of pertinency 
 was made up by its civility and gentlemanly consi- 
 deration ? " Suppose a person was likely to be 
 elected a fellow of your College, and that any re- 
 lation of his became the purchaser of a valuable 
 advowson, do you take upon yourself to represent 
 to this Committee, that such a circumstance would 
 make no difference whatsoever in bis chance of 
 obtaining one of your fellowships ?" Answer, " Not 
 the least." " If any reports of a contrary tendency 
 have been circulated, are they utterly devoid of 
 foundation ?" Answer, " I believe them to be 
 totally devoid of foundation, and entirely slander- 
 ous*' " How long have you been connected with 
 the College ?" Answer, " Nearly forty years, and 
 I have never known an instance to justify such an 
 insinuation." ' 
 
 1 Appendix, p. 52.
 
 5$ . 
 
 But permit me, Sir, to request your attention 
 more minutely to the case of Pocklington School, 
 and I think you will agree with me that even here 
 the learned Chairman does not make out an abuse 
 in the degree in which he states it. His charge, if 
 reduced to its substance, may be stated under three 
 heads ; 1st. that the Master and Usher are in the 
 possession of large estates, which are not employed 
 according to the will of the donor ; 2nd. that the 
 Master has personally neglected his school, and 
 has no scholars ; and 3dly. as I have above stated, 
 that St. John's College has neglected its visitorial 
 power. 
 
 Now, Sir, upon looking to the evidence pub- 
 lished by the Honorable Chairman in his Appendix, 
 it may be stated in answer to the first of his 
 charges, that the Pocklington Charity is a corpora- 
 tion composed of the Master and Usher, who by 
 the will of the founder have the whole administra- 
 tion of the revenues. That the endowment directs 
 that one third of the revenue of the estates of the 
 charity should be paid to the Usher ; and that 
 200/. per annnm, being as nearly as possible one 
 third, is actually so paid to the present Usher ; 
 that the revenue of the School was valued in 1811 
 at 700/. ; but that the estates had been in Chan- 
 cery ever since the appointment of the present 
 Master, and that he had in consequence been much 
 distressed. That the endowment required the 
 Master and Usher to educate in grammatical
 
 56 
 
 learning the scholars of the town of Pocklington ; 
 that the Master was always ready to receive such 
 scholars, and therein to fulfil the objects of the 
 charity. That the funds of the charity therefore 
 were not abused or embezzled, but employed ac- 
 cording to the will of the founder. 
 
 With respect to the second charge, it certainly 
 appears, that in October, 1817, the Master had 
 only one scholar ; but it equally appears, that one 
 cause of this was the disinclination of the inhabi- 
 tants of Pocklington . to avail themselves of the 
 grammatical education appointed by the founder : 
 that it had become the fashion of Pocklington, as 
 of too many other places, to prefer different modes 
 of education ; and that, though the Master might 
 be ready at all times to give the instruction, it was 
 manifestly beyond his power to compel the atten- 
 dance of scholars : that the charge of neglect has 
 been greatly exaggerated j much of it originating 
 either in the embarrassment of his Chancery suit, 
 or that he did not attend. because the inhabitants 
 of Pocklington had sent him no scholars. This 
 appears indeed from his own words. Appendix, p. 
 53. " I have to state," he says, " that in conse- 
 quence of the very extraordinary pressure of the 
 times, and the losses I sustained last year, I was 
 unable to fulfil my pecuniary engagements. The 
 subsequent rigorous proceedings of the Pocklington 
 Canal Company, and another creditor, have com- 
 pelled me, much against my inclination, to be
 
 57 
 
 absent a great deal from home during the last ten 
 months ; and I should certainly have appointed a 
 substitute to attend the school, if there had been 
 any scholars to be taught ; but I had been con- 
 stantly resident many months before that time, and 
 no one, either then or since, applied for admission." 
 
 As to the third point, the imputed neglect of the 
 visitorial power by^St. John's College, I have already 
 answered it above, and I have only to express my 
 conviction, that the master and fellows, having 
 ascertained their right, will execute their duty. 
 
 All the abuse in this case therefore resolves itself 
 into the imputed negligence of the master ; that he 
 was frequently not in the school after breakfast, and 
 no person (except the usher) deputed to attend for 
 him: and this at a time, when there were eight or 
 
 * * o 
 
 ten boys at school ; and that when he had only one 
 scholar, he was still more frequently absent. But 
 surely negligences of this nature are not the due 
 subject matter of parliamentary commissions. 
 Surely they may be left (with perfect safety to the 
 public good) to the moral administration of the 
 visitor. Here is palpably no embezzlement of 
 funds, but an excellent charity abridged of its 
 utility by a perverse disposition in the subjects of it 
 not to avail themselves of its benefits. It would be 
 as reasonable a ground of complaint, and entirely 
 as suitable a matter for a parliamentary commis- 
 sion, that many clergymen are actually receiving 
 
 H
 
 58 
 
 the tythes of large parishes, though they are notori- 
 ously preaching to empty churches. 
 
 With respect to the Yeovill Chanties, upon 
 which the Hon. Chairman next observes, it appears 
 to me a matter of just and reasonable surprise, that 
 the litigants, or persons at law with the trustees, 
 should be the only parties examined, although 
 twelve or fourteen of the trustees are mentioned ; 
 and some of them the most respectable gentlemen 
 in the county. Why were none of these examined ? 
 Why was the examination confined merely to the 
 accusing parties ? Why did not the committee 
 require some of the gentlemen whose names the 
 witnesses mention as the actual trustees of the 
 charities; Sir William Heathcote, for example, 
 Sir Charles Mills, or the Reverend William 
 Phillips p 1 And where was the discretion, let me 
 ask, not to say the civility, of so directing the ques- 
 tions, and rejoining upon the answers, as to lead to 
 no very civil imputations upon the Lord Chancellor 
 and the Court of Chancery ? Are not the com- 
 mittee here doing what the legislature itself would 
 assuredly not do ; degrading, not to say defaming, 
 a high court of justice, and by strong implication 
 reflecting upon the first officer of the law and 
 crown ? These committees are, or should be, re- 
 presentatives of the house from which they proceed ; 
 but what would not be the mischief, (I speak it 
 with due deference) if the House of Commons 
 
 \ 
 
 * Appendix, p. 70.
 
 59 
 
 should appear to sanction such a charge of oppres- 
 sion and cruelty upon the High Court of Chancery 
 and the Lord Chancellor ? Question : Have you 
 found that Court (the Court of Chancery) afford 
 you relief? 1 Answer: Oh! it has ruined me. 
 Question : Have you found the expenses heavy ? 
 Answer : Oh ! good God, I have wished myself 
 out of the world a thousand times since I have got 
 into it ; it has entirely ruined me. I had a nice 
 business which brought me in four or five hundred 
 a-year, which it has ruined, and I have now a 
 wife and family. Question : Have you (to another 
 witness) suffered any tiling in this Court? Answer : 
 My heart is almost broken ; indeed my nerves are 
 so shook by the losses I have sustained by this 
 proceeding, that I scarcely know what I am speak- 
 ing of; and I have a wife and eight children. 
 It is the most grievous thing I have ever known ; I 
 was a churchwarden only two years. To another 
 witness, by the Committee. Question : What 
 have you found the Court of Chancery to be? 
 Answer : It has cost me about five hundred pounds, 
 and I am afraid I do not know the worst of it yet. 
 I suppose the other party will bring in a bill against 
 us. 
 
 If it had been the object of the Honorable 
 Chairman to show one of his Spanish liberaks 
 randled by the Inquisition, I do not know how he 
 
 * Appendix, p. 78.
 
 60 
 
 could have put more leading questions, or more 
 dexterously have rejoined upon the answers. And 
 into what in fact does the whole case resolve itself? 
 Simply into a contest between two opposite parties 
 in a parish as to the management of trust estates, 
 and churchwardens belonging to each party. Again, 
 therefore, I must say, upon what principle of fair- 
 ness is the examination of the Committee confined 
 to one party ? 
 
 The next charity in Mr. Brougham's Appendix, 
 is the Croydon Charity. And here I must again 
 observe, that the evidence is of the same ex-parte 
 nature; the accusation being made upon the evi- 
 dence of a litigant on one side, whilst the defence 
 of the other party, (namely, the Archbishop of 
 Canterbury, and Dr. Ireland, the Dean of Westmin- 
 ster) is not produced, and was not required. I must 
 really, Sir, put it here to the honorable Chairman's 
 candor and fair dealing, upon what principle of 
 equity he can rest the question upon such evidence? 
 With what justice can he assail the character of 
 men in high station upon an hearing of one side 
 only? In a professional arbitration between the 
 most humble individuals, and in a case of mere 
 property, I am sure the generosity of the honorable 
 Chairman would not dispense with this first rule of 
 natural justice, to hear both sides, and not to 
 give his award upon the mere statement of one. 
 And how much more should this rule be observed 
 in a case of character, and where the defending
 
 parties are men of high public stations, and of a 
 sacred profession. One would think that their rank 
 and appointments should be a presumption in their 
 favor, as placing them beyond ordinary temptations, 
 and conferring habits of acting and thinking above 
 participation and connivance in low peculations. 
 But the honorable Chairman, by some perverse 
 way of reasoning, appears to'regard their rank and 
 profession as constituting a presumption against 
 them ; and because the Churchwardens are the 
 accusers, and the Archbishop and the Dean the 
 defendants, he infers the charge to be so final and 
 conclusive, that he does not even desire to hear the 
 defence. 
 
 As an answer to this case, 1 am sure I have 
 nothing more to add, than to show that this is its 
 complexion. And this appears immediately upon 
 the evidence. (Appendix, 87.) Question: Who 
 is the visitor of Whitgift's Hospital? Answer: 
 the Archbishop of Canterbury. Does he ever visit? 
 Answer : Yes, he has. When did he visit last ? 
 Answer": He appointed two persons last Monday to 
 visit it, not on account of the revenues, but on 
 account of the misconduct, as they conceived, of 
 the warden and schoolmaster. This warden I got 
 put in; he is one of the poor brothers; he is offen- 
 sive to the Archbishop and the clergy. (Appendix, 
 88.) " Is there a school there ? (at Croydon.) 
 Answer : Yes. Question : How many boys does 
 he (the schoolmaster) teach upon Whitgift's foun-
 
 62 
 
 dation? (a foundation for a Grammar School.) 
 Answer: None. There are none educated but 
 under Archbishop Tennison's will." To this Mr* 
 Head, the other Churchwarden, adds : I believe 
 the reason none are taught under Archbishop Whit- 
 gift's will is, that none have applied. Question : 
 Does the master teach any boys on any other foun- 
 dation ? Answer : The school is opened on Dr. 
 Bell's system. There are two schools there ; Mr. 
 Bisset is appointed schoolmaster by the society, and 
 he has the house to live in (Whitgift's house) and 
 the salary belonging to Whitgift's foundation. 
 Question : Who is the other schoolmaster ? An- 
 swer : I do not recollect his name, but that on 
 Bell's plan is taught in Whitgift's school-house. 
 Question : Do you know what is done with the 
 overplus of the funds (those of the hospital and 
 school) after paying the expenses ? Answer : I do 
 not know. The warden, the poor brethren, and 
 Mr. Bisset the schoolmaster, have the manage- 
 ment of it altogether. 
 
 Now, Sir, this appears to me to be the Croydon 
 case : the Archbishop of Canterbury is the visitor, 
 and the Dean of Westminster is one of the trustees; 
 and the Archbishop is in the actual, present, prac- 
 tice of frequently visiting. A feud exists in the 
 parish as to the education on the plan of Lancaster 
 and Dr. Bell, and the Churchwardens, the heads 
 of one of these parties, are the only persons exam- 
 ined by the Committee; and, finally, Whitgift's
 
 School is a grammar school, gone into disuse, be- 
 cause the inhabitants would not send their children; 
 under which circumstances, the Archbishop and 
 Dean, as the visitor and trustee, have given it a 
 form more suited to the present taste, by converting 
 it into a school under Dr. Bell's plan, and giving 
 the master under this system the Whitgift's school- 
 house and salary. I have omitted one answer in 
 the evidence connected with the above conclusion. 
 In answer to a question by the Committee, Mr. 
 Harding says, " There was no school till Joseph 
 Lancaster came to Croydon, and then Dr. Ireland 
 called a meeting of the inhabitants, and they esta- 
 blished a school upon Dr. Bell's system. Question : 
 In what year? Answer: In 181 a." (Appendix, 87.) 
 You will perceive, Sir, that I do not go the 
 length either of admitting or denying the possible 
 existence of abuses in some of these charities. J 
 only maintain that these abuses are not made out 
 by the evidence before the Committee. And I 
 complain of that absence of fairness and natural 
 justice, which has so strangely induced the Hon. 
 Chairman to give his decisive award and verdict of 
 guilt upon hearing one side only. I will presume 
 to say, Sir, that I am as anxious as the Hon. Gent 
 himself for a sober and just inquiry into the abuses 
 of charities, under circumstances warranting the 
 presumption of such abuse. I hope I have the doe 
 sense of the common dependence of all of us upon 
 the Supreme Father of the rich and poor, and of
 
 64 
 
 his strong and pointed denunciations against those 
 who shall defraud, or concur in defrauding, the 
 poor and the fatherless. I say, therefore, Sir, let 
 the Commission of Inquiry proceed ; but let us at 
 least inquire duly hefore we condemn. 
 
 I am sorry to add, that the next charities in 
 order, those of Wellingborough, and Huntingdon 
 School, are within the same predicament ; that of 
 being supported by the evidence of one of the par- 
 ties only, in a litigating parish. In the Welling- 
 borough Charity, Mr. Goodall, the witness, puts a 
 conjectural value upon the charitable estates, and 
 because their actual rent does not reach to this 
 amount, it is inferred (without any consideration of 
 what may be the nature of the leases), that the de- 
 ficiency of the present value and actual receipt 
 constitutes a strong presumption of fraud. I have 
 already shown, indeed, that this error pervades al- 
 most the whole of his argument, and has insensibly 
 led the Hon. Chairman into very groundless de- 
 ductions, and particularly in the cases of lands let 
 upon church-leases. If there be any overplus in 
 the Wellingborough Charity, it does not appear to 
 be misapplied. This may be inferred from the 
 answer of Mr. Goodall to a question by the Com- 
 mittee : To what is the overplus of that fund 
 appropriated? Answer: To such uses, I believe, 
 as the feoffees choose for the benefit of the town ; 
 but I never saw the deed. (Appendix, 90.) 
 Question : Who are the feoffees ? Answer : They
 
 65 
 
 are gentlemen of the town of Wellingborough, but 
 heretofore, before it was interfered in and re-Jet at 
 a public auction, it used to be let to their sons and 
 their relations. Question : In what way do the 
 feoffees, in point of fact, dispose of the surplus for 
 the benefit of the town ? Answer : They lay their 
 accounts before the parish every Easter ; lately 
 they did not use to do so, but they have for some 
 years past submitted their accounts to a meeting of 
 the parish. Question : How do they employ them? 
 Answer : I believe by giving money away to poor 
 people who do not receive relief. Question : How 
 did they employ it before they were in the habit of 
 making their accounts public? Answer: I never 
 knew ; I do not believe the parish were at all in- 
 formed. Question : How was it let ? Answer : I 
 never heard any complaint. Question : Did they 
 take beneficial leases themselves ? Answer : No, 
 I believe not. 
 
 This is the case, Sir, of the Wellingborough 
 Charities. The next in the Hon. Gentleman's Ap- 
 pendix is the Huntingdon School. This is an hos- 
 pital endowed with lands and tenements in Hunt- 
 ingdon, for the purpose of a free grammar school 
 for the town of Huntingdon. Mr. Wells, a soli- 
 citor at Huntingdon, is the only evidence called 
 before the Committee, and he appears to have 
 been at law with the corporation for six years, and 
 to have seized their mace, in order to get an answer 
 
 i
 
 6(5 
 
 to an information filed by him in the Court of 
 Chancery. It must be confessed, therefore, that 
 the evidence of this gentleman is that of a litigant, 
 and an angry litigant ; and I must beg leave to 
 observe, that the Hon. Chairman should have heard 
 the other side before he rested in the conclusion of 
 the fraudulent conduct of the corporation. The 
 endowment, as I have said, was for a school. 
 Now is there such a school ? Question by the 
 Committee : Is the Rev. Mr. Edwards the school- 
 master ? Answer : Yes. Question : How many 
 boys does he teach ? Answer : He teaches none 
 upon the foundation of the Hospital ; they have 
 suffered him to build a large board ing- school, and 
 chambers, and other things to make it convenient 
 for a boarding-school : he contends that he has 
 nothing to do but to teach Latin, and then he 
 charges them for other things. Question : Is there 
 any limitation in the foundation ? Answer : No. 
 It is for a " free grammar-school" Here, there- 
 fore, as in other cases, appears to be one of the 
 main gists of these complaints. The foundation 
 is for a grammar-school ; that is, for Latin and 
 Greek. The schoolmaster has, therefore, reason 
 for asserting that this is his duty. But the inha- 
 bitants, requiring another mode of education, will . 
 not avail themselves of this instruction To what 
 purpose are the 160/. rents applied (the rent of 
 the charitable lands, sworn by the corporation in 
 answer to an information in Chancery) ? Answer :
 
 67 
 
 They pay the schoolmaster's salary. I do not 
 know what he has, but I suppose altogether 120/., 
 as they state in their answer. Question : What 
 is done with the rest of the salary ? Answer : 
 Thirty pounds the Mayor has taken for his own 
 entertainment ; and that, with the land-tax, is pro- 
 bably all there is. (Appendix, 93.) Question : 
 What has been the issue of the proceedings in 
 Chancery? Answer: We obtained an order 
 within these two months, to take the rents away 
 from them, and to appoint a receiver. Question : 
 Is that receiver appointed ? Answer : He is now 
 upon the eve of being appointed ; but they have 
 thrown so many obstacles in the way, that it is 
 most harassing and expensive. Question : Is the 
 object of that proceeding to turn out the present 
 occupants of the land ? Answer : The object of 
 the proceeding is to have the land let for the bene- 
 fit of the inhabitants of the town. 
 
 You will perceive, Sir, from this last answer of 
 Mr. Wells, that the object of his information in 
 Chancery, and of his evidence before the Com- 
 mittee of the House, is not to give the lands to 
 the charity and school, " but to have the land let 
 for the benefit of the inhabitants of the town." 
 Here Mr. Wells, therefore, and the party in Hun- 
 tingdon who act with him, seem evidently to think 
 that the town is injured and not the charity, and 
 that the schoolmaster has already enough. 
 
 Such, Sir, is the Huntingdon case, and it ap-
 
 68 
 
 pears to me to be nearly similar with the others. 
 The charity is an endowment for a free grammar- 
 school ; there is such a free grammar-school ; but 
 the inhabitants being divided by a parish feud, 
 and not having a taste for the learned languages, 
 do not send their children. One party in the 
 corporation, being in possession of the lands, 
 think they execute their trust by paying a salary 
 to the schoolmaster, and dividing the rest for the 
 benefit of themselves. The party, of which Mr. 
 Wells is the head, seem likewise to think that the 
 schoolmaster has enough, and only differ upon the 
 point whether the whole town, and not merely the 
 corporation, are entitled to the surplus. By the 
 improved letting of the lands, (the rents being 
 raised from 1631. to 791/0 this surplus is now 
 very considerable ; but, as the founder's deed 
 allows the corporation to apply the rents, as well 
 for a school as for the support of poor persons who 
 were travelling through (pilgrims and others), it is 
 supposed, to the shrine of Ely, I very much ques- 
 tion whether, after having executed the object of 
 the founder, the excess be not legally their own. 
 (Appendix, 93.) 
 
 The next cases to which I shall call your attention, 
 are those of the Mere and Spital charities, of which 
 Mr. Brougham expresses himself in these words. 
 "The deanandchapteroi Lincoln have the patronage 
 as well as the superintendence of Spital Charity ; yet 
 they allow the warden, sou of their diocesan, to enjoy
 
 69 
 
 the produce of large estates devised to him in trust 
 for the poor of two parishes, as well as of the hos- 
 pital, whilst he only pays a few pounds to four or 
 five of the latter. The Bishop himself is patron 
 and visitor of Mere, and permits the warden, his 
 nephew, (for whom he made the vacancy by pro- 
 moting his predecessor) to enjoy or under-let a 
 considerable trust estate, paying only 241. a-yearto 
 the poor." ' A tolerably broad insinuation of most 
 gross misconduct in the Bishop of Lincoln, not to 
 say, a confederacy and peculation! Now, after such 
 words, who would imagine that the whole sub- 
 stance of this case resolves itself into the simple 
 circumstance, that the Mere Charity is an eccle- 
 siastical estate left for the benefit of an eccle- 
 siastical warden, like a rectory or vicarage, but 
 qualified by the injunction of the founder, that the 
 warden shall distribute certain limited pensions to 
 a certain number of poor. The original deed of 
 endowment was not produced before the Commit- 
 tee ;* but Mr. Dawson states in his evidence (Ap- 
 pendix, 60.) that the fines upon the granting or re- 
 newal of leases were always paid to the warden for 
 his own benefit; " I consider it," he says, " like a 
 living to a church." Surely the honorable Gen- 
 tleman must have anticipated this answer; for 
 there are between two or three hundred endow inents 
 of the same kind in the kingdom. The estates of 
 
 1 Letter to Sir S. Romilly, p. 25. 
 
 * It is not inserted in the Appendix of Evidence.
 
 70 
 
 the Mere Charity are let out like other church 
 estates, upon leases of 2 1 years, or three lives ; a 
 small annual rent only is reserved ; but fines, as in 
 all other cases of church property, are exacted upon 
 the falling in of lives. The honorable Chairman 
 must further have understood this from the answer 
 of Mr. White to the Committee. " What is your 
 idea of the reason, why a person having 650 acres, 
 Worth, you say, at least, 1 2 shillings an acre, should 
 let a lease for a term of years at about one shilling 
 an acre, and only reserve a fine of about forty-five 
 or sixty pounds ?" Answer, "I have considered 
 it in my own mind as analogous to church and cor- 
 poration property, and it is let I believe according 
 to the same rule upon paying a fine ; how that has 
 arisen I pretend not to say, but it is perfectly well 
 known that such is the practice in many parts of 
 England." There appears here to have been 
 some mistake in the amount of the fine. But be 
 that as it may, as the lands belonged to the incum- 
 bent as an ecclesiastical estate for life, he had the 
 full right of exercising the same power which is en- 
 joyed by other spiritual incumbents, namely, that 
 of letting for lives or twenty-one years ; and, as any 
 life fell, taking what fine he pleased for the renewal. 
 He might, if he had preferred it, have run his own 
 life against those of the lessees whom he found in 
 possession, and thus have obtained the enjoyment 
 of the whole estate, for life, to himself. In a word, 
 the Mere Charity is an ecclesiastical estate ; it ap-
 
 71 
 
 pears to have been so treated since its foundation, 
 according to the intention of the founder as neces- 
 sarily presumed from the endowment ; and is let 
 only in the ordinary way of church lands. 
 
 The Spital Charity is not to be distinguished 
 from the Mere ; it is a living qualified with 
 the condition of certain charitable payments to 
 the poor. Thus in the honorable Chairman's Ap- 
 pendix, p. 68, when John May Bromhead, Esq. is 
 interrogated whether he has any thing to state to 
 the Committee on the subject of the Spital Hospi- 
 tal, he replies, " There was a decree in Chancery 
 in the 10th of Elizabeth 1.568, and another in the 
 40th of Elizabeth, by extracts from which it ap- 
 pears that these expressions are invariably used ; 
 " This was founded for the relief of the master of 
 the said Hospital and the poor there," (meaning at 
 Spital, of which there is not one person to take the 
 benefit; therefore Mr. Prettyman gives it to some 
 other poor people ; there is not a poor person to 
 receive it) " for the relief of the master, who is to 
 be a priest." And Mr. Prettyman himself being 
 examined, states, " that originally the pensions 
 were only a penny per diem, but that he had now 
 made them five pounds four shillings a-year, and 
 that the remainder was for the maintenance of the 
 master." The estates are let in the usual manner 
 of church property upon fines and renewals ; and 
 it certainly does not appear that the poor have not 
 their due share, that is to say, what was intended
 
 72 
 
 by the founder. I must confess, therefore, that I 
 do not see, as respects the evidence in either case 
 before the Committee, that there is any abuse or 
 misapplication of a charitable fund. 
 
 The Reading and Berkshire Charities are next 
 in order, and, as connected and involved with 
 them, is another complaint against his Majesty's 
 Ministers, which the Hon. Chairman produces in 
 the following words : 
 
 " The case of Mr. Parry" (the omission of his 
 name in the Commission by the Secretary of the 
 Home Department) " was indeed peculiarly strong. 
 It happened that he had for some years devoted 
 himself privately to the very investigation which 
 the Board was to prosecute. He had been occu- 
 pied in examining the abuses in the Berkshire 
 Charities, upon which he has just published a 
 valuable treatise. He was the very man for the 
 new office; he was a Commissioner, if I may so 
 speak, ready made to our hand ; he was trained to 
 the business by a lucky coincidence ; he was by 
 this accident, the only man who could be found to 
 unite experience with the other qualities required ; 
 and all of which he also possessed. Nor had he 
 any of the drawbacks which might be supposed to 
 prevent his appointment. He had never mixed in 
 politics at all ; his connexions were ministerial ; he 
 was known to the Lord Chancellor, and much 
 esteemed by him ; he had, indeed, been promoted 
 by his lordship to the place of Commissioner of
 
 73 
 
 Bankrupt ; to the members of the Committee he 
 was wholly unknown, except by his co-operation ; 
 none of us had ever heard his name mentioned 
 until the member for Berks informed us of the 
 similarity of his pursuits. Thus, then, fortune 
 seemed to present a person eminently fitted for the 
 service of the public, and it might have been sup- 
 posed that Lord Sidmouth would eagerly avail 
 himself of the opportunity to appoint at least one 
 Commissioner whom all men would allow to be 
 well chosen. What were the grounds of his rejec- 
 tion, I am yet to learn. Whether he had incurred 
 the guilt of drawing forth my warm commenda- 
 tions, solely by his own merits ; or that abounding 
 in all other requisites, he had no friend at court ; 
 or that his inquisitorial habits might give alarm 
 to many favored personages ; or that his claims 
 stood in the way of illustrious birth united to 
 obscure merit ; or that the patronage of the Home 
 Department, was at all hazards to be defended 
 against every inroad of desert as well as of parlia- 
 mentary recommendation All we know is the 
 fact, that Mr. Parry is not in the Commission." 
 
 Now with respect to Mr. Parry, I think it is 
 not difficult to give an answer to the above interro- 
 gatory of the learned Chairman. Mr. Parry, as I 
 believe, is the author of a large volume upon the 
 Berkshire Charities, in which, certainly with more 
 zeal than discretion, he has proceeded upon very 
 imperfect information to accuse corporations and 
 
 K
 
 respectable individuals of gross misconduct; in- 
 deed, upon such deficient evidence, that, as I am 
 about to show, he found himself under the obliga- 
 tion of unequivocally recanting in a public news- 
 paper. But the case to which I allude, will speak 
 hest for itself. After having, upon very imperfect 
 information, made a general charge against the 
 charities of Berkshire, Mr. Parry proceeds to make 
 the following distinct accusation against the free- 
 school of New Windsor. " The free-school on 
 the north side of the church-yard is for clothing and 
 educating 30 boys and 20 girls. I have been in- 
 formed by a gentleman of Windsor (but I do not 
 vouch for the accuracy of Jhe statement), that the 
 income of this school is 400/. per annum ; that it 
 has fallen into the hands of a butcher, a stationer, 
 who is the school-master, and a linen-draper, who 
 supply their respective commodities for the use of 
 the school, and contrive that their bills shall pre- 
 cisely correspond with the amount of the school- 
 funds. Some inquiry is about to be instituted at 
 the instigation of respectable persons in and near 
 Windsor, respecting this establishment.". Now, 
 Sir, in answer to this charge, it will be sufficient to 
 remark, that the trustees are the Dean of Windsor, 
 two senior Canons, the Mayor, two senior Alder- 
 men, and the Vicar. ' There is neither butcher nor 
 linen-draper at all engaged in the management of 
 the school ; and the schoolmaster, who is not a 
 stationer, supplies no article whatever for the use
 
 75 
 
 of the establishment, directly or indirectly ; all 
 orders for books, clothing, &c. are given in the 
 general monthly meeting of trustees, which is regu- 
 larly summoned ; and all payments are made from, 
 the same source : that no inquiry was about to be 
 instituted, nor was ever in contemplation, as the 
 inhabitants of New Windsor considered the inte- 
 rests of the Charity sufficiently guarded by the 
 character of the trustees, and because the accounts 
 are constantly open to the inspection of every sub- 
 scriber. Indeed, Sir, so satisfactory did this answer 
 appear to Mr. Parry, that he immediately re- 
 tracted his charges in the following public letter 
 to the editor of a Berkshire newspaper. 1 " Sir ; 
 the account which you have given of the Windsor 
 Free-School, at least of the funds belonging to it, 
 in your paper of this week, has been highly grati- 
 fying to me, as it corrects an egregious error into 
 which I had been unwittingly led, and as it de- 
 monstrates the florishing state of an useful and 
 charitable establishment. I trust, Sir, that the 
 example which has thus been given by Windsor, 
 through your means, will be followed by all the 
 county with respect to all its charities, to the satis- 
 faction of the public, to the confusion of those who 
 have mismanaged these funds, and to the justifica- 
 tion of others, who, as in the example I am now 
 speaking about, may have been falsely accused. I 
 
 1 See the Windsor and Reading Journal, Aug. 23d, 1818.
 
 76 
 
 am most ready to admit, that my account of this 
 establishment was completely erroneous." 
 
 As to the other Berkshire Charities, I would 
 refer you, Sir, and I do it with great pleasure, to 
 the four Windsor and Reading papers, published 
 "between the 9th and 23d of August last, in which 
 the corporation of New Windsor, or some of their 
 able friends, have published not only an answer to 
 Mr. Parry's book, but an account of the funds and 
 disbursement of the several endowed charities at 
 New Windsor, and of the old and improved rents. 
 It will appear by these, Sir, that no charities in the 
 kingdom are better managed ; that the estates of 
 these charities are well let and most discreetly 
 managed ; and that the corporation and trustees, 
 considering themselves not only as stewards of the 
 charity of others, but as contributors to the neces- 
 sities of their fellow-townsmen, have in many cases 
 assisted the produce of the charitable funds, and 
 that most of these charities are actually in debt 
 to the trustees. 
 
 And, indeed, this is so particularly the case in 
 the Reading Charities, and is so manifest from the 
 
 C ' 
 
 evidence published by the Hon. Gentleman in his 
 Appendix, that it is really amazing to me how he 
 could point to these charities as examples of abuse. 1 
 Mr. William Andrews (Appendix, p. 12.) is 
 asked, " Is there a balance in favor or against the 
 
 i 
 
 See Letter to Sir Samuel HomiHy, p. 18.
 
 corporation upon the whole of the (Reading) 
 charities, including Laud's, Aldworth's, Rich's, 
 "West's, Malthus's ?" Answer : " Excepting Laud's, 
 but as to the other four there is a balance 
 against the charities." All the estates of the cha- 
 rities appear to be let at their full worth : indeed 
 Aldworth's charity being now let at 4007. per 
 annum, with a condition that it should be in- 
 creased to 500/. after a certain term, the trustees 
 have found it necessary to take only the 400/. ; 
 and " probably," adds Mr. Wilson, " there will 
 be a disposition to relieve the tenant stillmore." * 
 The fund of this charity is 4000/., which was laid 
 out in land about 150 years since. Before 1811 
 the rent of these lands appears to have been only 
 1967- To a question by the Committee, whether 
 this was a fair rent, Mr. Andrews replies, "that 
 they produce as much as lands in the neighbour- 
 hood let at a fair rent." To a further question, 
 whether the tenant is connected with the corpo- 
 ration, he replies in the negative, and adds, 
 " There is a strong opposition to letting of lands 
 to persons of that description ; but I should say, 
 that generally charitable estates have been put up 
 to the highest bidder, to be let by tender, which 
 has been found disadvantageous in general, by 
 inducing needy persons to bid beyond what they 
 ought. They have been generally let by tender." 
 
 : 1} ' - 1 Appendix, p. 9.
 
 78 
 
 He further adds, " If I were to look through that 
 book, (viz. the account of the corporation dealings 
 with the charities,) I believe ? shall not find the 
 name of any one corporation-man." I shall not 
 enlarge further upon the Reading Chanties, as the 
 evidence is all contained in the first twelve pages 
 of Mr. Brougham's Appendix; and is, in itself, an 
 answer to all the allegations made against them. 
 So far from any embezzlement or mismanagement, 
 the charilies are the actual debtors to the trustees. 
 Their estates are all managed with the zeal and 
 accuracy of private property, and are only in 
 debt, because t;he benevolence of the trustees ex- 
 ceeds the utmost possible receipts of even liberal 
 funds. 
 
 Mr. Brougham proceeds to complain of the 
 reluctance of the several public institutions to pro- 
 duce their titles and charters of foundations. I 
 can easily imagine the grounds of this reluctance. 
 I need not suggest to you, Sir, that many of our 
 schools and colleges were founded in remote and 
 superstitious ages ; and that many of them origi- 
 nated under particular circumstances, and are ac- 
 companied with statutes of regulation and exercise, 
 which, however respectable according to the piety 
 and simplicity of the age in which they originated, 
 would only provoke the ridicule of the philoso- 
 phers and economists of the nineteenth century. 
 The gentlemen, therefore, belonging to these foun- 
 dations, felt only as you and I, Sir, should have
 
 79 
 
 felt, (humbly speaking for myself,) had we been 
 present on the Committee when the Honorable 
 Chairman required the production of the charters 
 of Christ Church, Oxford, and Trinity College, 
 Cambridge. They felt, Sir, as a certain personage 
 in a book, doubtless well known to the Honorable 
 Gentleman, is said to have felt, they would fain 
 have turned their backs, and covered the naked- 
 ness of their father. Their charters were, however, 
 produced; and for one, Sir, I greatly regret that 
 they were so. For one, Sir, I would have de- 
 murred to the order of the Hon. Chairman, and 
 would have put it to the vote of the House of 
 Commons, whether a Committee of one branch 
 of the legislature could constitutionally assume a 
 power which, upon just principles, ought not to 
 be exercised by the whole legislature itself. I am 
 not, Sir, one of those who are for limiting the 
 powers of Parliament by any distinction between 
 fundamental and statutory laws, but I must cer- 
 tainly recognise a wide difference between matters 
 of establishment and temporary regulation ; and I 
 hold it neither politic nor constitutional to meddle 
 with titles of property, and the landmarks and 
 privileges of institutions contemporary with the 
 state itself. It is a contempt of that prescription 
 upon which government itself rests. Upon what 
 ground, I would ask, should the titles of colleges, 
 halls, and schools, be less respected than those of 
 private property? 'Is it decent to have them
 
 80 
 
 printed as the appendices of the pamphlets ? Why 
 are the charitable wills of founders in early ages 
 to be held up to public ridicule ? Why should not 
 the same feeling interpose as would have mani- 
 fested itself in the feeling of every gentleman In 
 the Committee, if the Hon. Chairman had called 
 for the will of their grandfathers or grandmothers? 
 Surely, Sir, there should be some limits to the 
 powers of a Committee. The principle upon which 
 the Education Committee acted, in some instances, 
 would confound principles hitherto deemed set- 
 tled ; and, should a future Committee be appoint- 
 ed to consider of the expediency of a turnpike- 
 road, or a navigable canal, they might proceed 
 upon the same principle to require the titles of 
 all the noblemen and gentlemen through whose 
 grounds such road or canal was to pass. 
 
 Perhaps indeed many persons of a more sober 
 judgment have wished, that a larger scope of par- 
 liamentary privilege had retained the publication of 
 the Reports within the discretion of the House, and 
 had prohibited them from being printed, as ex-par te 
 comments on ex-parte statements ; as appeals to 
 the public, instead of evidence, in information, to 
 the discreet judgment of parliament itself. Many 
 perhaps have also wished, that a wider compass of 
 the law of libei had cut off something of the plea- 
 sant device of libelling by innuendo ; of a writer's 
 insinuating what he would not venture to state, and 
 of taking the vengeance of an. adversary without
 
 81 
 
 the responsibility of an accuser. I beg leave to 
 add, Sir, that had these minutes of evidence been 
 confined to the parliamentary reports, and not been 
 selected and subjoined by the Honorable Chairman 
 to his letter, and therein made a part of his 
 pamphlet, I should not have taken them as the 
 subject of the preceding observations. 
 
 Mr. Brougham then proceeds to a particular 
 attack upon the foundation of Winchester School 
 and College. The statutes, he says, limit the 
 benefits of the foundation to the poor and indi- 
 gent; "but the scholars and fellows of Winchester 
 are in fact all children of persons in easy circum- 
 stances, and many of opulent parents. The boys, 
 when they attain the age of fourteen, solemnly 
 swear that they have not 31. 6s. a-year to spend ; 
 yet, as a practical commentary on this oath, they 
 pay !()/. 10,?. a-year to the masters, and the ave- 
 rage of their other expenses exceed 50/. If any 
 boy come into the possession of property to the 
 amount of 51. a-year, he is to be expelled ; but 
 this is now construed 661. 13*. 4d. No boy 
 should be admitted above twelve years of age. 
 This is wholly disregarded. The fellowships are 
 augmented by a liberal interpretation, whilst the 
 payments to the scholars are limited under the 
 strictest construction, &c. &c. The revenue is 
 between 13,000 and 14,000/. a-year. The yearly 
 expense of the foundation-scholars, as now borne 
 by their parents, is between 60 and 701. so that 
 
 L
 
 tt 
 
 there can be no reason for not paying the whole 
 out of the revenue, as obviously intended by the 
 founder. Why not increase the number of seventy 
 scholars? Why not reduce the fellowships to the 
 ordinary value of those at Oxford and Cambridge? 
 Why alter the original statutes against the express 
 injunction of the founder ? " ' 
 
 With respect to the first of these objections, 
 pauperes et indigentes, Mr. Brougham omits the 
 qualifications with which these pauperes are to 
 offer themselves, and without which they are not 
 eligible. The clause runs thus, " Quodque omnes 
 et Binguli in idem collegium nostrum prope Winton 
 in scholarec eligendi, sint pauperes et indigentes, 
 bonis moribus et conditionibus perornati, ad sta- 
 dium habiles, et conversatione honesti, in Icctura, 
 piano cantu, et antique donate competentes in- 
 structi, Rubric 2do." Now, Sir, pauperes* I 
 should humbly presume are never, in the common 
 acceptation of the word, paupers bonis moribus et 
 conditionibus perornati, nor antiquo donato com- 
 petentes instructi. I have been informed, indeed, 
 by a very eminent person long connected with 
 this foundation, and whose remembrance reaches 
 through fifty-six years, that none have been ad- 
 mitted on the foundation of Winchester, but those 
 to whom either present advantages or future ex- 
 pectations have been objects desirable and accep- 
 
 1 Letter to Sir Samuel Romilly, p. 512.
 
 table in the view of their parents, who have been 
 commonly either clergymen with lifehold benefices, 
 or gentlemen of moderate fortunes but large fami- 
 lies, or professional or mercantile men whose in- 
 come was precarious. The boys voluntarily "give 
 ten guineas." In the year 1766 a solemn appeal 
 was made to the visitor (Bishop Thomas) against 
 the statutable legality of these gratuities. The 
 Visitor's reply conveyed his idea and judgment, 
 that as the founder forbids only " exigere, ven- 
 dicare, aut petere," but does not prohibit " ac- 
 cipere," he meant to prohibit only any claims 
 for fees on account of instruction. If the let- 
 ter of the statute is to be observed, the mas- 
 ters are bound to teach Latin only. They 
 teach also Greek, and on that account merit 
 remuneration. Sumptuary laws are frequently 
 made by the governors of the college ; but parents 
 choose that their sons should conform to what is 
 fashionable amongst young persons, and thus de- 
 feat the regulations of the masters to keep down 
 expenses. If bills therefore are high, parents must 
 blame themselves. The construction of 51. per 
 annum into 661. 13*. 4id., was established at New 
 College by the visitor, who took into consideration 
 the depreciation of money, since 1393, and the 
 evident design of the founder, that, except in case 
 of marriage, a fellow was not to be deprived unless 
 he had a maintenance adequate to his fellowship. 
 By parity of reason, therefore, a scholar is not to
 
 be deprived, unless he has a certain income equal 
 to the expenses of school education. It is true that 
 the warden, fellows, and scholars, swear to ob- 
 serve the statutes ; but, in common candor and in 
 common sense, Mr. Brougham should have allowed 
 that the oath is binding so far only as possibility 
 admits. The honorable Chairman is contending 
 that 51. per annum should literally be the maximum 
 tenable with a scholarship: now, putting gratuities 
 out of the question, how, from 51. per annum, is a 
 boy to pay for his clothes, washing, books, jour- 
 nies ? With the exception of one gown yearly, and 
 some articles to the consangwnets, the statutes 
 make no provision for clothes, washing, books, 
 journies, &c. How, moreover, are boys to be 
 supported when discommoned, as by statute they 
 may be ? In fact, if actual paupers were admitted, 
 and the letter of the statutes observed, they could 
 not in truth remain in the college, through the want 
 of means possessed either by their parents or them- 
 selves, for defraying charges for which the college 
 is not required to be answerable. The admission 
 of " pauperes" thus circumstanced, would be to 
 them an act of cruelty, because a sure source of 
 debt, disgrace, and misery. The Hon. Chairman 
 appears to be guilty of a strange degree of inadvert- 
 ence in his next assertion. ft It is strictly enjoined 
 that no boy shall be admitted above 12 years of 
 age. This is wholly disregarded." ' Now, Sir, 
 
 1 Letter to Sir S. Romilly, p. 52.
 
 85 
 
 permit me to confront him with the clause itself. 
 It runs thus ; " Nullusque in dictum nostrum col- 
 legium prope Winton aclmittatur, qui octavum 
 aetatis suae annum non compleverit, vel duodeci- 
 mum aetatis suae annum excesserit, NISI infra 
 septimum decimum aetatis suae annum constitutus, 
 taliter forsan in grammatics fuerit informatus, quod 
 ante decimum octavum aetatis suss annum com- 
 pletum, judicio eligentium in grammatica suffici- 
 enter potent expediri." Rub. 2. 
 
 In no part of the statutes K> a money payment 
 assigned to those scholars who are not consanguine! 
 fundatoris. For the commons of each scholar the 
 bursar is to expend &d. per week, i. e. I/. 14s. 8d. 
 in the year. Now if we take into consideration 
 what is expended for bread, cheese, butter, meal, 
 beer, fire, attendance of servants, &c. we may cal- 
 culate that each scholar costs the college 40/. per 
 annum. Of this augmentation from the literal 
 I/. 14$. Sd. to 40/. per annum on account of com- 
 mons, the consanguinei fundatoris partake : and, 
 besides that benefit, share among the ten 20/. per 
 annum, which they apply as pocket money Whe- 
 ther provisions are dear or cheap, the same com- 
 mons are allowed to the consanguineis ; and in that 
 allowance they in fact enjoy a liberal construction 
 of the statute. By rubric 1 3, breakfasts are not 
 allowed to boys aged 15; by usage, they are al- 
 lowed to boys of all ages. By statutes, no provi- 
 sion is made for fire in the seven chambers or
 
 86 
 
 school ; by usage, a large supply of faggots for the 
 chambers, and coals for the school, is furnished at 
 the expense of the college. By rubric 34, boys 
 under 14 years of age are to lye two in a bed, in 
 six chambers ; by usage, every boy has a single 
 bed in seven chambers. In these provisions thus 
 made by usage, there is a liberal construction of 
 the statute. So with respect to chaplains. By 
 statute they could claim but Ql. per annum money 
 payment; 2/. 12*. 6d. (rub. 26) in commons ; 
 (rub. 1 3) and 31. 3s. 4d. robe money. By usage, 
 each chaplain has a certain income of more than .50/. 
 per annum. I shall therefore leave it to you, Sir, 
 to judge with how much fairness the Hon. Chair- 
 man makes the assertion, " That whilst the fellow- 
 ships are augmented in revenue by a liberal inter- 
 pretation, &c. the strictest construction is adopted 
 as to the payment to scholars, &c." 
 
 With respect to the refusal of knives, forks, 
 spoons, &c. as charged by the honorable gen- 
 tleman, the ground of refusal is, the certainty of 
 their being spoiled or lost, if bought by the col- 
 lege. Boys would attach no value to such articles 
 
 O ( J 
 
 if bought by the college ; but they are careful of 
 such articles bought by themselves. For many, 
 years, silver cups, six in number, were daily set 
 before the scholars for beer; but such was the 
 abuse and injury done to them, that the battered 
 remnant was withdrawn. With respect to the in- 
 
 1 Letter to Sir Samuel Bomilly, p. 52.-
 
 87 
 
 creased revenues, Mr. Brougham should recollect 
 the very great expense of keeping the college in re- 
 pair; the manifold contingencies for which large 
 sums are annually claimed ; and the surplus which 
 such a society ought in common prudence to re- 
 serve in order to meet unforeseen exigencies. Mr. 
 Brougham states, (page 53,) that the expense of 
 educating a boy is between 60 and 701. per an- 
 num : but in the preceding page he stated 50/. as 
 the average expense, fees not included. He per- 
 haps forgot this, or if he had not forgotten it, he 
 ought to have added, t( ten guineas of which how- 
 ever are voluntary gratuities." He proceeds to 
 state, that " there cannot be any fair reason for not 
 defraying the whole of this (60 or 701. per annum) 
 out of the revenues, as the founder obviously in- 
 tended." But the honorable gentleman is war- 
 ranted neither by the letter nor the spirit of the 
 statutes in this assertion. By the letter, the scho- 
 lars, not consanguinei, can claim only commons 
 (rub. 13) and one gown yearly (rub. 27.) The 
 founder did not mean that articles of clothes, &c. 
 should be given to the non-consanguineis ; for he 
 limits the supply of such articles to consanguineis 
 only (rub. 2.) Upon the whole it appears, that he 
 designed considerable aid, but not entire support, 
 to the non-consanguineis. If it be asked why the 
 non-consanguinei do not receive the clothes specified 
 in rubric 2. the answers may be several ; 1st, the 
 birth, and condition of the consanguinei place them
 
 88 
 
 above the want of articles, the acceptance of which 
 would be degrading ; 2d, in the increase of com- 
 mons since the founder's days, and in their quar- 
 terly money payment, the " consanguine!" have 
 their compensation; 3d, when the founder or- 
 dained that the consanguine! should live in the col- 
 lege, " supportatis oneribus" (rub. 2) he conceived 
 the number of them would be so small, as to doubt 
 whether sometimes any would be found : for he 
 rests their admission on the contingency " Si qui 
 tales sint." (rub. 2.) The funds of the college were 
 adequate to the maintenance of a number thus 
 small ; but the reformation was followed by a con- 
 sequence which he neither foresaw nor intended. His 
 clerical consanguinei married. Hence they were mul- 
 tiplied to a number which exceeded beyond all calcu- 
 lation, the founder's idea ; and the maintenance of 
 all who now gain admission as <( scholares consan- 
 guinei" would require a greater sum than the funds 
 of the College could afford, consistently with other 
 just and statutable claims. Those who decided on 
 the cases of consanguinei from 1579 to 1651, pro- 
 ceeded on a conviction, that the founder never 
 intended that so many should be admitted as non- 
 offer themselves on the plea of consanguinity. 1 
 With respect to the Honorable Chairman's pro- 
 posal, of enlarging the number of scholars, (page 
 53) I have only to say, that the founder's charter 
 
 < 'ill* s .!.'!,' i a 
 
 1 See Burn's Ecc. Law, Artie. Colleges.
 
 was for a limited number ; addition to this number 
 would violate his charter. 
 
 I would venture to put it to any man, whether 
 solemn ordinances of this kind are to be disregard- 
 ed as only waste paper ? If rights thus conferred, 
 and explicitly defined, are wantonly to be infringed, 
 there is an end to the security of property. 
 
 The Honorable Gentleman then proceeds to hint 
 an amendment, by reducing the fellowships to the 
 ordinary value of those at Oxford and Cambridge. 
 This would be to place men who consider them- 
 selves as settled for life, and who are not prohibited 
 to marry, in the same pecuniary circumstances 
 as men who are professedly but transient members 
 of their respective societies, and are impeded from 
 marriage. Such a reduction, Sir, would be no less 
 unwise and cruel than oppressive and arbitrary. 
 The world expects that a fellow, or warden of 
 Winchester College, should live, not indeed iu a 
 manner sumptuous or magnificent, but certainly in 
 a style suited to his rank in society. The whole 
 income and emoluments of a fellow or warden are 
 not more than adequate to his exigencies in a state 
 of celibacy. A family man, whether fellow or 
 warden, cannot, from his collegiate income and 
 emoluments alone, defray his unavoidable expenses 
 for the year ; much less can he accumulate any 
 property for his relations. 
 
 The learned gentleman adds, that the visitors' 
 M
 
 injunctions are in contravention of the statutes of 
 the college. To me, Sir, they appear but the 
 rational construction of statutes corresponding with 
 what is apprehended to be the true meaning of the 
 founder, or declarations of what the founder would 
 probably WILL, under a state of circumstances, 
 submitted to visitors who are his representatives. 
 Their office and powers are not, to enact in contra- 
 diction, but to interpret in unison with the founder. 
 A consideration of the Honorable Chairman's 
 attack upon Winchester College, and an examina- 
 tion of the statutes, suggest these inferences: 
 1st* No one is qualified to pass judgment on the 
 governors of Winchester College, who is not 
 thoroughly acquainted with their statutes ; who 
 will not consider that the reformation created a 
 new character in the clergy of this country ; who 
 will not admit that the universal discontinuance of 
 many usages annuls the necessity of many obser- 
 vances ; who will not acknowledge, that, through 
 change of manners, opinions, and laws, strict 
 obedience to the statutes is in some cases inexpe- 
 dient, in some cases impracticable, in some impossi- 
 ble. 2nd. The great objects prominent in the 
 founder's mind, and predominant in his statutes, 
 are the promotion of learning, morals, piety; and 
 a strict attention to the " commodum, utilitas, 
 honos," of the college. The former appears in his 
 introductory declarations ; the latter in rubrics 3, 
 6, 7, 1 1, 26\ The governors of the college have
 
 these leading objects constantly and steadily in 
 their view; they direct all their proceedings to-> 
 wards the attainment of these ends ; and, by thus 
 acting, they humbly conceive that they conduct the 
 system in a manner corresponding with their 
 founder's intention, so far as their means and powers 
 will enable them ; and to a degree of public advan- 
 tage compatible to the utmost with the operation 
 of causes and effects not under their control. 
 
 I have occupied you longer, Sir, on this case, 
 because it includes those of Eton and Westminster, 
 the statutes of which are nearly similar, and the 
 terms pauperes et indigcntes accompanied with the 
 like description, and are of course to be understood 
 with the same qualifications ; that is, pauperes et 
 indigentes as relative to the sons and heirs of gentle- 
 men of established property, but assuredly not 
 pauperes et indigentes as parish and mendicant poor. 
 The terms bonis moribus et conditioriibus peror- 
 nati 1 wholly exclude this latter idea. The inten- 
 tion of the founders appears to have been in almost 
 all cases to afford an education which should 
 supply the secular clergy and the law ; the greater 
 part of these founders, according to the manners of 
 that age, uniting the office of Bishops and Chan- 
 cellors, and most of them, much to their honor, 
 
 1 Vide the Statutes of Eton College, 4 Rep. p. 226. The 
 words ia Statute 3d., descriptive of the condition of the 
 pauperes, are almost similar to those in the Winchester 
 Statutes.
 
 92 
 
 derived from that condition of life which in that ase 
 
 o 
 
 was relatively pauper et indigens. Is it necessary 
 to inform the Honorable Gentleman, so vvell read in 
 Strype's Memorials, that the gentry of the present 
 day is a description of men peculiarly belonging to 
 modern manners, and to those changes of property 
 introduced by commerce, manufactures, and the 
 dissolution of the feudal system ? This kind of 
 gentry was totally unknown in the age of the 
 greater part of these founders. The words pau- 
 peres et indigentes were not adopted as a descrip- 
 tion to exclude them. It was taken only as 
 descriptive of that class above villainage. Therefore 
 the pauperes et indigentes, bonis moribus et condi* 
 tionibus perornati, of that age, exactly correspond 
 with the sons of clergymen of large families, and 
 with professional men of precarious fortymes of the 
 present day. And let me ask the Honorable 
 Gentleman (if he be at all acquainted with public 
 schools) whether the majority of this class does not 
 compose their foundations at the present day ? 
 
 Mr. Brougham then passes to the disappointment 
 of his hopesj in being omitted in the Commission 
 appointed by the crown, together with other gen- 
 tlemen whom he had proposed, and whose names 
 were submitted in "a List "to the Secretary of 
 State for the home department, to execute a par- 
 liamentary trust. He charges this upon His Ma- 
 jesty's Ministers, as a criminal abuse of their pa- 
 tronage, and of the trust reposed in them. But I
 
 93 
 
 should wish to ask the honorable Gentleman, whe- 
 ther he founds his claim to this preference upon 
 his exactness in the commentary upon the cases 
 just adduced, or upon the moderation and impar- 
 tiality manifested in his discussion ? Let me put 
 it to his candor, whether a Commission of this 
 kind ought not to be composed of gentlemen who 
 had in no degree prejudged subjects in which they 
 were commissioned to inquire ? Was it not a 
 matter of necessity, not to say courtesy, to intro- 
 duce two reverend prelates as honorary commis- 
 sioners of a board, the subject-matter of whose 
 proceedings was necessarily to affect so much 
 church property ? Was it not equally necessary 
 to guard the honor and privileges of the universi- 
 ties, and the constitutional pre-eminence of the 
 established church, by persons of an assured at-' 
 tachment to them, by a representative of the one, 
 and by dignitaries of the other ? Are not the pre- 
 lates, under the Act, chosen with the due impar- 
 tiality and equality betweeen the two universities ? 
 Is it necessary to inform the Honorable Gentleman, 
 that both of these prelates are of as active habits 
 for business as, in his zeal for the success of the 
 Committee, he himself could desire ? If the Bishop 
 of London be omitted, possibly the labors of the 
 most populous diocese in the kingdom could not 
 well consist with the duties of the proposed inquiry. 
 Was it not equally necessary to take a due security 
 for the sober meddling with the rights of property,
 
 94 
 
 by the introduction of Commissioners of the due 
 professional knowledge and habits, and of high 
 legal reputation ? And by what persons could 
 these objects be better secured, than by the Speaker 
 of the House of Commons, Sir Wm. Grant, and 
 Mr. Yorke ? With respect to yourself, Sir, I find 
 it difficult to express myself in a personal address ; 
 but I am persuaded that the public can have but 
 one opinion on the subject. I must really confess, 
 that when I look over the names of the hono- 
 rary Commissioners, I find myself impressed with 
 very different feelings from those of the Honorable 
 Chairman, and am more inclined to express a 
 warm admiration of that wisdom and choice of 
 the Secretary of State for the Home Department, 
 by which he has provided for the salutary exe- 
 cution of this Act of Parliament; and, at the 
 same time, for the due maintenance of the best 
 interests of the state. 
 
 With respect to the stipendiary Commissioners, 
 I cannot but express some surprise at the mode 
 with which the Honorable Chairman has canvassed 
 their qualifications and appointments. They are 
 all members of the same profession with himself, 
 and most of them gentlemen of known habits of 
 business and of adequate ability. 
 
 Let me ask Mr. Brougham what fitter gentlemen 
 the Secretary of State could have nominated ? 
 They are chosen from that class of the bar, which, 
 with the suitable experience and ability, could alone
 
 95 
 
 undertake the office. Some names I see in the 
 list eminently distinguished in one or other of the 
 Universities. Many of them have given further 
 proof of great professional talent ; nor is it candid 
 to insinuate, that they have been chosen for mere 
 political services. The Honorable Gentleman 
 (from his own knowledge of what is usual in public 
 business) might have inferred, that they were pos- 
 sibly appointed in the ordinary mode of such 
 nominations ? Probably the gentlemen might have 
 proposed themselves as candidates for the office ; 
 and according to such list the best selection might 
 have been made. Of course, Sir, I can only speak 
 conjecturally how these gentlemen were chosen ; 
 but be the mode of choice what it might, I am 
 persuaded that the whole profession of the law will 
 concur in the opinion, that no fitter men could be 
 found amongst the class of barristers who were 
 duly qualified and could accept it 
 
 Perhaps the Honorable Chairman would not 
 have much lessened the force of his argument by 
 treating some of these gentlemen with more cour- 
 tesy. " Past services" are at least as good a 
 qualification for ministerial preference as present 
 insults. " Illustrious birth" l might probably be 
 some impediment in the way of new-fangled 
 notions and practices. It might feel some dis- 
 inclination to encourage and forward any breaking-, 
 up of the present system of property, and any re- 
 
 1 Letter to Sir S. Romilly, p. 38.
 
 96 
 
 distribution of the funds of the church or charities, 
 to the contempt of the established law or the will 
 of the donor. 
 
 It might be difficult to persuade gentlemen of 
 "illustrious birth," that their ancient titles are to 
 be regarded as qualified by present use ; that the 
 principles of Adam Smith and the Scotch econo- 
 mists are to supersede the established maxims of 
 the law of the land and of the constitution ; and 
 that the legislature may better comply with the 
 will of the founder of a charity by a total deviation 
 and change in its objects ; that the poor are not 
 like the church, or any other corporation, an 
 existing body of persons ; but that one description 
 of the poor is as good as another ; and that each 
 has equal rights, according to the discretion of the 
 legislature, to a fund which the founder may have 
 appropriated to the other ; * that the revenue of 
 Pocklington school might be conveniently trans- 
 ferred to Mr. Lancaster ; and that the Spital cha- 
 rity might better administer to the relief of its 
 brethren of the same name in Spitalfields. If the 
 Honorable Chairman had any such views for this 
 classification and new arrangement of charitable 
 funds, I cannot dispute his consistency in objecting 
 to gentlemen of " illustrious birth" in the Commis- 
 sion. 
 
 But as the Honorable Gentleman appears solici- 
 tous to understand why the names of himself and 
 
 1 Letter to Sir S. Romilly, p. 64.
 
 97 
 
 Mr. Babington, (a name certainly never to be 
 mentioned without respect,) were omitted in the 
 Commission, I think I can summarily inform him : 
 first, because as the appointment of the Committee 
 belonged to the Crown, and to the Secretary of 
 State for the Home Department, as its officer ; 
 and, as it was a subject of great importance to 
 guard so many fundamental interests; the Ministers 
 possibly felt it to be their duty that the appointment 
 by them should be an -effectual selection, and not 
 a complimentary nomination ; and, as the respon- 
 sibility attached to them, that they should have* 
 the designation. Secondly, because the Honorable 
 Gentleman and Mr. Babington were both members 
 of the Committee ; which, in the very process of 
 the examinations taken before them, necessarily 
 assumed a kind of ex-parte character, disqualifying 
 them from forming anew board of inquiry upon 
 subjects in which they had already appeared as 
 accusers. It was probably under, these circum- 
 stances that his Majesty's Ministers thought fit to 
 pass over all the members who composed the 
 Committee. Thirdly, as respects the Honorable 
 Chairman himself, His Majesty's Ministers, per- 
 haps, saw nothing in the general tone of his lan- 
 guage and conduct, whilst the Bill was under dis- 
 cussion, which could induce them to exempt him 
 from these reasons of general expediency. Nor 
 could they affront his consistency, by requiring
 
 98 
 
 him to take a part in the execution of a Bill which 
 he had denounced throughout ; and which, now 
 that it has become a law, he holds up almost as a 
 mockery to the public. Is it not, indeed, almost 
 a new thing for an opposition member, inquiring 
 into public abuses, to give a "list" of his own 
 immediate friends for the patronage of the mini- 
 ster ? It would be, perhaps, a still more dangerous 
 novelty for a minister to adopt such list, and to 
 seek a compliment to his liberality at the expense 
 of hfe public and ministerial duty. 
 
 His Majesty's Ministers, therefore, have not 
 " mutilated " the Act from any disinclination to 
 pursue the inquiry into charitable abuses. No 
 one, indeed, can understand how such abuses can 
 in any degree attach to themselves. The appoint- 
 ments and patronage of these charities are no part 
 of their ministerial power. They may feel, indeed, 
 a reluctance to encourage the creation of an extra- 
 ordinary power for canvassing the titles of property 
 and establishments. They know, indeed, that " the 
 season has passed away, when the country could 
 be frightened out of a necessary attention to the 
 management of its affairs ; " ' but they are afraid 
 that the season still exists, in which a popular 
 leader may employ public reform as the pretext for 
 general innovation ; and whilst he comes forth as 
 the champion of public abuses, may rally round 
 
 1 Letter to Sir S. Romilly, p. 4,6.
 
 99 
 
 liim a party to assist him in the objects of his per- 
 sonal ambition. 
 
 They are as zealous as the Honorable Gentleman 
 himself for the due education of the lower classes ; 
 but they would not pursue even this valuable ob- 
 ject at the expense of funds destined for the mid- 
 dle orders of life. They think " reading and 
 writing " are instruments of moral improvement ; 
 and, when connected with just notions of religion 
 and civil society, they would wish them as exten- 
 sive as the population. But they would not desire 
 to extend this instruction by confiscating the funds 
 of royal foundations and grammar schools, and 
 thus gradually working the overthrow of the 
 existing system of English education. They 
 think Winchester, Westminster, and Eton to be 
 destined to the education of another class than 
 the Philanthropic and Borough schools. They 
 think the education of the middle classes, from 
 which the learned professions are supplied, to be 
 no less useful to the public than the education of 
 the poor ; and they will not sanction the breaking 
 into funds which the will of the donor has set apart, 
 for assisting gentlemen of large families and small 
 fortunes to keep their children within the same 
 rank of life as themselves. They do not wish to 
 see the colleges and halls of our universities con- 
 verted into charity schools and alms-houses ; nor 
 can they divest themselves of " that romantic at- 
 tachment to the academic scenes of their early
 
 life," which, if they should suffer any. devastation 
 would excite in them something of the appre^ 
 hension of the ancient Druids, 
 
 " Si robora sacra ferirent, 
 In sua credebant redituras membra secures." 
 
 Lucan. 
 
 I have the honor to remain, with the highest 
 sentiments of esteem and regard, 
 
 Yours, &c. &c. 
 London, Oct. 1, 1818. 
 
 ' 
 
 . 
 
 ' 
 . . . 
 
 ,
 
 VINDICATION 
 
 OF 
 
 Zt)t UnquU'B into &artta&U 
 
 WITH AN EXPOSURE OF 
 
 MISREPRESENTATIONS CONTAINED IN 
 
 THE QUARTERLY REVIEW. 
 
 .Pant* egentium est vita paupenm, et gut defnudat tot homo sanguinit est. 
 
 LONDON; 
 
 PRINTED FOR LONGMAN, HURST, REES, ORME, 
 AND BROWN, PATERNOSTER-ROW. 
 
 1819.
 
 VINDICATION, &c. 
 
 J. HE importance of affording to all classes the means of 
 literary instruction, has in all civilized societies at times 
 occupied the attention of the philosopher and the politician, 
 and a conviction of its operation in producing an enlightened 
 obedience to the dictates of morality and religion, and 
 to the laws, was strongly impressed on the minds of our 
 ancestors. At early periods in our history, individuals were 
 led by such motives, to found establishments for imparting 
 the blessings of knowledge to their fellow creatures. 
 
 But, however the memory of these charitable persons is 
 to be revered for their beneficent intentions, it can scarcely 
 be disputed that the poor have as yet derived little benefit 
 from such institutions, and that ignorance, with the evils in- 
 separable from it, is still generally their lot. 
 
 The extraordinary events of the last 30 years, appear to 
 have awakened in legislators and statesmen the reflection, 
 that an accumulation of sanguinary laws and the strong arm 
 of power are not the most safe instruments to wield in the 
 government of a people, and that the diffusion of education, 
 knowledge, and morality, may perhaps, be a better security 
 for the reasonable obedience of mankind. That such opi- 
 nions are widely prevalent in the well informed classes of 
 society in this country is beyond a doubt, and they now 
 appear in the conduct of every collective body known to 
 our constitution, where public opinion has any weight. 
 
 Such sentiments, however general, are apt to be repressed 
 B
 
 by the distrust of the timid in their own reasoning and experi- 
 ence, by the deference that others may properly entertain 
 for established laws and customs, and by the discountenance 
 manifested by governments to all innovation, however ne- 
 cessary ; and were it not that sometimes men arise whose 
 capacities, courage, and station, enable them to avail them- 
 selves of such fortunate inclinations in the people, the 
 opportunities of improvement would probably be for ever 
 lost. 
 
 To such men, we owe the abolition of the Slave Trade, 
 and the commencement of a reformation of our Penal Code, 
 and let us hope that the individual, who with such distin- 
 guished ability and courage has undertaken the more im- 
 portant cause of the Education of the Poor, will persevere 
 with the fortitude that animates his competitor for the title 
 of the Defender of the Slave, the indigent, and the op- 
 pressed. 
 
 Mr. Brougham in the pursuit of views so legitimate and 
 honourable, has been accused of attacking unwarrantably, 
 establishments and persons unconnected with the professed 
 object of the Committee of which he was chairman, and an 
 attempt is making with singular assiduity, to undermine the 
 foundation of every practicable plan for ameliorating the 
 condition of the wretched, by discrediting the principal 
 agent marked out by public voice for its execution. 
 
 It is not unusual with those whose charitable dispositions 
 have led them to examine by close inspection the origin of 
 the misery of the poor, to find the causes linked to some 
 abuse of power, to some advantage taken of the defenceless 
 state of the distressed, to stumble on corruptions disguised 
 by age, and reverenced from their utility to the rich, and 
 finally to suspect that the sentence pronounced, that man 
 should live by the sweat of his brow, is much aggravated 
 in its execution on a large portion of mankind. What has 
 happened to others has now occurred to Mr. Brougham, 
 but as he has ventured to express his indignation at such
 
 8 
 
 practices, he must consent to pay the usual price of teme- 
 rity. 
 
 His opponents are persons of various ranks, descriptions, 
 and characters. Some of them are possessed of lucrative 
 situations held under the establishments, the objects of which 
 have been supposed to be perverted they are men whom 
 the irritation of expectancy does not exasperate, whom enjoy- 
 ment has softened, and they defend themselves with learn" 
 ing, decency, and candour. In their discussion on the sta- 
 tutes and laws which regulate their foundations and describe 
 the persons for whose benefit they were instituted, they have 
 not contended that by the expressions of thepoor and indigent 
 scholar as used in these documents, the rich are obviously 
 designated, but only that such terms, when interpreted by 
 practice and explained by inference and construction, 
 point at the powerful, the favoured, and the well con- 
 nected. 
 
 There are other opponents whose peculiar business it is 
 to defend all usages that are ancient, all established power, 
 to repress every liberal opinion, and to strengthen all the 
 boundaries that separate the classes of mankind. Upon this 
 occasion, however, they have departed from their usual 
 caution, and with a magnanimity that exceeds all praise, 
 have admitted they have no desire to see any abuse screened 
 from enquiry, and they only endeavour to defeat the pur- 
 pose, by objections to the means proposed for remedying the 
 mischief. 
 
 In estimating the enormity of any crime by the rules of 
 morality done, and without reference to the importance 
 which may be annexed to it by the severity of legislative 
 enactments, we are acquainted with no offences, that exceed 
 in atrocity the robbery and oppression of the poor. They are 
 frequently the immediate and more often the remote cause 
 of the restless jealousy and suspicion that exist between 
 the different orders in the community, and lay the ground- 
 work of those convulsions that shake states to their founda- 
 
 B 2
 
 tion. Whether this sin appears in the shape of insufficient 
 wages for their labour, of unjust distribution of taxation, 
 of direct perversion of funds destined for their use, or ot 
 evading the imputation of abuses, by confounding the mean- 
 ing of clear expressions, by the help of ingenious distinc- 
 tion, and the acute commentaries of learning and of talents, 
 the result is equally dangerous and revolting. 
 
 But however great these transgressions may be, it by no 
 means follows, that the laws intended for the security of 
 the innocent and for the defence of the guilty until convic- 
 tion, should be suspended to remedy such evils, or that 
 those against whom no crime shall be eventually proved, 
 ought to be harrassed, insulted, and oppressed, without re- 
 dress. Such expedients are odious. A charge, however, of 
 attempting something of this abominable nature seems to be 
 insinuated against the persons who principally attended, and 
 suggested or advised the proceedings of the Committee on 
 the Education of the Poor, and it is highly proper to ex- 
 amine whether so heavy an imputation rests on any autho- 
 rity. 
 
 The object of the following pages is to discuss the mea- 
 sures pursued by the Committee for enquiry into the Edu- 
 cation of the Poor, and of the charities devoted to that 
 purpose, and also to canvass the different charges which 
 have been brought against the Committee, and more par- 
 ticularly Mr. Brougham, the chairman. 
 
 Some time previously to the. year 1816, investigations in 
 the metropolis respecting the Education of the Poor had 
 taken place, and it had been discovered, that in different 
 parts of the town, many thousands of children were totally 
 destitute of instruction, and that, as may be naturally sup- 
 posed, this state of ignorance was accompanied by crime and 
 misery. 
 
 In 1816, a Select Committee was appointed to enquire 
 into the Education of the lower orders in the metropolis, 
 and to report their observations thereon, and the minutes of
 
 5 
 
 evidence. \_And to consider vehat might he Jit to be done 
 iKith respect to the children of paupers, who should be found 
 legging in the streets in and near the metropolis^ or tvho 
 should be carried about by persons asking charity, and whose 
 parents, or other persons tchom they had accompanied, had not 
 sent such children to any of the schools provided for the edu- 
 cation of poor children.*'} 
 
 This Committee met and heard a vast variety of evidence 
 on the several points thus referred to them for examination, 
 and they came to the conclusion in their report to the 
 House " that a large numher of poor children were wholly 
 *' without the means of instruction, although their parents 
 " appeared to be generally very desirous of obtaining that 
 " advantage for them ; that they observed with satisfaction 
 " the beneficial effects on that part of the population which 
 " was assisted in whole, or in part, by various charitable 
 " institutions enjoyed from the benefit of education, and 
 " they recommended that measures should be taken to supply 
 " the deficiency of means of education ; and the institution of 
 *' a Parliamentary Commission for enquiring into the ma- 
 *' nagement of charitable donations and other funds for the 
 ** instruction of the poor, and into the state of their educa- 
 " tion generally, especially in the larger towns " 
 
 No one who has taken any interest in these questions, 
 can be ignorant of the -importance of the evidence procured 
 by this Committee, both as to the state of education of 
 the poor, and the nature of the Charities by which h was 
 
 * This additional instruction, it is generally known, was moved by the 
 late Mr. George Rose and acceded to by Mr. Brougham, some time 
 after the Committee had been sitting on the subject of enquiry, for which 
 they were originally appointed* It is material that the reader should 
 bear this fact in mind, as it is one of the strong gro'intlt of the writers in 
 the Quarterly Review, for shewing what was the real nature and object 
 of the appointment of the Committee : is it to be supposed, that writers 
 10 well informed, could have been really ignorant of the fact above 
 stated ?
 
 6 
 
 supported ; up to this period, even the writers in the 
 Quarterly Review can find no blame. They admit that the 
 Minutes of the Committee in 1816, so far as they relate to the 
 Poor, " are interesting and important in the highest degree, 
 " and trust that none of the remarks which might arise 
 " upon the subsequent measures of the Chairman, would 
 " be considered as detracting in the least from the applause 
 " to which this part of the investigation is entitled." 
 
 In the succeeding year, Mr. Brougham's illness, pre- 
 vented the Committee from proceeding in their en- 
 quiries'*, they merely recommended in their report, that 
 the subject should be taken up at an early period of the 
 ensuing Session, expressing an opinion, that from the in- 
 formation communicated to them in the preceding Session 
 from various parts of the country, touching the state of 
 education, and more particularly the misapplication of funds 
 destined to that purpose, it would be expedient to extend 
 the instructions under which they acted, so as to embrace an 
 inquiry into the education of the lower orders, generally 
 throughout England and Wales. 
 
 parly in the Session of 1818, the Committee was again 
 appointed, under the title of " Select Committee on the 
 ' Education of the Lower Orders," and proceeded in the 
 further consideration of the subject referred to them, and 
 they so reported on the 17th of March, and recommended 
 that in the mean time, before their enquiries were concluded, 
 and to prevent deliiy, a Bill should be brought in for appoint- 
 ing Commissioners to enquire into the Abuses of Charities, 
 connected with the education of the poor. 
 
 A Bill was brought in by Mr. Brougham for the above 
 
 * It may perhaps appear from the' expressions in the Quarterly 
 Review, that it is doubted whether this was the real cause of the Com- 
 mittee not proceeding, but it is hardly to be supposed that the writers of 
 the article quoted could be ignorant of the fact of Mr. Brougham'i 
 illness. But the value of insinuation of design and artifice is fully known 
 to the Editors of this Journal.
 
 purposes, which after such alterations as in a great mea- 
 sure restricted its effect, passed into a law. Before the 
 dissolution of the Parliament, the Committee made a third 
 report, accompanied by an Appendix, containing the evi- 
 dence which they had collected respecting the abuses in dif- 
 ferent charities, which they had been enabled to select for 
 examination, either from the parochial returns, or from other 
 information afforded to them. An abstract of the most ma- 
 terial parts of this Report is subjoined*. 
 
 * The Committee stated, that siuce the report in 1816, they believed 
 the exertions of charitable individuals and public bodies in the metro- 
 polis had increased, and that the discussions had operated very satis- 
 factorily in improving the administration of the institutions for Educa- 
 tion, and that since the enquiries of the Committee had been extended 
 to the whole Island, they had reason to conclude, that the means of 
 educating the poor were steadily increasing in all considerable towns, 
 as well as ttie metropolis. A circular letter had been addressed to all 
 the clergy in England, Scotland, and Wales, requiring answers to 
 queries relating to the nature of the Schools, the children educated, 
 and the mode of teaching, and the nature of the foundations of the 
 charities for their support; that it was impossible to bestow too much 
 commendation upon the alacrity shewn by those reverend persons in 
 complying with this requisition, and the honest zeal which they dis- 
 played to promote the great object of universal Education ; that from 
 the returns, it appeared, as well as from other sources, that a very 
 great deficiency existed in the means of educating the poor, wherever 
 the population was thin, and scattered over country districts. The 
 efforts of individuals combined in societies, were almost wholly confined 
 to populous places. 
 
 The report proceeds : 
 
 Another point to which the Committee considered it material to direct 
 the attention of Parliament, regarded the two opposite principles, of 
 founding schools for children of all sorts, and for those only who belong 
 to the Established Church. Where the means exist of erecting two 
 schools, one upon each principle, education is not checked by the exclu- 
 sive plan being adopted in one of them, because the other may com- 
 prehend the children of sectaries. In places where only one school can 
 be supported, it is manifest that any regulation which excluded Dis- 
 senters, deprive the poor of that body of all means of education.
 
 The Bill, as introduced by Mr. Brougham, passed through 
 the House of Commons without any very material alteration, 
 
 The Committee, however, observed, that in many schools where the 
 national system was adopted, an increasing degree of liberality pre- 
 vailed, and that the Church catechism was only taught, anil attendance 
 at the established place of public worship only required, of those whose 
 parents belong to the establishment ; due assurance being obtained, 
 that the children of sectaries should learn the principles aud attend the 
 ordinances of religion, according to the doctrines and forms to which 
 their families were attached. 
 
 The Committee found reason to conclude, that the Roman Catholic 
 poor were anxious to avail themselves of those Protestant schools esta- 
 blished in their neighbourhood, in which no catechism was taught. 
 That in all the returns, and in all the other information laid before 
 them, there was the most unquestionable evidence, that the anxiety of 
 the poor for education continued not only unabated, but daily increasing; 
 that it extended to every part of the country, and was to be found 
 equally prevalent in those sma'ler towns and country districts, where no 
 means of gratifying it were provided by the charitable efforts of the 
 richer classes. 
 
 Two plans were suggested by the Committee?, as adviseable for pro- 
 moting universal education, adapted to the opposite circumstances of 
 the town and country districts. Wherever the efforts of individuals 
 could support the requisite number of schools, it would be unnecessary 
 and injurious to interpose any parliamentary assistance. But. the 
 Committee had clearly ascertained, that in many places, private sub- 
 scriptions could be raised to meet the yearly expences of a school, 
 while the original cost of the undertaking, occasioned chiefly by the 
 erection and purchase of the school -house, prevented it from being 
 attempted. 
 
 The Committee conceived, that a sum of money might be well 
 employed in supplying this first want, leaving the charity of individuals 
 to furnish the annual provision requisite for continuing the school, and 
 possibly for repaying the advance. 
 
 In the numerous districts where no aid from private exertions could 
 be expected, and where the poor were manifestly without adequate 
 means of instruction, the Committee were persuaded that nothing could 
 supply the deficiency but the adoption, under certain material modi- 
 fications of the parish school system, so usefully established in the 
 northern part of the Island, ever since the latter part of the seventeenth
 
 9 
 
 (except as to the appointment by the Crown of the Com- 
 missioners) and it was not till it went to the House of 
 Lords that some of the Ministers, (more particularly the 
 Lord Chancellor) altogether opposed the measure. 
 
 century, and upon which many important details were given in the 
 Appendix. 
 
 The more extended enquiries of the Committee, amply confirmed 
 the opinion which a more limited investigation had led them to form two 
 years before, upon the neglect and abuse of Charitable Funds, connected 
 with Education. The report adds, that although in many cases those 
 large funds appeared to h?ve. been misapplied through ignorance, or 
 mismanaged through carelessness, yet that some instances of abus* 
 had presented themselves, of such a nature, as would have led them 
 to recommend at an earlier period of the S'jssion, the institution of 
 proceedings for more promptly checking misappropriations, both in 
 the particular case, and by the force of a salutary example. 
 
 That as the Universities, Public Schools and Charities, with special 
 visitors, were exempted from the jurisdiction of the Commissioners, the 
 Committee occupied themselves in examining several of those Institu- 
 tions, and it unquestionably appeared, that considerable unauthorized 
 deviations had been made, in both Eton and Winchester, from the 
 original plans of the founders; that those deviations had been dictated 
 more by a regard to the interests of the Fellows than of the scholars, 
 who were the main object of the foundations, and of the founder's 
 bounty ; anrl that, although, in some respects they had proved bene- 
 ficial upon the whole to the institutions, yet that they had been, by 
 gradual encroachments in former times, carried too far. 
 
 That the Committee were fully persuaded, many great neglects and 
 abuses existed in Charities which bad special visitors; and it so hap- 
 pened, that the worst instance which they had met with, belonged to 
 that class; and that no visitatorial power vas exercised, until a few 
 months before, although the malversations had existed for many years. 
 
 The Committee further recommended, that as the Commission about 
 to be issued would be confined to the investigation of abuses, and as the 
 information, in the parochial returns, was not sufficiently detailed 
 respecting the stale of education generally, a Commission should also 
 be issued for the purpose of supplying that defect. And they con- 
 cluded their report, by observing, that in the course of their inquiries, 
 they incidentally observed, that charitable funds, connected with edu- 
 cation, were not alone liable to great abuses. Equal negligence and 
 .malversation appeared to have prevailed in all other Charities.
 
 10 
 
 As the exertions and conduct of Mr. Brougham have been 
 the subject of misrepresentation and animadversion, as every 
 remark that has been made by him on any individual has 
 been asserted to be personal satire, or to have been made 
 from motives of political hostility, or for the purpose of 
 attacking the national system of education and the Esta- 
 blished Church, it is the more necessary that whatever may 
 tend to rectify the false impressions attempted by these means 
 should be stated, even at the expense of being tedious. 
 
 The Bill, as originally brought in, was entitled " a Bill 
 for appointing a Commission to enquire into the abuses in 
 Chanties connected 'with the Education of the Poor in 
 England and Wales :" but when in the House it was altered 
 to " an Act for appointing Commissioners to enquire into the 
 Charities in England and Wales, and of the Education of the 
 Poor ;" extending its operation to all Charities. 
 
 The preamble states " the necessity of enquiring into all 
 *' irregularities, breaches of trust, or the management of 
 ** estates devoted to the education of the poor, and other 
 " charitable uses ; and that an enquiry should be made 
 " into the state of the education of the poorer classes ;" 
 for which purpose eight Commissioners were to be appointed, 
 with directions to report to both Houses of Parliament an 
 account of their proceedings ; and they were authorized to 
 divide, for the purpose of prosecuting their enquiry, into 
 four bodies, each body having the same powers as the whole 
 Committee, with power to hold meetings at various places, 
 and summon any person, and to call for any deed or other 
 document, relating to estates or funds, &c. which in their 
 judgment should be necessary for the due execution of the 
 purposes of the Act, and to examine on oath, and commit 
 persons summoned for disobedience, until they might submit 
 to be examined, or make production.* The two Uni- 
 
 * In the bill, as originally brought in by Mr. Brougham, the Commis- 
 sioners, in case of death, &c. were to nominate three persons, of whom 
 the Crown was to select one.
 
 11 
 
 versities, Westminster, Eton, Winchester, all Cathedral and 
 Collegiate Churches, Jewish and Quaker Establishments, 
 were excepted from the Act. The appointing the Commis- 
 sioners in the Bill was given up, and the Bill authorized 
 his Majesty to issue a commission to fourteen persons for 
 the purposes of the Act, of these, six were to be honorary. 
 In the Committee a clause was inserted, excusing pur- 
 chasers who should allege they purchased for a valuable 
 consideration without notice, from answering interrogatories, 
 and no person was to produce more than an extract relating 
 to the Chzrity, where the deed also concerned other matters. 
 And in the warrant of commitment by the Commissioners for 
 refusal to answer, the vchhle cause of commitment luas to be 
 set forth. Afttr much discussion and various alterations in 
 the House of Lords, some of which though the whole pre- 
 amble stating the necessity of the measure was left just as it 
 came) rendered the effect of the Bill nearly nugatory ; it was 
 returned with the powers considerably limited, to the Com- 
 mons, and finally passed into a law. The most material altera- 
 tions in the Lords were the Act extended to England alone 
 the enquiry into the education of the poorer classes was left 
 out altogether the powers were confined to institutions for 
 the education of the Poor only the precept of the Com- 
 missioners was to state that it had been represented upon oath 
 that the persons summoned "were able to give material informa- 
 tion relating to the subject matter of the said enquiry and the 
 power of committing for refusal to attend, was omitted (at 
 once depriving the Committee of all power to compel any 
 one to give evidence, who might be unwilling to do so) 
 three of the eight Commissioners instead of two, (a conve- 
 nient mode of division,) were made a board, and to the 
 former exceptions from the operations of the Act were 
 added, Harrow and Rugby, and every charitable institution 
 for the purpose of Education, having special visitors, gover- 
 nors, or overseers, appointed by the founders, as also all 
 institutions for the education of Roman Catholics ; and the 
 duration of the Act was confined to two years.
 
 , 12 
 
 It has been before stated that the principal opposition to 
 the Bill was in the House of Lords ; and as what passed 
 there is of considerable importance, it will be necessary to 
 give a detailed account of the proceedings. 
 
 The second reading was moved by Lord Rosslyn, 
 when the Lord Chancellor is reported to have com- 
 menced his observations with " expressing a strong 
 " sense of the abuses in Charities as any man, but con- 
 ' ceived the Bill to be more detrimental to Charities than 
 " any mode of proceeding that could be devised, and 
 " therefore felt bound to give it his decided negative. If 
 " the Legislature," observed his Lordship, " did not protect 
 " to the utmost all honorary trustees in the execution of 
 ' their trusts if they were to be exposed to suspicious 
 " and vexatious enquiries into all the details of their duty, 
 " not one man would be found in the kingdom to take upon 
 " himself the responsibility of a charitable trust : there were 
 " many splendid charities founded by munificent donors, 
 *' with which courts of justice ought to have nothing to do 
 Cujus est dare ejus est di^ponere and such charities 
 " ought to be under the domesticum forum of the risitors 
 *' nominated by the founders, unless it were proved that 
 ' the visitors neglected their trust he would to the utter- 
 ' most resist the progress of the Bill if a more temperate 
 " measure were not provided, no man would in future take 
 " upon himself such arduous and hazardous tasks. He ad- 
 " mitted that the law upon the subject required amendment, 
 (t but the alteration proposed was most injudicious.'* 
 
 These observations of his Lordship are of the utmost 
 importance, particularly as containing his direct opinion 
 that the present law is defective, and his strong sense and 
 reprobation of the existing abuses just the two principal 
 points sought to be established by Mr. Brougham and it is 
 only to be regretted that with such feelings the Poor are 
 still left without the benefit of his Lordship's knowledge 
 and experience, in procuring for them that relief so openly
 
 13 
 
 admitted by him to be wanting by them, and of which they 
 stand so much in need. It might have been supposed that 
 his Lordship's great experience must have shown him how 
 frequently this domestic forum required some other exciting 
 power, than the moral feelings of the special visitors, (whether 
 individuals or corporations,) to compel them to perform their 
 duty. The master of St. John's, on whose indecorous treat- 
 ment the Quarterly Review descants with such signal elo- 
 quence, and who with the Fellows of the College, were the 
 special visitors of Pocklington School afford a common 
 and intelligible example of the utility of such jurisdictions. 
 When the exertions of Mr. Brougham had awakened their 
 consciences or their fears, these special visitors made their 
 progress to the North, and found in the school they were 
 directed to superintend, a deaf usher, the school room a 
 ruin only one scholar, and the schoolmaster playing at 
 hide and seek with his creditors, though enjoying, accord- 
 ing to his own statement, a nett income of 9001. a year. 
 Quis custodiet ipsos cusiodes, says Mr. Brougham. So far 
 as to visitors. And as to trustees on what ground are 
 these honorary trustees (and all trustees are honorary), 
 to be more protected by the legislature than other trustees 
 in his lordship's court ? Are not all trustees bound to ac- 
 count, bound to shew their vouchers for what they have 
 done ? Would not the Archbishop of Canterbury be bound 
 before his lordship to produce his accounts, if he was a trus- 
 tee in private affairs ? and is it not admitted that the Court 
 of Chancery cannot, in cases of Charities, afford relief, in 
 many instances, where it is loudly called for? And, after 
 all, is it not certain, that, with the liberal and enlightened 
 spirit which has gone abroad to diffuse knowledge 
 over mankind, there would be found honourable indivi- 
 duals, willing to take upon themselves the responsible 
 office of Trustees, without the special interference of 
 the legislature, with the full knowledge that they were 
 bound to render to the Poor (whose cause they were serv-
 
 14 
 
 ing,) an account of their conduct? it is the past conduct, 
 the fraud, and the negligence of this class of Trustees, that 
 have given rise to the suspicious and vexatious enquiries that 
 are complained of. 
 
 In answer to the observations of the Lord Chancellor, 
 it was ably argued by Lord Holland, that no power was 
 given to the Commissioners to judge, but only to enquire, 
 and ascertain the nature and extent of the abuses; that 
 it was an enquiry rather in favour of Trustees and Visitors ; 
 for, with the general suspicions of misconduct, it would 
 give them an opportunity of shewing, that they had executed 
 honestly their trust, and honourably discharged their 
 duties. Lord Redesdale supported the opinion of the Chan- 
 cellor, and with the same arguments; adding, that he 
 had conversed with many Trustees, who said, they Mould not 
 have accepted the trust, if they had been aware of such a mea- 
 sure as proposed if the bill was to pass. ' On this it may only 
 be observed, that it would have been fortunate for the pub- 
 lic if those Trustees, who were unwilling to state how they 
 had performed their duty, had never become possessed of the 
 offices they held. 
 
 The Lord Chancellor voted against the bill, and the 
 commitment was only carried by a majority of two. And 
 it is worthy of remark, that when the bill went back to the 
 Commons, Lord Castlereagh defended the alterations in 
 that bill which he had suffered to pass without objection, by 
 asserting, that the Report went beyond the object of the 
 Committee's appointment, and the Bill beyond the object 
 of the Report ! 
 
 With regard to the Members of the Education Committee, 
 it is a fact perfectly well known, that they agreed in every 
 matter which came before them. ; Mr. Brougham, as he states 
 in his letter, does not recollect an instance of a division. 
 And although the regular attendants on the Committee, as 
 is usual, were but few, they are stated by Mr. Brougham for 
 the most part to have been gentlemen differing from him in
 
 15 
 
 politics; and, that a constant communication was main- 
 tained between those who took an active part in the inquiry, 
 and those who attended but seldom, consequently the least 
 dissention would have led to an assembly of the greater part 
 of the members. 
 
 Soon after the dissolution of Parliament, Mr. Brougham 
 addressed a letter to Sir Samuel Romilly upon the Abuses 
 of Charities, with particular reference to the proceedings 
 in Parliament on the passing the Act, and the evidence 
 which had been laid before the Cotomittee. 
 
 That Mr. Brougham should address Sir Samuel Romilly ona 
 subject of this nature is matter of no surprize ; whatever tended 
 to the upholding the rights of the injured, the poor, and the 
 distressed, against the invasion of the rich and the powerful ; 
 whatever led to the general amelioration and happiness of 
 mankind, was nearest the heart of that illustrious statesman : 
 and it is well known that although his other avocations 
 prevented Sir Samuel Romilly from taking an active part 
 in the proceedings of the Education Committee, yet the 
 cause they were engaged in had his most cordial support. 
 In this letter Mr. Brougham has, with irresistible force, 
 pointed out the gross and glaring abuses existing in the 
 administration of public charities applicable to the educa- 
 tion of the poor ; the utter insufficiency of the present legal 
 remedies to afford relief, and the consequent necessity of 
 creating new powers for the examination into, and the cor- 
 rection of the existing abuses, and a provision for the future 
 wholesome administration of the property of the poor. 
 
 Mr. Brougham in his observations on the conduct of Mi- 
 nisters in excepting from the visitation of the Commissioners 
 those Charities which have special, visitors, ( in which class 
 the Committee in their report had stated they had found 
 the worst instances of abuse to exist,) and in depriving the 
 Commissioners of the power of compelling the attendance 
 of witnesses, and the production of deeds and papers re- 
 lating to the Charities, has accused Ministers of an unwil-
 
 16 
 
 lingness to allow " a zealous and unsparing investigation of 
 charitable abuses," and has inferred from their reluctance 
 to reformation in general, that they afforded too powerful a 
 shelter for malversation in public trusts. 
 
 It can hardly be supposed, that a person of Mr. Brougham's 
 character and importance, and being a leading member of 
 the opposition, could publish a pamphlet on any political 
 subject, without its immediately bringing into the field many 
 opponents ; but, in the present instance, on a subject of such 
 general interest, and in a case in which from necessity the 
 conduct and character of individuals and societies were called 
 into notice, and in some instances became the subject of ani- 
 madversion, it was to be expected that opponents would start 
 up on every side in support of the existing Government, 
 were it right or wrong ; the rich and the powerful are not 
 long without apologists. 
 
 The most important of Mr. Brougham's antagonists are the 
 writers of an article in the last number of the Quarterly Re- 
 view, and the author of a letter addressed to Sir William Scott. 
 Messrs. Clarke and Bowles, Wykamists, have also severally 
 addressed letters to Mr. Brougham, respecting his remarks 
 on the foundation at Winchester, and a letter from Dr. 
 Ireland, the Dean of Westminster (and late Vicar of Croydon) 
 has been published, warmly vindicating himself from some 
 imputations ingeniously supposed by him to have been cast 
 on him by the chairman of the Education Committee. 
 
 The Quarterly Review is to be considered as the most im- 
 portant, and is the most successful opponent. Every topic 
 usually resorted to, on subjects like the present, by the trained 
 advocates for abuses and their concealment from enquiry, 
 has been pressed into the service ; and the danger of the 
 church, and the invasion of private property, are, as usual, 
 dealt forth with an unsparing hand. 
 
 Wherever the intentions and conduct of Mr. Brougham 
 have been noticed, motives and designs are attributed to him 
 as foreign to his feelings as they were to those of the writers
 
 17 
 
 themselves, and have contributed to form an article of eighty, 
 pages, making a case " as clear as the noon day sun," that 
 shook the alarmist in his bed at the danger passed, and 
 made him reverence the wisdom of the Lords, that thus 
 by their cautious and timely interference controuled the 
 ebullitions of virtuous indiscretion in the Commons. It is not 
 safe at any time to assume common report as a foundation 
 for believing particular individuals to be the authors of an 
 anonymous publication, or that they assisted in its fabrication; 
 and it is still more unsafe to do so, where a band of writers 
 profess a community of opinions, indulge themselves in the 
 same jokes, and apply to all who oppose their principles or 
 their prejudices, the same terms of ridicule and reproach ; 
 they are easily mistaken the one for the other. But the 
 sarcasms on poverty, the insults oa misery, the unbroken 
 chain of wit, and the perpetual inclination- to buffoonery, 
 on subjects that rouse the best feelings of the heart, 
 although they may present indications of unusual abilities 
 and accomplishments, they imply a rigidity of feeling 
 which can only be attained by practical politicians. 
 
 The letter to Sir William Scott, is stated in the Quarterly 
 Review to be written by a lawyer, and " with a knowledge 
 * of the legal bearings of the subject evidently superior 
 " to that of Mr. Brougham." But without any information, 
 beyond that afforded by the production itself, we should he- 
 sitate long before we ascribed it to a person possessing 
 either that knowledge of the law relating to the points dis- 
 cussed, or that candour in the statement of the arguments 
 which it is believed are rarely found wanting in gentlemen 
 at the bar. 
 
 But after all the identity or the character of Mr. 
 Brougham's opponents, is of no real importance, and we 
 shall now proceed to discuss in detail the principal points 
 relating to the question. 
 
 As the bill was first framed, the Commissioners were to be 
 C
 
 named in it; the first material alteration was, that the 
 appointment should be vested in the Crown ; to this, Mr* 
 Brougham states, the Committee with extreme reluctance 
 assented. Every thing, it will be instantly seen, depended 
 on the fitness of the persons who were to be selected to 
 carry on the enquiry. 
 
 The acts authorizing the naval and military enquiries* 
 nominated the members composing the boards established 
 by them, and these precedents were followed by the Edu- 
 cation Committee in the framing the bill. The analogy^ 
 however, is flatly denied by the correspondent- of Sir W. 
 Scott, p. 11 12. ** By reason of the palpable difference 
 " between an enquiry by the House into the proper ex-pen- 
 " diture of public money granted by the House, and an 
 *' inquisition into the proper administration of fuods in ne 
 " way originating with the House, that the abuses of 
 w Charities is properly an abuse of administration, not of 
 ' Parliamentary trust all officers of administration are part 
 " of the supreme magistracy of the country, and as such 
 " therefore belong to the Grown. And by Parliament 
 " taking the business out of the hands of the Sovereign, 
 they superseded pro tanto the king's authority." This 
 argument, the Quarterly Review considers has set the 
 question at rest. Not thinking it worth while to consider that 
 the duties of the Commissioners were in fact in nowise adminis- 
 trative; but were imposed for the purpose of enquiring into 
 abuses, not to reform them. They were to be the servants 
 of the two Houses of Parliament, and though selected by 
 the House of Commons, yet appointed by the Constitution 
 (the three Estates) for the purpose of procuring informa- 
 tion to be furnished to both Houses of Parliament, on 
 which they might or might not take steps at their pleasure: 
 but the opinion of the law assessor to the Quarterly Review 
 has gone forth and the question is at rest for ever. 
 
 In the Committee, the extreme importance of a- public 
 appointment was felt, the qualifications of several gentle-
 
 19 
 
 proposed were canvassed, and a list was prepared 
 by the Committee, who must have been supposed competent 
 to judge of the fittest persons; in which list no one was 
 to be found, in the remotest degree connected either with 
 the Chairman or any other of the Committee, and with 
 one exception, all were in political connections adverse to 
 Mr. Brougham ; but although such list was made by the 
 Committee, it was presumed, of course, that the persons so 
 nominated were selected by Mr. Brougham, and by an easy 
 deduction of consequences, were to be Viceroys under him, 
 in the administration of all public and private property 
 whatsoever. 
 
 It may be deemed a sufficient answer to the sneers at the 
 assumption of power proposed by Mr. Brougham for himself 
 and friends, that the appointment of six honorary Com- 
 missioners proposed by Ministers, was cheerfully adopted 
 by the Committee, and was looked forward to with gladness 
 as furnishing a security against the consequence of any 
 defects in the selection of the stipendiary Commissioners. 
 But it is worthy of remdrk, that neither Lord Rosslyn who 
 brought the question forward with such signal ability, nor 
 Lord Holland, nor Lord Carnarvon, who powerfully sup- 
 ported him, were included in the list, and Mr. Brougham and 
 Mr. Babington, (the one with whom the measure originated, 
 the other whose whole time and attention had been de- 
 voted unremittingly to the subject,) were also excluded! 
 and the only members of the House of Lords appointed 
 to be honorary Commissioners, were the Bishops of Peter- 
 borough, and St. Asaph, one of whom had actually voted 
 against the commitment of the Bill, and the other had re- 
 tired before the division on it, in which the bench of bishops 
 took so active a share. 
 
 As to the absurdity of changing the quorum from two 
 to three, leaving the number of the Commissioners eight, 
 no defence appears to have been made to this mode of in- 
 creasing the activity of the commission. 
 C 2
 
 The important change made in the Lords, by refusing to 
 the Commissioners the power of compelling witnesses to be 
 examined, .disarmed them of all effectual authority. The 
 report which was to be the result of these inquiries, might, 
 indeed, expose the disobedience of those who were sum- 
 moned ; but such fears would be feebly felt, by persons 
 hardened in peculation and abuse. 
 
 We, observes Mr. Brougham, had originally given the Commis- 
 sioners the same authority which rendered the Naval and Military in- 
 quiries so effectual. Imagining that persons concerned in any abuse 
 might be unwilling to give evidence against themselves, or to produce 
 documents which made them liable to refund large balances due to the 
 poor, we had armed the Commissioners with the, power of compelling the 
 production of papers, and obliging every one to answer such questions 
 $ did not criminate himself. The ministers in the House of Lords 
 peremptorily insisted upon this prorision being struck out. They said 
 it was harsh but why should any one complain of being forced to do 
 what it is every one's duty to do, and what no one can refuse to do unless 
 with the design of concealing some malversation ? They represented it 
 as indelicate to respectable trustees but can any respectable trustee 
 complain of being called upon to disclose the particulars of his conduct in 
 the execution of his trust ? They described it as unconstitutional yet 
 the same powers are possessed by all courts, even by commissioners of 
 bankrupt. They called it unprecedented yet they themselves, when 
 in office with a trul,y great minister, the renown of whose naval exploits 
 alone eclipses the glory of his civil administration, had furnished the 
 precedent which we followed ; had passed the very act from which we 
 copied verbatim the clause in our Bill. They attempted, indeed, to 
 escape from this dilemma by various outlets. My Lord Chancellor said 
 that he had always disapproved of that provision in Lord St. Vincent's 
 act; yet he suffered it to pass without a division, and was, with my Lord 
 Ellenborough, the principal advocate of the measure. My Lord Sid- 
 mouth contented himself with observing, -that many persons had ob- 
 jected to Lord St. Vincent's bill; but assuredly his lordship, then minis- 
 ter in the House of Commons, was not of the number; for he strenu- 
 ously defended it against Mr. Canning, who alone, of the present 
 cabinet opposed it. A feeble effort was made to distinguish the objects 
 of the two inquiries. But as to their importance can any one main- 
 tain that the expenses of the dock-yards, demand more rigorous inves- 
 tigation than the disposal of funds destined by benevolence for the 
 relief of wretchedness ; or that the conduct of the person who uses a
 
 sum of the public money, without authority, and then replaces it, shall 
 be sifted by every means of examination which can wring the truth 
 from interested reluctance ; while he who pockets thousands a year 
 belonging to the poor, shall only be invited to disclose the state of his 
 accounts in order that his undue gains may cease, and his past accumu- 
 lations be refunded ? Then as to the nature of the two inquiries can 
 it be contended that the power of examining all private merchants' 
 accounts, in substance possessed by the Naval Commissioners, was less 
 liable to abuse, or in itself less vexatious, than the power of examining 
 the accounts of trustees, filling a public office ? As for the clamour ex- 
 cited against the clause respecting title-deeds, no one who had read our 
 Bill could be deceived by it for a moment; because the possessor of a 
 deed was only obliged to produce it, in case it related wholly to the 
 charity j if any other matter whatever was contained in it, he was al- 
 lowed to produce a copy of the part relating to the charity. Letter lo 
 Sir Samuel Romi/lu, p. 10 12. 
 
 The foregoing observations of Mr. Brougham, enforced 
 with such singular power, as yet have remained without the 
 shadow of an answer ; the necessity of the enquiry was ad- 
 mitted, and still remains in the preamble of the Act. And 
 yet the sting was to be taken out, the reality was to be 
 taken away, and the Commissioners have only leave to in- 
 vite or solicit inquiry, instead of demanding explanation 
 whereever they might find it necessary. 
 
 On referring to the printed debates in 1802, in the passing 
 the Bill for appointing the Commissioners for Naval Inquiry, 
 the Lord Chancellor is reported to have expressed himself as 
 unwilling to offer any thing like opposition to a measure, 
 which, like that of the Bill, was directed to the great ends 
 of correcting flagrant abuses of the public service, and 
 although he disapproved of the manner, as to the want 
 of time for deliberation in which the Bill came before the 
 House, his Lordship was far from desiring to instil in 
 the minds of the House any prepossession against it, only 
 wishing to recommend its particular consideration in the 
 Committee: and in the subsequent stage of the Bill, his 
 Lordship moved the amendment in the clause, by which 
 it is provided that no person should answer questions tending 
 to criminate himself.
 
 The observations of Lord Ellertborough, on the propriety 
 of compelling persons to answer questions, in enquiries into 
 abuses, are particularly important on this occasion : " H 
 " hoped that it was not intended to be established, that, if 
 " the Bill did not answer the purposes for which it was 
 " framed, the legislature could not adopt other means to 
 " attain the object; if abuses could not be removed by mild 
 " measures, it would be the duty of the legislature to 
 " have recourse to such as would wring from the guilty 
 " the lurking secrets which were to the great injury of the 
 *' country concealed : this Bill was only an inception of 
 " reform ; but, as enormous frauds existed, the legislature 
 5* certainly owed it to the public to resort to other means 
 " of correction, if this lenient proceeding should not 
 *' produce the desired effect." And Lord Sidmouth 
 observed, " that in every Act which had been passed for 
 " the preceding 18 years, for appointing Commissioners, 
 *' for the enquiry into abuses, powers, as great, or greater had 
 " been given to the Commissioners.'* 
 
 An objection has been made by some of the opponents 
 of the proposed enquiry, who shudder at the idea of 
 any searching into abuses, who suspect that the most tem- 
 perate vindication of, or attempt to uphold the rights of the 
 poor, is the signal for the destruction of the rich, that the 
 powers given by this Bill are an infringement on the rights 
 of private property. It is impossible to comprehend how 
 any person, however wild or fantastical his notions of 
 danger, can call the property vested in Trustees for 
 the poor, private ^property ; unless, indeed (as in too many 
 instances is the case) -their dishonesty or negligence may 
 have made it so. What, if a bill is filed in Chancery 
 against a Trustee for an account, is this to be called in- 
 vading his private property ? And yet the difference 
 between the case of a Trustee of a Charity and any other 
 Trustee 'is not very distinguishable, except that the cause 
 of the poor is not so eagerly defended; what principle of
 
 23 
 
 legislation or maxim of law has ever treated charitable 
 funds as private property ? Can the Statute of Elizabeth, 
 or the registry acts be considered as regarding the property 
 as private? The inheritance of the poor is regarded by the 
 law as a matter of public, not private, custody and adminis- 
 tration, as was expressly admitted by Lord Castlereagh, and 
 indeed as is proved by every legal principle, and every en- 
 actment relating to Charities. 
 
 Who, indeed, would be the guardian of the poor, if the law 
 did not expressly cast that duty some where^ It is said that 
 the founder in the selection of trustees or of visitors, points 
 out the manner in which his private property is to be ad- 
 ministered, and by placing it in the hands of trustees, has 
 expressed his desire that it should be confided to their 
 sole controul, or to that of the superintending visitor, and 
 that any infringement on this arrangement, is an infringe- 
 ment on the disposition of private property, but how is 
 there any infringement on private property, in appointing 
 guardians to see that the trustees fulfill the intentions of 
 the founder, that his laws are well observed ? it is not to 
 alter the disposition, not to take away the property from 
 the trustees appointed by the donor, that the Commisr 
 sioners are appointed : it is to see that this is not done by 
 the trustees themselves, it is to stand in the place of their 
 founder, and to watch over and call to account the de- 
 faulting and the fraudulent trustee, not to impeach or in- 
 terfere with him who has been the good steward. 
 
 The having given the Commissioners power to call for 
 deeds, &c. relating to Charities, is one of the points mainly 
 relied on by the correspondent of Sir W. Scott, as shew- 
 ing the mischief and the wildness of Mr. Brougham's views. 
 
 The powers of the Bill, he observes, were " too large both 
 " for the Committee and its objects, they trespassed too much 
 " on the rights of property, the obligations of confidence, and 
 " the courtesies of life." It may not perhaps be so easy 
 to understand what is meant by this subversion of th
 
 24 
 
 moral obligations of confidence, and the finer courtesies of 
 life, in the requiring trustees of Charities to render an ac- 
 count of their trust, and where they have any deeds in 
 their possession solely relating to the Charities, to produce 
 them ; and where they relate to the Charities and something 
 else, to produce a copy of that part only relating to the 
 Charities ; it is difficult to see how property is to be more tres- 
 passed upon, in this case, than in any other case in which it 
 is necessary to enquire into the rights of property. The 
 greater part of the trusts, says the correspondent of Sir 
 W. Scott, are merely honorary, and strictly offices of be- 
 nevolence in those who undertook them, and consequently such 
 persons are not the proper subjects of such an account. Now 
 what account is it that they would be subject to ? Why, to the 
 production of deeds, charters, and papers relating to their trust, 
 whereby it might appear what the rights and the possessions 
 were. Who, having acted uprightly, would have objected 
 to this ? Is not the office of every trustee in common affairs 
 honorary, in the strictest sense ? Is it not a Known principle, 
 that he shall derive no benefit from his trust; and would any 
 one have the slightest delicacy in requiring a Trustee to 
 produce his deeds and accounts relating to the execution 
 of his trust, to convince the person for whom he had acted, 
 that he had performed his honorary office properly ; and 
 where is the difference between the office of a Trustee of a 
 Charity, and a Trustee under a will ? if persons of rank and 
 character, when they become Trustees of Charity Funds, 
 are to be regarded with such exclusive respect ; it may be 
 adviseable to make the selection from less important per- 
 sonages, less fastidious and nice than those alluded to by 
 Lord Redesdale ; and besides, in effect, little or no increased 
 publicity could arise from the production of deeds relating 
 to the titles to lands belonging to Charitable Institutions. 
 Since the last Mortmain Act, all conveyances of land were 
 of "necessity inrolled, and before that act, wills, which were 
 public documents, (except in very few instances,) were the
 
 25 
 
 most usual instruments whereby property was given for cha- 
 ritable purposes. 
 
 With respect to powers given to the Commissioners of 
 Naval Inquiry, it is said,* the object was of a different nature ; 
 the papers required could only be a matter ot account ; could 
 extend to no inquisitions of title, and muniments of indiffe- 
 rent parties, it was matter of ledger, and no more ! Has 
 the writer read the clause in the acts which give these 
 powers? and if he has, is it possible he should not perceive 
 that as far as regards all real and practical inconveni. 
 ences, the power of examining every ledger in every mer- 
 chant's counting house in the city, and every contract or 
 dealing, was more likely to destroy the moral obligations 
 of confidence, and the courtesies of life ? What but the 
 terror of detection, could make.it irksome to a Trustee to 
 court enquiry, and to lay before the parliamentary Com- 
 missioners his accounts and papers ; for if the Charities 
 suffered by any flaw in their titles when produced, this 
 would in no wise affect the trustees ; and private property 
 never could be invaded nor affected, as no deed relating 
 to private property was ever to be produced. It might 
 as well be said, that it was indelicate and hurtful to the 
 feelings of men, to compel them to register deeds re- 
 lating to their private property, in Yorkshire or Middlesex. 
 And yet this is one of the great points made by the corres- 
 pondent of Sir W. Scott, and no pains have been spared by 
 him, either in the misrepresentation of Mr. Brougham's 
 positions, or of the law. 
 
 It is an error, this writer observes, to maintain, that powers 
 of this nature are possessed by all courts and commissioners 
 of bankrupts, (as was asserted by Mr. Brougham) : that 
 there in fact exists no such compulsory unqualified production 
 by third parties of any papers or documents, and least of all 
 of that highest description of papers (titles, muniments t and 
 
 * Letter to Sir W. Scott.
 
 26 
 
 deeds,) which were the subjects of the clause in question. 
 And further he observes, that Mr. B. has mistaken the scope 
 of the 46 Geo. III. c. 37 in the same manner as he appears 
 to have mistaken the rules of evidence ; that the 4-6 Geo. III. 
 merely refers to the obligations of witnesses to answer ques- 
 tions, though such answer might make them civilly respon- 
 sible for debts, and that the production of muniments and title 
 deeds are not included in the words, to answer questions. Is 
 this irony, ignorance, or misrepresentation ? what has 
 any thing said by Mr. Brougham, to do with the act 46 
 Geo. III. which he had neither noticed nor referred to ? it 
 was the power given to the Commissioners of the Military 
 apd Naval Enquiry to which he alluded ; a power which, he 
 said, was possessed both by Commissioners of Bankrupts, and 
 all courts. And is this to be questioned ? is not every wit- 
 ness bound to answer to what does not criminate himself. 
 And under the writ of subpoena duces tecum to produce 
 all papers which do not tend to criminate himself, although 
 he may withhold a document under which he derives title ; 
 just the powers given to the Commissioners and no more ; 
 but the cases are entirely different, as to the produc- 
 tion of papers in courts, it is by interested parties, and 
 before the naval and military commissioners the same, the 
 things to be produced were by parties themselves inte- 
 rested, whereby their own property might be injured, but 
 in this case nothing of the sort could arise ; what could 
 be the nature of any paper or document which a trustee 
 not the owner of the estate could be called on to produce ? 
 It must have been a foundation deed, endowment, or 
 some deed relating to the transmission pf the property, 
 or the administration of the funds, or the title to the 
 Charity estates, the rules of the Charity, or the trustees' 
 accounts, or the accounts of other trustees, what else could 
 it be? and what possible mischief could arise from such a 
 production : how otherwise was, as Mr. B. eloquently ob- 
 serves, the truth to be wrung from interested reluctance;
 
 27 
 
 else were the undue gains to be made to cease, and the 
 past accumulations to be refunded ? Still the real state of 
 the question has been purposely misunderstood and mis- 
 represented. " What," observes the correspondent of Sir 
 W. Scott. 
 
 " What in fact would not be the mischief of such a matter of course 
 production of the securities upon which property r< stg; many of those 
 securities, prepared perhaps in remote parts of the kingdom, and by 
 insufficient conveyancers; and therefore, not impossibly, wanting in some 
 of those fonrs and technical niceties, which, however necessary to the 
 exactness of law, might invalidate real titles, to the overthrow of 
 ancient families ? Was it not already within the memory of many noble 
 lords, that the careless exposure of a title-deed in the office of a solicitor, 
 had led to a discovery of a flaw of this kind, which, in its effects, had 
 divested a noble peer of what he had deemed, and with g^od right, his 
 established property, and had enjoyed for upwards of twenty years ?" 
 
 What has this to do with the production relating to 
 charitable foundations, in what can individuals be con- 
 cerned ? W T hat becomes of the invalidated real titles this 
 learned lawyer writes of, or the overthrown ancient family ? 
 As for the allusion to the case of Lord Cholmondeley and 
 Lord Clinton, how can that be considered at all applicable ; 
 some solicitor, or one of higher rank, it is said in the 
 investigation of the title of Lord Clinton, on a treaty for a 
 sale or mortgage, observed, that by the construction of the 
 will, under which Lord Clinton pretended to hold, the 
 property, according to his view of the case, belonged either 
 to Lord Cholmondeley or Mrs. Darner, and he sold this 
 important secret to Lord Cholmondeley ; and he, as every 
 other man in his senses would have done, took immediate steps 
 for the recovery of the estate, which, according to the rules 
 of law, (as the decision turned out,) "was his own. And 
 where would be the objection, if in consequence of 
 the enquiries of the Commissioners it should turn out 
 that some of the estates held by the Charities were in 
 fact the property of some needy, or neglected descendant
 
 28 
 
 of the grantor, and wrongfully withheld from him ; and no 
 other inconvenience could arise. 
 
 " * So sacred, indeed, are muniments of property held, 
 ' that where a lessee sells his term, and the vendor objects 
 " to the deficiency of title upon the inspection of the lease, 
 " the Court of Chancery (though a court of equity) will 
 " not assist the vendor in requiring the original landlord 
 *' to produce his title;" that is, where a landlord has 
 granted a lease to a tenant, (who it is to be presumed is 
 satisfied with his title,) and the taking of which lease implies 
 an admission of it, and without any stipulation for 
 further production of title, the Court of Chancery though a 
 court of equity, will not allow the landlord against his will to 
 be called upon to produce his title to all the subsequent 
 assignees of his tenant, who claiming only through the 
 tenant cannot have any claim to stand in a better situation 
 than the tenant himself. And yet this absurd case is 
 put in the letter to Sir W. Scott, erroneously, as it is to 
 be hoped for the credit of the profession, ascribed to a 
 lawyer by the Quarterly Review, and of superior legal 
 abilities to Mr. Brougham. 
 
 The objects of the Education Committee have been di- 
 vided into I- the present condition of the lower orders of 
 the Metropolis 2. plans for promoting education amongst 
 them 3. the propriety or impropriety of connecting the na- 
 tional religion with national education 4. the nature and 
 state of afl charitable endowments 5. the circumstances and 
 administration of the great public schools, and of the two 
 Universities of England ; and lastly, sundry charges of mal- 
 versation and robbery of the poor, adduced against some per- 
 sonages of exalted rank and character in the country.f 
 That part of the division which states the object to be, as to 
 the propriety or impropriety of connecting the national re- 
 ligion with national education, is in a great measure a mis- 
 
 * Letter to Sir William Scott. f Quarterly Review.
 
 29 
 
 representation of the report of the Committee, which re- 
 commended the House to consider, whether some plan could 
 not be devised in those places, where there was only 
 one school, (and the rules of which were so framed as 
 to exclude all dissenters,) to enable the dissenters to send 
 their children to the school, and who would otherwise 
 remain altogether without the means of education. Now 
 this is a very different statement of the case, than if Mr. 
 Brougham or the Education Committee had argued either 
 for or against the propriety of connecting the national re- 
 ligion with the national education, but this is brought in for 
 the purpose of reviving the Bible Society contest ; the effect 
 to be produced is too imposing to be omitted ; and the 
 Authors well knew the assistance which would be derived from 
 once imbuing the minds of the public with the conviction 
 that the great aim of the Committee was to disconnect 
 religion from the general system of education; besides 
 it was important to prepare the mind of the reader for that 
 which was to follow, " quand les esprits sont echatiff'ces plus 
 " une opinion est impertinente plus elle a de credit" says 
 Voltaire, speaking of the absurdities which were put forth 
 and believed at the time of the Popish plot. 
 
 With respect to the personal attacks so loudly complained 
 of, if Mr. Brougham was correct in the view of the Evi- 
 dence which was given before the Committee, what terms 
 can be too strong to express the reprobation of those, who, as 
 visitors of Charities have been content to suffer the inheri- 
 tance of the poor to be wasted and perverted, without stirring 
 a finger in the execution of their offices ; of those Trustees 
 and sinecurists, who unblushingly wring from the poor their 
 scanty pitance. It should first be shewn that they have 
 been wrongfully accused, before any complaint is made of 
 personal attacks. It has been one of the great objections 
 that the cases brought before the Committee, were invidious 
 selections for mere party purposes : a slight inspection of the 
 returns made by the parochial clergy, will shew that the Com-
 
 30 
 
 mittee in the selection of cases, r were in fact, embarrassed only 1 
 by their riches. It is absurd to suppose that this invidiou^ 
 selection could have happened, in a Committee consisting of 39 
 members, 16 of whom constantly voted with Government, and 
 two of whom were in no wise connected with the opposition.* 
 Well aware of the importance of the subject, every nerve has 1 
 been strained ; wit, law, satire, all styles, from the moral and 
 didactic, to farce and satire, have been called into action 
 for what--to screen the fraudulent Trustee, and the slum- 
 bering Visitor, from the punishment and exposure which they 
 merited, and which they will yet meet. For this, acts and 
 expressions, the most usual and simple, have been mis- 
 represented and tortured, that they may aid in the cause ; 
 but we trust that it is too late that the die is already cast, 
 and although there are some well meaning persons who 
 may conceive, that a part of the enquiries made by the 
 Committee, were hasty, or perhaps beyond their immediate 
 powers, if their authority is to be construed strictly, yet', 
 this in no wise affects the real question, which is, whether 
 an effectual enquiry should be made into all charities and 
 endowments 'that such as are found to have been originally 
 destined to afford light and education to the poor, should not 
 be devoted to the advancement of the rich, nor suffered to 
 decay altogether by the profligate dishonesty of the masters. 
 It is foreign to our present purpose to enter into the subject 
 of the benefit of education of the poor : at this enlightened 
 period none will be so hardy as to deny that it is an object of 
 national polity of the most vital importance. We cannot 
 but hope, that neither the misrepresentations contained in 
 the libels on the proceedings of the Committee, or Mr. 
 Brougham, nor any errors committed by them, will prejudice 
 the great object in view. That notwithstanding their weak- 
 ness, if it be, they may be the humble workers of great good. 
 
 * In the Quarterly Review, the Committee are represented as being* 
 composed of two-third opposition members.
 
 31 
 
 Already indeed, the benefit of their enquiries have been felt* 
 far and wide ; numerous proceedings have been commenced 
 for the discovery, and revival of Charities long neglected or 
 perverted : and if it were not for the dreadful and ruinous or- 
 deal necessary to be gone through, much more would have 
 been done long before this, but the spirit has gone forth ; and 
 not the powers of ministers, nor even of the House of Com- 
 mons, nor the present imperfect means of redress, will be able 
 effectually to screen charitable foundations, so long per- 
 verted, from a visitation more just and more searching than 
 that domestic forum, the conscience of the Special Visitor. 
 Let not the delinquents rest safe in the protection of the 
 House of Lords, nor the leaden vigilance of their Special 
 Governors. 
 
 Already is new vigour beginning to be infused into 
 establishments long languishing in decline, whilst others 
 are silently restoring, whilst a hope remains of escaping de- 
 tection, the plunder of the poor : it is not the warnings, nor 
 the allusions of Lord Redesdale to the proceedings of the 
 parliamentary Committee in the reign of Charles I., nor the 
 comparing the Chairman of the Committee, examining the 
 Trustees of Charities, to Bradshaw and Charles :* that will 
 be sufficient to " clamour down,'* to use the phrase of a 
 modern statesman, those who stand forward to maintain the 
 rights of the poor. What single syllable is there in Mr. 
 B.rougham's speech, or his Letter, that can be fairly repre- 
 sented, as disparaging the most*' reverend institutions" of 
 the country ; or, as shewing " a disposition to subvert and 
 " discredit every thing that is familiar from custom, or vene- 
 " rable from antiquity." Is it the objecting to the notorious 
 and admitted abuses wh^ch have silently and slowly crept into 
 these institutions for education, (or rather merely the de- 
 manding inquiry for the purpose of ascertaining what is' the 
 
 * " Thus England's monarch once uncover'd sat, 
 " While Bradshaw bullied in a broad-brirnm'd hat :" 
 
 Quart. Re:.
 
 practice, and whether or not abuses do exist,) when applied 
 to any institution, connected with the Universities, or public 
 schools, that is a disparagement of these venerable institu- 
 tions ? Is it to venture even to cast a glance towards them, 
 or to mention their very names, that is a crime ? we assert 
 that there will not be found one single observation in all that 
 Mr. Brougham has said or written, either as Chairman of the 
 Committee, or otherwise, that can be fairly construed in the 
 slightest degree hostile to any of the public schools, the 
 Universities, or the Church. Why are not abuses, if they 
 occur in these bodies, to be noticed, as well as in every other 
 place ? Are not private individuals, public officers, and courts 
 of justice, the subject of perpetual animadversion ? And 
 where is the cause of complaint, if what has been asserted 
 is true ? And why, if it appears, that the vast revenues 
 possessed by the public schools and the Universities, are in 
 many instances designed for the poor, and yet are swallowed 
 up by the rich, is it not to be even hinted at? What pe- 
 culiar protecting shield is to be thrown over these bodies, 
 more than any other corporation or institution in the state ? 
 Why, if from the foundations of Winchester, Eton, the 
 Charter House, and the other public schools, it plainly and 
 directly appears, that these institutions were founded for the 
 purpose of educating the poor, and in all respects give pre- 
 ference to the poor, and that throughout the words, inops, 
 pauper , indigens, are emphatically used ; (and it turns out 
 that these directions are totally disregarded, ) what is there 
 so peculiarly to be revered in these institutions, that their 
 very faults and perversions are not even to be alluded to ? 
 There is nothing venerable in the age of these establishments, 
 so long as it appears that their administration is faulty. 
 What veneration is there to be paid to an institution founded 
 in a remote age to assist the poor, which should now be dis- 
 covered to be appropriated to the support of the rich, and 
 from which the poor were excluded ? and what did Mr. 
 Brougham in the Education Committee propose beyond en-
 
 33 
 
 quiry ? it was left to the wisdom of Parliament to point out 
 what should be done. All that was required was that a fair 
 and searching enquiry should be instituted and that was the 
 sole object of the bill, which was so cramped and con- 
 fined by the amendments of the Lords, as to preclude 
 all hope or expectation of any great benefit resulting from 
 the enquiries of the Commissioners. Amidst the host of 
 opposers to the measure of appointing Commissioners of En- 
 quiry, two contrary objections have been started : one op- 
 ponent has turned the proposed Commissioners into " an am- 
 " bulatory tribuneship, all powerful and irresponsible, gra- 
 " dually growing in strength and extent, the constitutional 
 " principles, and the maxims of the common law departed 
 " from, for any purpose of their expediency; all bodies 
 " holding their property, not by the common law, and the 
 '* known and fixed administration of the ordinary tribunals, 
 " but their titles slurred and canvassed at the will of a 
 ** Parliamentary Commission, acting under an equity as 
 " general as the discretion, information, and public and 
 " private feeling of the gentlemen who compose them."* 
 It is well to lay such passages before our readers. Even 
 those who may have read the work from which the pre- 
 ceding passage has been taken, may not have considered it 
 so accurately and dispassionately as this extract will now 
 enable them to do. \Ve consider such statements as these 
 our firmest and best support ; what in truth are the real 
 features of this monster which has been shadowed forth 
 to strike terror into the hearts of all who have an interest in 
 the constitution, ? what, but " a commission in the nineteenth 
 " century composed of eight gentlemen at the bar selected by 
 * c the minister with power to examine all persons respecting 
 " Charitable institutions, and their funds, and they are 
 " empowered to call for all documents respecting Charitable 
 " Estates, and to enforce the presence of witnesses by com- 
 
 * Letter to Sir William Scott, p. ^2. 
 D
 
 34 
 
 *' mitment, in the usual manner ; the result of the enquiries 
 ' of such Commissioners are to be by them laid before both 
 " Houses of Parliament, and the Crown."* Such is the real 
 picture, and how utterly unfounded is it to represent these 
 commissioners as possessed of the power to slur the titles of 
 private individuals, when they had not the slightest power 
 to look at a line, or ask a single question relating to the 
 possessions of any private individual whatever. " It is a 
 " sophism to suppose that the reports of these Commissioner* 
 " would not be followed up, the first stage is to report, 
 " the second to act."f And the Correspondent of Sir W. 
 Scott, can find no parallel case, but in the commission in 
 Hen. 8. for examining into the property of abbies, mo- 
 nasteries, &c. which last was followed, as he says " by a 
 " profligate und unprincipled robbery of the Church, abo- 
 " minable to all times." This writer, at least, deserves the 
 praise for ingenuity and research, he has gone a long way back 
 for a parallel. But we hope that when the second stage of pro- 
 ceeding is arrived at, no such similarity will be found. And 
 that the report of the present Commissioners will not be fol- 
 lowed by a profligate and unprincipled robbery, but by a com- 
 plete and radical reform of the profligate and unprincipled rob- 
 
 * It is impossible to read the letter to Sir William Scott, without 
 perceiving that there is not even an attempt on the part of the author 
 to disguise his general prejudices. As to the gross mis-statements of the 
 legal points of the case, we are still in doubt whether to attribute them 
 to ignorance or design ; but it has been one of our principal objects to 
 etfpose these defects, as the Wiiters in the Quarterly Review have on all 
 law points contented themselves with quoting his authority. " // y avoit 
 alors un cet hommes qni, aux vceux etroiles de la medior.rilt, joignent toutes 
 Its hauteurs du despotisme ; insultent a ce qu'ils ne comprennent pas ; couorent 
 Itur foiblesse par Itur audace, et leur bassesse par leur orgeuil ; inlriguans fa- 
 natiques, pieux calomniateurs ; n'offectent de la religion que pour nuire, nefont 
 tenir la glaive det faix qii'd assassiner ; etontassez de credit pour wtfirer dis 
 
 fureun irtbalternes." 
 
 f Letter to Sir William Srott, p. 33.
 
 35 
 
 bery of the trustees and schoolmasters, as abominable to all 
 times, to the full, as the robbery of the Church, in the time 
 of Henry the 8th. We trust that the streams of former 
 bounty and benevolence will then again flow in their right 
 channels, from which they have been so long diverted by the 
 dishonesty and negligence of Trustees and Special Visitors. 
 
 Another, and a more formidable opponent of the measure, 
 khe Lord Chancellor, makes it one of the principle objections 
 that the measure was indefinite and incomplete ; it was en- 
 quiry without a remedy, and it pointed at nothing. Mr. Parry* 
 has adopted his lordship's objection, and at the same time 
 has taken care to avoid incurring any risk of subjecting 
 himself to the like imputation in his own project, which he 
 has brought forward ; one which may be pronounced, without 
 hesitation as inefficient as it is absurd. 
 
 Mr. Brougham having alluded to the romantic attach- 
 ment of the English gentlemen to the scenes of their early 
 instruction, as preventing them from being willing to 
 concur to the full in his proposed measure, the discus- 
 sions, which some years back took place in the Edin,- 
 burgh Review, on the system of Education at the Univer- 
 sities, are immediately recalled by the Quarterly Review, 
 to the reader's attention ; and although it is well known that 
 Mr. Brougham took little or no part in them, the Report 
 and the Edinburgh Review are immediately identified, and 
 they remark it is as impossible to peruse Mr. Brougham's 
 Letter and Speech, as it is to read the productions of a 
 certain northern school of critics without observing a con- 
 tinual eagerness to censure the conduct of the Church of 
 England, and to speak of its distinguished characters with 
 expressions of bitterness or derision. -\- We have not under- 
 taken to defend the Edinburgh Review nor its doctrines, but 
 
 * Objections to Mr. Brougham's bill, &c. by F. Parry, Esq. A. M. 
 1819. 
 
 f Quarterly Review.
 
 36 
 
 we have already asserted that no such expressions appear 
 in Mr. Brougham's Letter, Speech, or the examination of 
 the Evidence. Nor can any suph tendency fairly he shewn 
 or inferred. 
 
 One of the principal objections to the conduct of the Com- 
 mittee is, that they transgressed the limits appointed for their 
 enquiry, by examining into the foundation of some of the 
 public schools ; let us see how this is made out. The Com- 
 mittee of 1816 were appointed to enquire into the Education 
 of " the lower orders" of the metropolis, and in addition to 
 an enquiry into the state of a vast number of Charity Schools* 
 the Committee " of their own accord," as is stated, exa- 
 mined evidence respecting Westminster, the Charter House, 
 and St. Paul, " schools which have ever since their founda- 
 " tion, been appropriated to the classical education of the 
 " higher and'middling orders of society."* Well, the Com- 
 mittee, having done so of " their own accord :" on the pre- 
 sentation of their report, Mr. Brougham, in remarking on 
 seme deviations which had taken place, expressed his satis- 
 faction as to the establishment of Westminster School. 
 And not a single observation was then made, in repro- 
 bation of this proceeding of the Committee, for indeed these 
 schools were as much within their province, as the meanest 
 Grammar School in the metropolis, and although they may 
 have been appropriated of late to the education of the 
 higher and middling orders: still their original destination was 
 for the poor was for the affording to the poor gratuitous 
 education. 
 
 When the Committee was re appointed with more 
 extended powers, the same examinations into Eton and 
 Winchester took place of their " own accord," and is it not 
 fair to infer, that if in the former examinations Westminster, 
 and the Charter House, had been considered as improperly 
 intruded upon, it would have been noticed, and the 
 
 * Quarterly Review.
 
 37 
 
 powers of the Commissioners more accurately defined ; did 
 all sleep in the House of Commons, andMr. Brougham alone 
 watch ? 
 
 This has reduced those who contend that the public schools 
 were without the pale of the enquiry, to a dilemmaj but it was 
 to be avoided by attributing a mean fraud to Mr- Brougham, 
 and it is gravely suggested that by expressing his approba- 
 tion of Westminster on the presentation of the first report, 
 he had purposely lulled* the suspicions of the House and the 
 country, that his -game might be more sure the next time. 
 How far the public may be willing to give credit to slanderous 
 imputations of base motives to Mr. Brougham, coming from 
 these anonymous writers, we cannot judge but it is futile to 
 do any thing more than state the plan and the object of attack, 
 so long as they consist in such arguments and suggestions as 
 these ; it may be fair to observe, that. Mr. Brougham at 
 least, continued consistent, and having once praised West- 
 minsUr School, no subsequent abuse of it is to be found; 
 nor after the benefit has been obtained, was the ladder on 
 which he mounted kicked down. The entire ignorance which 
 existed as to the real nature of the foundations of the public 
 schools, and some of the foundations connected with the 
 Universities, was the chief cause of the prejudice against the 
 examination into their establishments : it was the ignorance 
 that the Charter House was originally destined to the educa- 
 ting the poor, that the vast revenues of Winchester and 
 Eton were (if justly applied) to be appropriated to the poor 
 and indigent, that caused the surprise and doubt which arose 
 on seeing these institutions (so long devoted to the upper and 
 middling classes) ranked amongst the establishments for the 
 education of the poor and of the lower orders; much 
 stress ha been laid on the term lower, orders, as pointing at 
 a class composed of beggars, and those only just above them ; 
 while in truth, the poor and the lower orders are convertible 
 
 * Quarterly Review.
 
 38 
 
 terms; indeed the Committee themselves, in their Report* 
 use the one for the other. 
 
 The Appendix to the Third Report, contains the evi- 
 dence taken before the Committee on the abuses supposed 
 to exist in charities ^connected with education, these cases 
 were not invidiously selected for party purposes just before 
 the election, and only those places pointed out as containing 
 abuses, where some particular ministerial influence was 
 supposed to reside, as is suggested in the journal so often 
 referred to. 
 
 Nor is it likely that Mr. Brougham as chairman, if he 
 had been inclined, should have been able to do so ; had he 
 attempted, it is not too much to suppose that the Go- 
 vernment party in the Committee, finding all the corrup- 
 tion and abuses connected with their own partizans, would 
 have been active in discovering some cases equally flagrant, 
 in which some of the opposition members or their adherents 
 were connected. But no such selection was made ; parties 
 who knew of the existence of abuses, or who conceived 
 them to exist, came forward and offered their evidence. 
 
 And if it so happens, that a violent presumption of abuse 
 at St. Bees, within the precincts of the Lonsdale influence, 
 or at Huntingdon, so intimately connected with Lord Sand- 
 wich, did arise, it is hard to throw the blame either on Mr. 
 Brougham or his friends, who assisted him in the Commit- 
 tee ; but neither the absurdity nor the injustice of such an 
 accusation, has prevented its being asserted most roundly 
 in the Quarterly Review. 
 
 " We wish not to see a single abuse screened, but 
 every case fairly and impartially examined," such is the 
 sentiment of these journalists, who confess " they do 
 not pretend to be amongst the number affecting to 
 doubt the existence of abuses ;" it is not that they 
 " doubt the abuses, or wish to screen them,'* it is only, 
 however, that when the frauds are exposed, or the abuses 
 are to be enquired into, the one becomes a personal attack
 
 39 
 
 on individuals, the other becomes a prejudiced and partial 
 enquiry into a few cases, for the purpose of casting odium 
 on the connections of Government, and libelling and insult- 
 ing the church. 
 
 It happened, that the Bishop of Lincoln was patron and 
 visitor of one of the chanties, into the administration of 
 which the Committee enquired. And in stating what Mr. 
 Brougham conceived to be a perversion of the charitable 
 funds, he added, that this was done by the permission of 
 the visitor and patron. The very fact of the mentioning the 
 name of the illustrious prelate, is the signal for exclama- 
 tion. 
 
 And he is represented as the first visitor, whose cha- 
 racter is immolated at the shrine of Mr. Brougham's ven- 
 geance. And after having ingeniously discovered this assault, 
 which, perhaps, the Right Rev. personage would not him- 
 self have felt ; the next object is to discover a motive for 
 the attack, which was soon found to exist in this Prelate's 
 having stepped forwards on various occasions as vindicator 
 of the doctrines of the Church of England, which is set 
 down as quit* sufficient to account for the hostile spirit sup- 
 posed (without any reason) to have been displayed against 
 him by Mr. Brougham. 
 
 The two cases we shall first mention are Mere and Spital. 
 
 Mr. Dawson proved he was agent to the warden of the 
 Hospital of Mere, near Lincoln, and as such, received, in res- 
 pect of ihe estates belonging to the charity, the annual sum 
 of o32 rent, o8 of which he paid to the warden, and <4 
 each to six brethren ; the brethren are nominated by the 
 warden, though it appears, that in fact it was left to this 
 very agent to recommend fit objects the estate consisted 
 of about 653 acres, freed of tythe and poor's rates, five 
 miles from the city of Lincoln ; 224 acres, part of this pro- 
 perty, were occupied by Mr. Dawson the witness, and 
 though ill cultivated, he paid after' the rate of 10s. an 
 acre for what he occupied. No foundation or other docu-
 
 40 
 
 i 
 
 merits appea'red, from which it could be collected on what 
 authority the money stipend to the six poor men, called 
 Beadesmen, was fixed ; no chapel or church of any kind 
 existed in this parish, nor in fact any poor; the rent of 32 
 of course was not the real rent, but only the ancient re- 
 served rent, the estate being let on a 21 years lease, and 
 renewed every seven years, and the whole Jine received by 
 the 'warden for his otvn use. The Rev. Dr. John Prettyraan, 
 son of the Bishop of Lincoln, is the warden, and was ap- 
 pointed by his father ; the witness being asked, whether the 
 late warden had resigned on being presented to the living 
 of Cardington ? he answered in the affirmative he was fur- 
 ther asked, whether that living was given him by the Bishop 
 of Lincoln, to which he replied, " he believed it was." 
 
 As to the Hospital of Spital, the Rev. John Prettyman, son 
 of the late Dr. Prettyman and nepheu of the Bishop of Lin- 
 coln is master, and the dean and chapter of Lincoln are 
 the patrons. The estates belonging to this charity are very 
 extensive, part stated to produce a rental of between 600 
 and ct700 a year, and others also very considerable, let out 
 on leases for lives, (one of which is a lease of the seat of 
 the Monson family), the amount of the real value of these 
 leases could not be ascertained. The charity was endowed 
 the twenty-second of Richard II. the foundation was by 
 Thomas Aston, the words of the grant are, 
 
 " Habeudum quatuor tnesuagia, &c. et advocacoes ecclesiaf de Skel- 
 dynghop eidem magistro sive custodi et successoribus suis magistris sive 
 custoclibus domus sive hospitalis predicte, divina pro salubri statu nostro 
 dum vixerimus, et anima nostra cum ab hac luce migravimus, necnon 
 animarum omnium fidelium defunctor" in hospital! predicto, juxta 
 ordinacoem ipsius Thome in hac parte faciendam celebratuf* in aug- 
 mentacontm sustentacdYiis sue ac auzilium sustentaconis quorundam 
 pauperism in eodem hospitali sive domo degencium iinperpetuum." 
 
 It concludes, 
 
 '* Ita semper quod quedam compelentes tumme argenti de fruclilus tt 
 proficuis ecclesiar* predictar, per prefatum magistrutn sive custodem 
 pauferibus parochianis earundem ecclesiamm aunuatim solvantur et dis- 
 tribuantur."
 
 41 
 
 Notwithstanding these express words, the whole profits 
 of all the estates are received by the Master, except 
 27 4-5. puid to four pensioners and half a pensioner, and 
 abcut '6 to the vicar, and the expenses of the repairs of 
 the chancel, (a mere trifle). 
 
 On these two cases Mr. Brougham remarked, and it must 
 be admitted rightly enough, that 
 
 " at Mere there was an endowment lor a warden and poor brethren of 
 very ancient date, and that the warden and lessees were well prov.ded for, 
 whatever might be the lot of the brethren, (and their lot was to receive 
 4 a piece as has been seen), that the bishop of the diocese is both patron 
 and visitor, and had given the wardenship to his nephew, and that the 
 former warden resigntd it, on being promoted by the saine prelate to a 
 living in his gift, and the son of that right reverend person is master of 
 Spital Hospital, enjoying besides other landed property, an estate of 
 600 or <700 a year, and all he pays to the poor is <'27 4*. to four or 
 five pensioners." pp. J4, 15. 
 
 Again, 
 
 " The Dean and Chapter of Lincoln have the patronage as well as 
 the superintendance of Spital charity : yet they allow the Wnrden, son 
 of their Diocesan, to enjoy the produce of large estates, devised to him 
 in trust for the poor of two parishes as well as of the hospital, while he 
 only pays a few pounds to four or five of the latter. The Bishop himself 
 is patron and visitor of Mere, and permits the Waiden, his nephew (for 
 whom he made the vacancy by promoting his predecessor) tp enjoy or 
 underlet a considerable trust estate, paying only '2-t a year to the 
 poor." p. 25. 
 
 It may be proper here to state an error Mr. Brougham 
 has fallen into : first the Rev. J. Prettyman, master of Spital, 
 is not the son of the Bishop of Lincoln (but the nephew) 
 and the Rev. J. Prettyman, Master of Mere is the son of 
 the Bishop. As to the living of Cardington being given, 
 by the Bishop of Lincoln to the late Warden of Mere, 
 that living is not in his gift, and the chairman was misled 
 by the statement of Mr. Dawson the agent. The mistake as 
 to the nephew and son, of the same name, is easily accounted 
 for. Our readers may be already puzzled on this point : 
 as to the living there does not seem to be any reason
 
 42 
 
 why Mr. Brougham should have suspected the accuracy of 
 the statement of the witness. If Mr. Brougham's malice 
 towards the Bishop of Lincoln were greater even than is sug- 
 gested, it would be allowing little for his ingenuity to suppose 
 that he intentionally made these mis-stitements, which in 
 no wise tend to alter the case sought to be established by 
 him. 
 
 The case" of Mere is discussed in a few words by the 
 Quarterly Review, and its law assessor, ** it is let by the 
 ' Warden as ecclesiastical or collegiate property frequently 
 " is on renewable leases, this preferment being like many 
 '* others in the kingdom an ecclesiastical estate burthened 
 " by a fixed money payment." Now the reader must bear in 
 mind as an answer to this, that it no where appears that this 
 is an ecclesiastical estate ; nor how it is burthened with any 
 fixed money payment. No endowment or statute being 
 shewn, it only appears, that an estate .(left, according to 
 current report for the support of six poor men, and a poor 
 warden, who was to read to them) is enjoyed entirely 
 by the Rev. J. Prettyman, on the presentation of the Bishop 
 of Lincoln, subject only to a yearly payment of o24. Why 
 it is asked is this case selected from 2 or SOO benelice 
 similarly circumstanced in different parts of the kingdom ? 
 Just, because there was such a number so situated, is the ob- 
 vious answer ; and there are few readers who will not readily 
 agree that all similar cases of property, evidently designed 
 for the poor, and usurped without any apparent right, by 
 the rich, should at least be enquired into. 
 
 There are some trifling remarks attributing ignorance to 
 Mr. Brougham, as to the modes of letting leases on fines. 
 These may pass; it has not yet been shewn, that the Chairman 
 puts every question which appears in the minutes ; indeed, 
 we know that in some cases the greater number of questions 
 were put by other members of the Committee: and the pre- 
 sent is the first instance of a Chairman being held answer- 
 able for all the questions as well as all the answers in the 
 evidence.
 
 45 
 
 The Spital case is also dismissed like the other, " the 
 circumstances of this benefice not differing materially from 
 those of Mere." But the reader must judge from the 
 misrepresentations about to be exposed, how far this Ques- 
 tion has been fairly canvassed by the antagonists of Mr. 
 Brougham, 
 
 " It appears that the property was expressly given to the Master of 
 the Spilal-in-the Street (called by the learned gentleman Spilal Hospital*) 
 annexing only the condition of aiding in the maintenance of certain poor 
 persons. And that, accordingly, he (the Master) does give the ut'ial 
 pensions to the usual number of poor taken, according to the directions 
 of the original deed from the neighbouring parishes. To call it ' an 
 estate devised in trust for the poor,' is an unfair representation, the 
 paymont of competent sums of money to certain poor, is not the maiu 
 object, but only a conditian of the grant." 
 
 Now, it is not very probable that many of the reader* 
 of the Review, referred to the grant itself, though the 
 Reviewer has noticed it, and we have given the most im- 
 portant words of it, from which it will be seen, that the 
 estates are expressly given, as well for the usual prayers, 
 as for the support of the Master of the Hospital, and certain 
 poor persons for ever. And what hospital does the Master 
 support ? or what part of his large revenues is applied 
 to the support of certain poor persons according to the 
 express words of the endowment ? Not one halfpenny, there- 
 fore, goes towards one of the main objects of the Charity. 
 This is not, as is contended, an ecclesiastical benefice tuith a 
 
 Jixed money payment ; it is a charitable endowment, one of 
 the objects of which, namely, the support of certain poor 
 
 persons, is entirely neglected ; and the whole revenues go to 
 swell the income of one who enjoys a complete sinecure. 
 To say that there is a condition annexed, of aiding in the main- 
 tenance of certain poor persons, and that, accordingly, the 
 
 * " Magister denius sive Hosphalis de Sp:ltal-o-Slrete," are the exact 
 words of the letters patent before quoted, the very words used by Mr. 
 Brougham, and prove this lively sneer introduced no doubt ad cmgendam 
 invuliam to be ra'hcr misplaced,
 
 44 
 
 usual pensions to the usual number of poor are paid, is a gross 
 and intentional perversion of the words, and the intent-of the 
 endowment, because the aiding in the support of the poor, 
 and the fixed money payments, are two distinct parts of 
 the endowment, both of which are to be performed, whereas 
 according to the construction pretended, the payment of 
 the fixed money payments, is made to satisfy the direction 
 to support the poor. It is said the attack might as well 
 be directed against every ecclesiastical property in every 
 diocese, or all property belonging to every chapter, college, 
 or corporation in the kingdom ; but this is untrue ; the attack, 
 as it is called, may indeed be fairly made on every endow- 
 ment, like that in question, where one of the principal 
 objects is charity, where, like the present, a flagrant abuse 
 exists, flourishing unchecked by the patron and visitor. 
 
 We now leave the cases of Spital and Mere, trusting that every 
 person who has read the foregoing statement, is completely 
 convinced, that both the properties which were evidently 
 designed originally in part for the relief and support of the 
 poor, are now with the exception of some trifling payments 
 entirely diverted from their original destination, and that they 
 fully warrant the remarks made on them by Mr. Brougham. 
 
 The Appendix to the third and fourth report contains the 
 evidence with respect to St. Bees School in Cumberland. 
 This school having a special visitor is excluded from the in- 
 trusion of the Parliamentary Commissioners, although from 
 the facts disclosed, Mr. Brougham conceives it to have been 
 exactly one of those cases which demanded their inter- 
 position. From the evidence it appears that part of the 
 property belonging to the school is now held by Lord 
 Lonsdale one of the trustees, under a lease granted to his 
 ancestor, who was himself a trustee.* 
 
 * The correspondent of Sir William Scott has devoted nearly sixteen 
 pages of his work, to the examination of Mr. Brougham's remarks on 
 this caie : the Quarterly Review, although not so prolix, has been no
 
 45 
 
 St. Bees School was founded by Archbishop Grindal, in 
 pursuance of letters patent from Elizabeth, in the twenty fifth 
 year of her reign. The provost of Queen's College, Oxford, is 
 the visitor. The school is managed by seven governors : the 
 present Lord Lonsdalc, the provost of Queen's, and five 
 others, chiefly clergymen, holding church preferment of 
 which Lord Lonsdale is the patron, are the present go- 
 vernors. 
 
 The endowment is of the manors of Sandwith and St. 
 Bees, otherwise Kirkby Beacock. From a letter of one of the 
 governors, written to the visitor in 1721. it appears that the 
 tenants of part of the property, claiming probably some te- 
 nant right of renewal, had persuaded Archbishop Bancroft to 
 compel the Governors (but by what right is not shewn) to 
 grant leases to the then tenants for 999 years, of seventy 
 tenements at small rents of about 15s. each and the same 
 Governor in answer to an enquiry by the visitor, whether the 
 income of the Charity could not be improved by opening 
 coal pits in the manors belonging to the school, says, that 
 the Trustees did not know of any person who would farm 
 the coal pits, except J. Lowther, Esq. afterwards Sir James 
 Lowther. This is important, as shewing that in 1721, 
 there appeared to be no doubt of the title of the school to 
 the coal in these manors. A lease (of the coals) in 1742 
 was granted to Sir J. Lowther, (who was a Trustee of the 
 Charity) for 867 years, (to correspond with the existing 
 term of 999 years already created in the surface) at a rent 
 of B. 10s, 
 
 wise sparing either of contradiction, or of ingenious suggestion of the 
 particular motives for Mr. Brougham's remarks, not forgetting by the 
 wa y, his opposition to the Lowther interest at the last election. It was to 
 be supposed for obvious reasons, every nerve would be strained to prove 
 that the case of St. Bees had been overstated, or misrepresented by Mr. 
 Bioughaui; how far this was the case will appear. It .will be useless to 
 oppose contradiction to assertion. Mr. Brougham's remarks will be best 
 defended by a stattment of the effect of the evidence before the Com- 
 mittee.
 
 46 
 
 As this lease was not produced before the Committee, it 
 cannot be positively shewn what part of the coals is grante d 
 though from the whole tenor of the evidence there can be 
 no doubt but it was of all the coal belonging to the school 
 endowment. Dr. Satterthwaite, the Rector ofLotuther, and 
 an active governor of the charity, asserts that the lease was 
 of the coal in the manor of Kirkby Seacock only, and that 
 he considers Kirkby Beacock to be a manor laithin that of 
 St. Bees, the contrary, however, is positively asserted by 
 Mr. Wilson, the late Master, who distinctly says he saw the 
 lease, and copied the indorsement. It is to be remarked it 
 is in evidence that in the leases of the surface, the coals and 
 other manerial rights were reserved, (as is usual in like 
 cases,) and indeed one of the principal revenues now left to 
 this school is an alabaster quarry worked in one of the 
 manors. 
 
 From the evidence it appears, that Lord Lonsdale is now 
 procuring coals from under the manor of Sandwith, (which 
 is part of the school lands) and the governors of the Charity 
 in 1816, in answer to the enquiry of the visitor, state that 
 there is in the school chest a counterpart of a lease of" the 
 '* coals, seams of coals, &c." granted to Sir J. Lowther. 
 And as they do not specify of what parts, it is fair to infer 
 that it is a grant of the whole. The present Lord Lons- 
 dale has succeeded to the possession of this lease, and to 
 the collieries adjoining the school property, and now worked 
 by him, and of which Sir J. Lowther was also possessed at 
 the time he caused his co-trustees to grant him the School 
 lease. 
 
 The first person examined before the Committee, was 
 Mr. Brooks, a solicitor in London, who had been employed 
 to make enquiries as to the validity of the lease in 174-2 ; 
 it appears from a letter produced by the provost of Queen's, 
 that Mr. Hodson (now the legal agent of Lord Lonsdale as 
 is stated) had, before he became so, (in 1807) informed the 
 provost that he was directed to enquire of him whether he
 
 47 < 
 
 was aware of any document by which Lord Lonsdale was 
 entitled to the coal lying under lands in a township, called 
 Sandwich, near St. Bees, part of the manor of Kirkby Bea- 
 cock, alias St. Bees, the property of the Governors of St. 
 Bees school. Mr. Brooks' evidence was only obtained as 
 a clue to the other evidence, and nothing material turns on 
 it, but as he professed to " speak conjecturaliy," much is 
 made of this admission as tending to discredit the other 
 and more important evidence. The next evidence is 
 the Rev. Mr. Wilson, who had been treated with con- 
 siderable harshness by the Governors, and at last, after 
 a hard and painful struggle of six years, was driven to the 
 necessity of resigning his situation. Mr. Wilson, early in 
 his mastership, it seems (and laudably enough) made en- 
 quiries as to the property of the school, and the validity 
 of the lease of the coals. And a plan was set on foot 
 for bringing the point before the Court of Chancery : hovr- 
 ever, on Mr. Wilson mentioning this to a neighbour, the 
 fact was disclosed to the governors, and from thence Mr. 
 Wilson dates the opposition and harsh treatment he ex- 
 perienced from the Trustees. 
 
 It is not necessary to go into his case with minuteness it 
 seems, however, that some complaint was made against him 
 for giving too many holidays, and some < bjections in conse- 
 quence of that, and of his supposed Calvinistic principles, 
 together with an informality in his appointment, prevented 
 the Bishop of Chester from licensing him to the school, 
 though the same Bishop did not scruple to countersign hi 
 testimonials on his quitting the diocese. 
 
 From the evidence of Dr. Satterthwaite, it appears, that 
 he had enquired of the Coal Steward of Lord Lonsdale, and 
 that he stated he believed there were not any workings 
 whereby coals were procured frjm out of the manor of St. 
 Bees. Nor does it appear that there are any pits in the 
 manor, the nearest pit being Wilson's pit, now worked by 
 Lord Lonsdale, and adjoining Sandwith manor, the pro-
 
 48 
 
 perty of the School; and coal immediately under the School 
 land is now being got from Wilson's pit ; the fact, then, is 
 established beyond a doubt, that Lord Lonsdale is now in 
 possession of a lease of the coal belonging to the school 
 land ; is working coal from under the school lands ; whether 
 it be a lease of part, or of all the coal, it is not shewn, because 
 the lease was not produced, nor (notwithstanding the inge- 
 nious suggestions of the Quarterly Review,) could it have 
 been procured by the Committee, had they been ever so will- 
 ing ; but, if a single fact could have been produced to shew 
 the lease was a mere piece of waste paper, not trenching on 
 the revenue or property of the School, it is probable that so 
 studious a defender of his Lordship, as the correspondent of 
 Sir William Scott, would not have been in possession of it, 
 long before his work arrived at the fifth edition. 
 
 It is true, it appears the School estates are so situated, 
 that at present there are no immediate means of working 
 the collieries under them, without being possessed of road- 
 ways over adjoining property ; but is this a reason for alien- 
 ating the property of the school for eight or nine centuries 
 to come, at a mere quit rent ? Might not some future pos- 
 sessor of that very adjoining property now possessed by 
 Lord Lonsdale, in pious charity to the School, afford means 
 of working these very collieries, instead of wringing from the 
 poor their possessions at an under price ? 
 
 The defences made for the possession of this lease 
 are various and opposite ; sometimes, the lease was 
 taken by Sir James Lowther out of charity to the School, 
 as no one else would take it, and that it was worth 
 nothing ; (it is a singular fact, that even the rent of 
 3. 8s. does not appear in any of the accounts as being 
 paid) at others, it was a lease of the coals in the manor 
 of Kirkby Beacock, which is supposed (without any 
 evidence) to be a manor within that of St. Bees: and 
 that, in fact, there are no coals the property of the School. 
 Again, it is ingeniously suggested, as an after-thought, in
 
 49 
 
 one of the new editions of the Letter to Sir William Scott f 
 it is to be presumed (without any reason, however,) that 
 all the coal was granted out by the Crown, when the manor 
 of St. Bees was in the possession of the Crown (which it 
 is not proved ever to have been) ; and the lease from the 
 School was only taken to avoid question in fact, that Sir 
 James might have two strings to his bow ;* that the title of 
 the School to the collieries was, in fact, very doubtful, of 
 which not a shadow of evidence ever appeared. At others, 
 Lord Lonsdale is represented as willing to throw up the 
 lease altogether : then again, the law is to take its course ; 
 that is, if any individual can be found hardy enough to 
 question Lord Lonsdale's right to the lease, he must look 
 forward to being engaged, perhaps for the rest of his life, in 
 a Chancery suit. 
 
 With regard to the defence, that in this case there is a 
 Special Visitor appointed by the Founder himself, to guard 
 over the property destined for the poor, it is absurd even to 
 suppose that the Special Visitor would ever take upon him- 
 self this laborious task, though it appears from the evidence 
 that the Provost (now 80) had an interview with Lord Lons- 
 dale, and did not seem satisfied with his Lordship's explana- 
 tion. 
 
 When it was rumoured that a legal enquiry was about to 
 take place, it is said that Lord Lonsdale first offered to give 
 up the lease, but then, regard being had to its value, said, 
 the law might take its course : but who was to set this power- 
 ful engine in motion ? Was it his L-ordship, one of the Trus- 
 tees ? No. Was it the Visitor? No. Jt appears clear 
 enough, that there was no great activity on the part of the 
 the Provost of Queen's, (and when the delay and vexations 
 
 * It will be recollected, that in 1721 there appeared no doubt (notwith- 
 standing this convenient doctrine of presuming a grant,) of the property 
 of the School in the collieries. And, notwithstanding this grant is to be 
 presumed as far back as FJiz.ibeth, stiil the leases of the surface ex- 
 pressly reserved the coal to the School ! 
 
 E
 
 50 
 
 of a Chancery suit are contemplated, who can wonder !) 
 Was it the Schoolmaster ? No : the example of Mr. Wilson 
 who had been sconsed of his salary ; reprimanded ; his 
 " wings clipped," as the Rector of Lowther observed, his 
 licence refused by the Bishop, and at last driven from the 
 office altogether, was sufficient to deter his successor.* And 
 Lord Lonsdale still is in the quiet possession of the lease, 
 and selling the coals, for aught that appears to the contrary : 
 and no effectual enquiry has been yet made, because no one 
 is found hardy enough to bring down the whole vengeance 
 of the Lowther interest on his head, and to plunge at the 
 same time into a Chancery suit. And the Charity having 
 the full benefit and advantage of a Special Visitor to pro- 
 tect, defend, and recover its rights, is amply guarded from 
 all enquiry by the Commissioners. 
 
 On the foregoing case, Mr. Brougham observes, in his 
 Letter to Sir S. Romilly : 
 
 " It should seem, too, that St. Bees school is equally 
 " exempted. But that its affairs merit investigation clearly 
 " appears by the evidence ; for we there find, that leases of 
 " its land were granted at a remote period, for 1000 years, 
 " at a very low fixed rent ; that at a more recent date, the 
 " valuable minerals were leased at a mere trifle, ( 3. 14*.) 
 ' for the term of 8 or 900 years, to one of the Trustees ; 
 " that one of the present Trustees now enjoys the lease ; 
 " and that a decided majority of the others are clergymen, 
 " holding livings under him, and supporting him in his ma- 
 " nagement of the concern. As none of them have made 
 " any attempt to set aside a lease which every one must 
 " perceive to be utterly void,'and as one of their number has 
 <* expressed his apprehensions of engaging in a contest with 
 " so powerful an adversary, it may be presumed that such 
 " considerations alone could deter them from what was ob- 
 
 * The correspondent of Sir W. Scott believes there is not the slightest 
 moral imputation in the character of Mr. Wilson.
 
 51 
 
 * f viously their duty to the Charity; and the inference is 
 " irresistible, that this was exactly a case which demanded 
 " the interposition of the Commissioners. The rent is about 
 " 100, the value of the tenements being above 8000 a 
 " year." Letter to Sir S. Romilly, p. 17. 
 
 ' We were equally unable to ascertain how much in value 
 *< of the St. Bees School property remained in the hands of 
 " the noble lord, who sustains in his own person the double 
 " character of Trustee and Lessee." p. 22. 
 
 " Not to multiply instances, the venerable head of a Col- 
 " lege at Oxford was deterred from exposing the St. Bees 
 " Case, by the dread of a conflict with his powerful col- 
 " league, before a tribunal where a long purse is as essential 
 " as a good cause." p. 28. 
 
 " So determined was I to avoid every thing which might 
 " lead to such imputations, (i. e. of political feelings,,) that 
 " I interfered at the Westmoreland election to prevent any 
 " allusion from being made to the case of St. Bees School, 
 " and uniformly refused access to the evidence touching 
 " that extraordinary affair, to persons who might use it for 
 " the purposes of the contest." p. 42. 
 
 These remarks of Mr. Brougham have called forth the 
 strongest animadversions from his opponents : first, it is 
 more than insinuated, that the Chairman purposely did not 
 call for the best evidence.* As it appears, that Lord Lons- 
 dale had offered, " in a letter to the Rev. F. Bradley, to 
 " produce to the Committee all such papers as he should 
 " require ; the writer laments, that Mr. B. did not avail 
 '< himself of this offer, as he has a strong belief that it would 
 ' not only have removed his doubts on the 1000 years 
 *'. lease, as also that Lord Lonsdale was not, as was insinu. 
 * ated, working valuable coal mines, the property of St. 
 lf Bees School, of which he continued to possess himself by 
 ' an illegal lease." This is, indeed, a serious charge against 
 
 * Letter to Sir W. Scott. 
 
 E 2
 
 Mr. Brougham ; and it is important, that he should be en- 
 tirely freed from it ; a slight attention to dates will do this. 
 
 On the 23rd of May, Mr. Bradley, then at St. Bees, (who 
 though the nominee of Lord Lonsdale, and entirely unknown 
 to Mr. Brougham, yet for the sake of effect is harmlessly 
 called his friend and correspondent, merely because he very 
 incautiously expressed his approbation of Mr. Brougham's 
 exertions,) received a letter from Mr. Brougham respecting 
 tfte production of the deeds, &c. relating to St. Bees School. 
 And it must be observed, that Mr. Bradley must have been 
 written to the very day the examination of the St. Bees case 
 commenced, viz. the 20th. Mr. Bradley wrote to Lord Lons- 
 dale, then in Rutlandshire ; who, on the 28th of May, re- 
 turns an answer to Mr. Bradley, stating, " that the presence 
 <{ of three Governors was necessary to open the chest, ac- 
 " cording to the statutes ; that he could only speak for him- 
 " self, but was ready, when required to do so, to attend 
 " himself, or to depute some other Governor to attend on 
 " his behalf, to open the chest, and to deliver such papers 
 " as might be required, as far as he was, in conformity to his 
 " duty authorized to do, to such person as might be 
 " directed to receive them." Well, this letter of the 
 28th of May was to go to Mr. Bradley in Cumberland, be- 
 fore Mr. Brougham could learn this extreme willingness of 
 his Lordship (although a little incumbered with the forma- 
 lity of office,) to produce all papers, and it is only sent 
 to the Committee in a letter from Mr. Bradley dated 15th 
 June, Parliament having been dissolved on the 10th of 
 June, how, therefore, was it possible, that the Committee 
 could have availed themselves of this offer to produce all 
 papers ? 
 
 It may be observed that this very formal mode of 
 opening the School chest seems only to have been 
 adopted, on state occasions, as will appear from the evi- 
 dence of Mr. Wilson, who states, that one of the Gover- 
 nors, possessing all the three keys, accompanied by Lord
 
 Lonsdale's own attorney, entered the room in which the box 
 containing the School muniments were kept ; and by force, 
 and contrary to the express statute of the School, took away 
 the lease of the coals, granted to Sir James Lowther, which 
 was given to Lord Lonsdale's agent, who put it in his pocket 
 and walked off with it, and kept it in his possession for more 
 than an hour ! 
 
 Hitherto it has been taken for granted, that a lease of the 
 minerals for 867 years at a mere nominal rent, is such a 
 lease as the Court of Chancery would set aside; but in the 
 Letter to Sir W. Scott, this point is considered as doubt- 
 ful; and a distinction is taken between a long lease of 
 lands (which is admitted, to be voidable,) and a long 
 lease of minerals, which, by reason that they may be soon 
 exhausted., is not always beneficial to the tenant, leaving 
 him subject to the rent. This opinion is very ostentatiously 
 set forth in the Quarterly Review : and, they say, as the 
 authority of the learned Author's opinion is not so great at 
 the bar as in the Select Committee, and, as Sir William 
 Scott's correspondent has doubted whether the lease is void, 
 they are content to remain in suspense on that subject : and, 
 indeed, no attempt would be made to disturb their equili- 
 brium, were it not of importance to shew that Mr. 
 Brougham's authority as a lawyer is at least equal to that of 
 the correspondent of Sir W. Scott. 
 
 It will be superfluous to cite authorities to shew that a 
 lease for nearly 1000 years is in fact to all intents, an aliena- 
 tion, and putting the rent at 20 years purchase ; the lease to 
 Sir James Lowther was nothing else than a sale of all the 
 collieries for about 70. 
 
 It is said, that from Mr. Brougham's letter, it would be 
 supposed, that Lord Lonsdale was personally concerned in 
 this, and that he was implicated in what may be considered 
 as little less than a fraud on the Charity ; but that the fact 
 is, " Lord Lonsdale is in no wise concerned in it, the lease 
 " was made, not even to any one of his ancestors, but to
 
 ; J 54 
 
 " Sir J. Lowther, ort the failure of whose immediate issue, 
 " this lease passed into the line of which the present Earl 
 ' is the representative." 
 
 Notwithstanding this, we maintain that Lord Lonsdale 
 is personally concerned, for Lord Lonsdale is in the enjoy- 
 ment of a lease, (amounting, to all intents and purposes, 
 to a perpetual alienation) of part of the school property, 
 and according to the best evidence that could be pro- 
 cured, this lease is very valuable ; Lord Lonsdale . is 
 actually getting coal from under the school lands, and 
 at the same time, is a trustee himself of this very property, 
 consequently swayed on the one hand, by his interest to 
 preserve his valuable lease, and bound by his duty on 
 the other, to maintain to the uttermost, the interests of 
 the Charity, by every means, and amongst the rest, by 
 the impeaching all fraudulent and improper leases. And 
 will it be maintained, that a lease which was to endure 
 for nearly a thousand years, could be a proper mode of ad- 
 ministering the property ; that a sweeping grant of the mi- 
 nerals of an estate, for 1000 years, (the value of which was 
 unascertained,) at a quit rent, was a lease beneficial to 
 the Charity, and made in due administration of its property; 
 is not such a lease, just the one for the examination of a 
 trustee, the very circumstance that should rouse the 
 suspicion of the supinest special visitor; and yet it has 
 existed in full force for the last 80 years ? 
 
 In the letter to Sir W. Scott, there is no part so laboured 
 as the defence of Lord Lonsdale and the St. Bees Charity ; 
 a new argument of a page and a half has been inserted in 
 the latter editions of this work, which goes to maintain, 
 that after all the lease of the collieries under the circum- 
 stances stated, must be taken to have been granted on the 
 most advantageous terms that could be gotten, and that a 
 trustee may be a lessee as well as any other person, where 
 it is manifestly for the benefo of the trust estate; the doctrine 
 of the Court of Chancery only tending to make the con"
 
 tract fast and loose, and to be set aside if bad ; if, what 
 has been before said, has not produced conviction of the in- 
 validity of the lease, it is useless to attempt any thing further 
 by way of argument. 
 
 Both in the letter to Sir W. Scott and the Quarterly Re- 
 yiew, it is taken for granted that every question put to all 
 the witnesses came from Mr. Brougham ; the absurdity of 
 which is manifest, particularly as to the examination of the 
 witnesses in the St. Bees case, for previously to the Evidence 
 in that case being gone into, Sir James Graham (the late 
 solicitor of Lord Lonsdale) was put on the Committee, as is 
 said, at his own request, and he attended all the sittings, 
 and himself cross-examined the witnesses ; the intimate con- 
 nection that subsists between Sir James Graham and Lord 
 Lonsdale is well known, and is it to be supposed that his 
 Lordship's interest, when watched by so active and ex- 
 perienced a friend, was neglected or betrayed ; is it not fair 
 to suppose, that all evidence necessary to the defence would 
 be procured ; that every fact advanced against Lord Lons- 
 dale, capable of being denied or disproved would have been 
 so ; is it not also fair to presume, that if there was any 
 evidences to disprove the statements made, and the inferences 
 drawn by Mr. Brougham, that they would have been long 
 ere this before the public ; at least his Lordship's interest 
 amongst the trustees is well represented, is it probable that 
 there should be any want of a " holy poet" to sing forth his 
 Lordship's praises ? seeing what a patron of church prefer- 
 ment he is ? 
 
 It may be fair to state that Lord Lonsdale has expended 
 from </ 600 to of 800 on the school house, although in truth, 
 his private bounties have nothing to do with his conduct as a 
 trustee. 
 
 With regard to the examining the best Evidence, Mr. 
 Hodgson being Lord Lonsdale's attorney, it would have been 
 improper to have called him. Dr. Satterthwaite was examined, 
 and being intimately connected with Lord Lonsdale, it must
 
 be assumed all questions necessary for his defence, and which 
 could be satisfactorily answered, were put to him. 
 
 The Dambrook case was not even alluded to by Mr. 
 Brougham in his pamphlet or speech, and therefore his an- 
 tagonists were not strictly called upon to discuss it, and 
 they have not even noticed it ; it was understood at the 
 time this singular matter came before the Co nmitte.e, that 
 some satisfactory answer would be furnished as yet we have 
 heard of none. It should seem indeed, that Lowther and 
 its neighbourhood is fertile in cases of this sort. 
 
 The following is an extract from the will of John Viscount 
 Lowther, dated 1698. 
 
 " Al^o I give and devise to my executors hereinafter named, their heirs 
 ami assigns, tha manor and lordsh;p of .Dambrook in the county of York, 
 with the appurtenances, together with my capital messuage and tene- 
 ment of and in Datnbrook aforesaid, and all other my messuages, 
 houses, lands, tenements and hereditaments of and in Dambrook afore- 
 said, with the appurtenances, (the mynes of leed, coale, and all other 
 minerals royalties and ftanchises within the same, always excepted and 
 reserved;) and aUo all that my rectory and parsonage of the parish 
 of Hale, in the said county of Cumberland, together with the glebe 
 lands there, and all manner of tvthes or tenths, oblation-, obventions, 
 profits, advantages, emoluments and hereditaments whatsoever to the 
 said rectory parsonage and glebe lands belonging, and all my propor- 
 tion, part or share of the tythes, tenths and other profits yearly 
 cumincr, growing, renewing and increasing within the territories, village 
 or hamlet of Brisco, within the parish of Saint John, in the said county 
 of Cumberland, heretofore had and enjoyed together with the rectory 
 of Hale aforesaid, in tru*t nevertheless to be a Fund, or to employ aud 
 dispose the rents and profits thereof, for the maintenance and salary 
 of the Schoolmaster or Schoolmasters of the Free School, for which I 
 have erected a house at Lowther aforesaid, and for the management of 
 the same, and upon such trust and for such purpose to settle the afore- 
 said manor or lordship of Dambrook aforesaid, aud the aforesaid rectory 
 and parsonage, globe lands, tythes and premises, with the appurte- 
 nances, upon trustees, in such manner, and under such laws statues and 
 constitution*, as to my spid executors shall seem meet and expedient, 
 or otherwise upon such other trusts, aud for such other purposes, as my 
 said executors shall think most conducing to the good of the county
 
 Of 
 
 of Westmoreland, and especially of the parish of Lowther aforesaid. 
 Report, p. 124. 
 
 It will be a matter of some surprize to learn that there is 
 now no school at Lowther, though there exists a tradition that 
 one did exist. 
 
 The estates in Yorkshire which appear to he charged 
 with the support of the school, were bought about 1.S06 by 
 Lord Ribblesdale, and a considerable portion of land is noiu 
 in the possession ofLcri Lvnsdal*, allotted under an act of 
 Parliament in lieu of the tythes of H ile. 
 
 Such is the remarkable evidence of Dr Satterthwaite : 
 this case has received no answer ; not a syllable of explanation 
 of any sort has been offered ; the inference at present, till 
 the contrary be shewn, is, that in addition to the lease of the 
 collieries at St. Bees, Lord Lonsdale hus sold one estate and 
 enjoys another, both of which were expressly devised for 
 the poor. Is not this a case that demands enquiry ? Is the 
 law in this case as in the case of the collieries, to take its 
 course ? Or is Lord Lonsdale to give up the estate and the 
 by-gone arrears to the use of the poor ? 
 
 It may be well to remember that this case was not alluded 
 to by Mr. Brougham, no doubt, because it appeared impos- 
 sible, but that some explanation must be j^iven, and yet what 
 can be said in defence of Lord Lonsdale, should it turn out* 
 that in fact he has sold one large estate, the inheritance of 
 the poor, and enjoyed for a series of years another, unless it 
 can be clearly shewn he was ignorant of the fact ? 
 
 Mr. Brougham just before the dissolution of Parliament* 
 aware probably of the delicate situation in which he was 
 placed with regard to the Lowther interest, which he wa* 
 about to oppose, states, " that to avoid all imputation of his 
 " having been actuated by political feelings with regard to 
 the enquiries to be made respecting the abuses of St. 
 " Bees, interfered to prevent any allusion being made to 
 " the case of St. Bees school, and uni.turmly refused access 
 " to the evidence touching that extraordinary aftair, to
 
 58 
 
 persons who might seek it for the purpose of the election." 
 Now we can well guess what would have been said in the 
 Quarterly Review, and by Sir William Scott's correspondent, 
 if Mr. Brougham, or any person through his means, had 
 just before the Cumberland election, published the whole 
 statement of the St, Bees and the Darobrook cases, but it 
 would be difficult to imagine how the line of conduct ac- 
 tually pursued by Mr. Brougham could have been fastened 
 upon as the means of reproach, but so it is : first, it is re- 
 marked with an ingenious and ironical simplicity, it may 
 be well to hand it down to posterity that, whilst the in- 
 quiry relating to St. Bees was going on, Mr. Brougham's 
 friends were canvassing Cumberland against the Lowther in- 
 terest ; this may be an important fact in history, but as it 
 is to go down to posterity, it may as well go coupled with 
 the fact, that the exposure of the curious history of the ad- 
 ministration of the St. Bees charity, arose entirely from the 
 suggestion of a member of the Committee, whose political 
 opinions were opposite to those of Mr. Brougham, and not 
 from any suggestion of the Chairman or his friends. 
 
 As to the charge, that Mr. Brougham after the dissolution 
 of Parliament, executed a dominion over the archives of a 
 dissolved House of Commons, and treated as his private pro- 
 perty, that evidence which had been once presented the House, 
 artd that it does not appear when the expiring House appointed 
 Mr. Brougham custos of its suspended functions and authorities. 
 It is hardly credible that such a point could have been se- 
 riously made, as the answer, if it is worth it, is obvious ; the 
 evidence being presented to the House was ordered to be 
 printed, and from the moment the evidence was presented, 
 each member was entitled to it, although Parliament was dis. 
 solved before it was printed ; still it was competent to any 
 member to have possessed himself of a copy of all, or of any 
 part of it, although, of course, it was not probable that any 
 member should do this, yet Mr. Brougham as chairman of the 
 Committee was differently situated, and although, strictly
 
 59 , 
 
 speaking, he may have possessed no power " over the archives 
 " of a dissolved House," yet he possessed a power over the 
 copy of the minutes of the evidence which was his own 
 private property, taken by him or by his direction during the 
 proceedings of the Committee, and of course he was entitled 
 to admit or to deny access to this his properly, just as he would 
 to any other minutes or notes he might have been possessed 
 of, and it was to those notes that Mr. Brougham of course is 
 to be taken to allude. 
 
 But in fact, if the writers of the Quarterly Review had en- 
 quired of any of the clerks of the House of Commons, he 
 would have found that Mr. Brougham was not the sole 
 member who exercised dominion over the archives of a de- 
 funct House, but that partial evidence, affecting the cha- 
 racter of au individual, was expressly impounded till the 
 opening of the new Parliament, by an order of the person 
 who had been chairman of the Committee before which it 
 was taken, with the concurrence of tho Speaker. 
 
 There is another point which is treated of at great length in 
 the Quarterly Review, namely the inserting in the minutes of 
 the House, a letter in fact received after the Committee had 
 ceased to exist. Every reader of the article above quoted will 
 remember the wild and absurd construction put on this: the 
 simple fact was, an answer on a matter of form, which com- 
 posed part of the necessary materials of the report could not 
 be received in time to insert it, whilst the Committee was ac- 
 tually sitting, but it was agreed that when received, the 
 answer, should be considered as part of the minutes, and so 
 printed accordingly. 
 
 Pocklinglon School. 
 
 We have alluded to this case before ; as one disclosing 
 the grossest abuse m the disposition of the funds, and as es- 
 tablishing the utter insufficiency of Special Visitors, under 
 whose harmless interference the most remiss Master, the
 
 60 
 
 most fraudulent perverter of the property devoted to the 
 poor, may sleep in the calmest security ; but, that no loop 
 liole may remain for an answer, nothing shall be left on mere 
 assertion : the following is an abstract of the evidence re- 
 lating to this case : 
 
 The Master of St. John's College, Cambridge, is the 
 Visitor of Pocklington School in Yorkshire, founded by Dr. 
 Downman: the authority is stated by Dr. Wood, the Master, 
 to be " if the Master should happen to be in the neighbour - 
 " hood of Pocklington, or should send any Fellows of the 
 '* College thither (they having estates near), they might go 
 ''to the School and examine the Master, and see if he was 
 " doing the duty or not ; and if not, then the original power 
 " was to remove him." 
 
 After the Reports of the Education Committee, in 1816 
 and in 1817, and after repeated notices both in debate 
 and out of doors, that such abuses were no longer un- 
 attended to, two of the Fellows of St. John's College made 
 a visitatorial progress to the north, and examined the 
 Master and parishioners, relating to this School; they 
 found the school-room in a dilapidated state, the floor of 
 the lower room up, and the windows broken, and no ap- 
 pearance of its being used as a School, although it was 
 stated to be about to be repaired ; and it was mentioned to 
 the Visitors, (as they admit,) that it had been used as a saw- 
 pit ; one scholar was found in a room not in a very good 
 state, yet habitable. It appeared from the time the Master 
 had entered the School, in 1809, there had been in the 
 whole sixteen scholars, previously to which time there had 
 been none for eleven years, and only three or four 
 for twenty years. 
 
 It would be absurd to state the times of attendance stated 
 by the Master, or the school regulations, when in effect 
 there was neither teaching nor scholars ; the usher was 
 deaf, and it appeared from the answers to the questions 
 by the parishioners, that due attendance was not given
 
 61 
 
 by the Schoolmaster, that but for want of due instruc- 
 tion, sereral would have sent their children there, which 
 had been sent elsewhere, and that the inhabitants and 
 neighbours would have sent a large number to the school 
 (which is admitted by the Master to be a free grammar 
 school, open to other than the inhabitants of Pockling- 
 ton, which is itself a considerable market town of 2000 
 inhabitants) : the revenues as rumoured in the parish, are 
 ..1200 a year. 
 
 The Master admitted, although part of the property was 
 in Chancery, that he made from 800 to to .900 a year. 
 He had been entirely absent from home more than 10 
 months at a time by his own admission, playing at hide 
 and seek with his creditors, leaving the single scholar to 
 the administration of the deaf usher. 
 
 " Vo!o et ordino ac firmiter itatno tit quicunque de collegio predicto 
 inagister autsocius per magistrum eUisclem colle.zij missus dictam villain 
 de Poklington appropinquare contigerit, eandem villam adeat, dictam 
 scolam iiienm ibidem iutret, tnagistrum ejusdem scole salutct, aut 
 absentem ad scolani venire facial diligenterque examinet ; que si 
 raoribus aut scientia culpabilein aut minus idcneutn reperierit infra ter- 
 m iiium amovere facial, aliumque eo peritiorem atit moribus ornatiorera 
 per dictum mag' strum ac gardinnos dictum glide eligi, ordinari, et 
 imtitui cum omni celeritnte perficiat, tarn in sui collegij utilitatem et 
 decorem quern in hujus mee voluntatis firmitatem et vigor^m, ut qui sui 
 incuria aut negligentia id minus fieri aniuaadverterint." 
 
 So says Dr. Downman the founder of the school, who 
 it must be remembered, was a munificent donof to that 
 college, which was thus entrusted with the watching over 
 it, and it was from this school that the scholars of Dr. 
 Downman's foundation at St. John's were to be first chosen ; 
 and this is particularly important, because it completely 
 establishes a connection between the school and the college : 
 at the same time there appears to be no instance on re- 
 cord of any visitatorial power exercised by the Master of 
 St. John's, although the college enjoyed the benefit of a
 
 62 
 
 foundation of five scholarships of the founder, and it also 
 affords a sufficient reason for the enquiry into the value of 
 part of the revenues of St. John's, made by the Committee, 
 and which has been ingeniously perverted into a studied 
 insult to the whole university of Cambridge. 
 
 It is remarkable, that this same Master of Pocklington, 
 notwithstanding the subsequent visitation of Dr. Wood in 
 person, which took place in May last, when the number 
 of scholars had increased to eight, still has the controul over 
 the school : the visitor, however, having thought proper 
 to issue some new regulations for the future government of 
 it, transmitted, nevertheless, to the Master, in the most 
 friendly terms, without being mixed with one single syllable 
 of complaint or animadversion on the past ! 
 
 Well, upon this evidence what were the remarks of Mr. 
 Brougham ? Why, that gross abuse of large funds had 
 been permitted to exist, notwithstanding the visitatorial 
 power assigned by the founder to St. John's College, nor 
 does it seem that any one has attempted to deny this, though 
 the vigilance and early care of the Master of St. John's, 
 in investigating the abuses of the School, receive the highest 
 praises from the Quarterly Reviewers. 
 
 But there is another part of the proceedings connected 
 with the Pocklington School ; namely that some questions 
 were put to the Master and Fellows, as to the value of the 
 possessions of the College ; which it is asserted had nothing 
 to do with the enquiry before the Committee, (and 
 strictly speaking it had not) : and also, that Dr. Wood 
 and the two Fellows, were insulted by questions respecting 
 the possibility of some preference having been shewn in 
 the election of certain persons as Fellows, who were con- 
 nected with the Duke of Norfolk: (the patron of five 
 livings, which the Fellows alone of that College might be pre- 
 aented). In the first point, it needs only be remarked, that the 
 statutes of St. John's enact that in the election of scholars, 
 the inopes are to be preferred : and further, that the objection-
 
 63 
 
 able questions were in truth put for the purpose of enquir- 
 ing into the value of the benefit received by the College, from 
 the donation of Dr. Downman, the founder of Pocklington 
 School, and over which he had in a manner paid these 
 very persons to watch, and who were ready to accept 
 the bounty, without performing the duty. 
 
 On the other point, (respecting the livings) not with" 
 standing the assertions in the Quarterly Review, it is a 
 piece of scandal long rumoured abroad, that some pre- 
 ference had been given in the election of the fellowships 
 of St. John's. And on this being mentioned to Dr. Wood 
 (not as appears either by way of studied insult or of 
 cross-examination) he was much surprized; and on it being 
 suggested to him that an advantageous opportunity occurred 
 of putting on record an utter denial of the accusation, he 
 very readily assented to this, in consequence of which, the 
 questions alluded to were put both to him and also to the* 
 two Fellows present, that the denial might be as pointed as 
 possible, and for no other purpose whatsoever, as far as either 
 the evidence shews, or as has ever transpired during the 
 course of these discussions. 
 
 It may be well to remark once for all that in exami- 
 nations of this nature, it frequently happens, that some in- 
 terlocutory remarks (which are not recorded) lead to ques- 
 tions, the motives and objects of which, when written down 
 without the previous conversation, are not apparent, and 
 this is said to have happened in the present instance, but 
 nothing was to be omitted that could in any wise tend to 
 heighten the effect ; and the cruelty and insolence of these 
 examinations, form a very conspicuous object in the fore- 
 ground of the picture so skilfully composed by the Quarterly 
 Review . 
 
 The Yeovil case is similar to many of the others ; the 
 persons examined were the former churchwardens of the 
 parish, who have been involved in a Chancery suit with 
 the Trustees and ihe parish ever since 1804?. Allowing that
 
 the parties giving their evidence were led away by their pre- 
 judices, and stung by the recollection of the vexation and 
 misery they had endured, during the prosecution of a ruinous 
 law-suit of fourteen years, without the prospect of its ter- 
 mination ; it nevertheless is incontestable that at Yeovil there 
 are Charity estates to the value of about .2000 a year, 
 very little of which can be ascertained to reach its original 
 destination: almost all the same persons are concerned 
 in the different trusts, and part of the estates are let to the 
 Trustees themselves, or to their relations. There appears a 
 similar abuse at Romsey, and nearly to the same extent. 
 
 We are unwilling to enter into the detail of the present state 
 of these Charities, it is sufficient that everyone who reads the 
 evidence, will be satisfied that they are not administered so as 
 to afford the relief and the education to the poor, for which 
 they were unquestionably destined. The examination of' 
 the three churchwardens, respecting the issue of their 
 proceedings in Chancery, has been quoted, as well by those 
 who strive to shew the prevalence of abuse, and the inefficacy 
 of the powers of the Court of Chancery to repress it, as by 
 those who are well satisfied to let things remain as they now 
 are, and are content to the full with the relief afforded 
 by the Court of Chancery ; the latter have brought 
 forward this part of the examination as forming part of one 
 of the supposed grand designs of Mr. Brougham, namely an 
 attack upon the proceedings of the Court of Chancery, and 
 the noble Lord who presides there. We should be unwilling 
 to aid Mr. Brougham or any other person, either in the one 
 or the other : we do not think that there is any likelihood 
 of rendering the administration of justice more per- 
 fect by a virulent attack on the Court, nor by a studied 
 philippic against the judge who presides there. But if 
 the statement of these three unfortunate persons bears 
 any resemblance to truth, we have but to extract it, 
 to deter every one of our readers, who may be concerned 
 in any charity, from venturing to approach the very threshold 
 of the Court of Chancery as a suitor.
 
 The three witnesses* whose answers we shall give metis-' 
 crirainately, were directed at a vestry meeting in 1804y 
 at Yeovil, to prosecute any suit for the maintaining 
 and re-establishing the Charities and rights of the town, 
 and were authorised to reimburse themselves all expences 
 by rates in the usual manner. In consequence of these 
 directions proceedings were commenced in the same year. 
 
 We are not out yet says oue we have paid .1200 or 1 300 and 
 have only received about 3GO from the town it lias ruined me [ have 
 a thousand times wished myself out of the woild I had a nice business 
 of 4 or .500 a year wh ch is ruined, and I have a w;feand family. 
 
 My heart is almost broken my nerves are so shook by the losses I 
 have sustained by this proceeding, that 1 scarcely know what I am 
 speaking of I have a wife and eight children, and I was only church- 
 warden two year*. 
 
 It has cost me about <500 anl I fear I do not know the worst, &c. &c. 
 
 It seems that by their statement, the three churchwardens 
 were turned out by the opposite party in the parish, who 
 were principally Trustees, and implicated in the supposed 
 abuses, and the successful pnrty will not now grant a rate for 
 the reimbursing them the law expences : and the recollection 
 of what is past, effectually prevents the sufferers from- at- 
 tempting to procure any redress by the institution x of fresh 
 legal proceedings. The conduct of these witnesses may have 
 been violent, and the case stated by them, may have been 
 overcharged. But the fact of the expences incurred, and 
 the protraction of the suit, and the persecution they have en- 
 dured is undeniable. At the time of the examination last 
 year, it will be remembered the suit was then pending ; it 
 was not even set down in the paper for decision, it had yet 
 to scramble up to the top of the judgment paper, and then 
 the expectant suitors " dunes of to-morrow" will have (sup- 
 pose their existence to continue so long) to linger on through 
 the space allotted to the final judgement of a Chancery suit. 
 The Charities at Yeovil are of a mixed nature, a part 
 only being applicable to education, but all appear as far as 
 can be collected from the evidence (which certainly is not 
 
 F
 
 66 
 
 to be considered as satisfactory, or impartial) equally the sub- 
 ject of abuse and mismanagement. But the present confined 
 power of the Commissioners, will only enable them to enquire 
 into that part which relates to education. 
 
 Of the Wellingborough Charities, little has been said, in 
 the letter to Sir W. Scott, except to furnish some extracts 
 of the Evidence, from which it appears, that estates of about 
 one thousand a year, according to the evidence of a Mr.' 
 Goodall, the solicitor to the parish, have been let at small 
 rents, and that till lately no accounts were rendered by 
 the trustees, and that these trustees, heretofore, let out 
 the Charity estates to their sons and relations; but some 
 enquiry having taken place in the parish, the accounts 
 which before were withheld, are now submitted to public 
 inspection. This is just the case of half the Charities in 
 the country, the correspondent of Sir W. Scott, however, 
 observes, that Mr. Brougham has (without any considera- 
 tion of the nature of the leases) inferred fraud from the 
 actual rent not being equal to the conjectural value, and 
 that this error pervades his whole argument, and has in- 
 sensibly led the honourable Chairman into groundless de- 
 ductions, particularly in the case of lands let upon church 
 leases. 
 
 Now we think, that the vice is in the leases, not in 
 Mr. Brougham's argument. It is just his cause of com- 
 plaint, that it every where appears, the feoffees and trustees 
 are letting their trust property to their sons, and friends on 
 nominal rents, and perhaps not accounting for the fines, when 
 they are let to strangers, from which the difference between 
 the conjectural value, and the actual rent arises, and 
 whereby the Charities are defrauded. 
 
 Huntingdon. 
 
 The only person examined before the Committee, rela- 
 ting to the supposed abuses of the charitable funds at
 
 67 
 
 Huntingdon, is Mr. Wells, a solicitor, who had been em- 
 ployed for four years, in prosecuting a suit against the 
 corporation of Huntingdon, in order to compel a due ad- 
 ministration of the charitable funds under their manage- 
 ment, and supposed to be by them misapplied. 
 
 It may be fair to presume, tlr.t sor.:e prejudices, and some 
 feelings of anger> may have influenced the statements of this 
 witness; and that his assertions are to be received with 
 caution few persons, when their fselings are strongly ex- 
 cited by a continued series of insults, and whose temper 
 has been exasperated by wilful and unmerited misre- 
 presentation and injury, can be supposed to be in a 
 disposition fit to give impartial evidence, in a case in which 
 they are so deeply interested ; but with all these qualifica- 
 tions respecting Mr. Wells's evidence, if indeed it should 
 be necessary, it is well to remark, that he has won the 
 race, and triumphed in the fight, as will be shewn in the 
 sequel. 
 
 We must trespass on the patience of our readers, while 
 we give the substance cf his evidence, and of the report 
 of Sir J. Simeon, the Master in Chancery, to whom the 
 cause against the Corporation was referred. 
 
 " I hadoccasou, says Mr. Wells, some years ago, to look into the 
 Charity of St. John's Hospital, at Huntingdon; it is a considerable Charity, 
 endowed by Edward II. or III,, and it was found, by au inquisition taken 
 in the reign of Elizabeth, that the hospital was endowed for the purpose 
 of a. free Giammar School for the town of Huntingdon. I filed an infor- 
 mation in 1810, against the Mayor, &c, at the relation of T. AInutt, 
 Esq. and others. They sent me, the relators, and the R t v. Mr. Bagley, 
 a respectable and conscientious clergyman, to Coventry, one of the al- 
 derman dismissed one of the rtlators, a tradesman, from his employ. 
 The conduct of the corporation was infamous in this respect, and the 
 town being generally of a different way of thinking, they treated us with 
 eviry possible mark of disgrace. I was under the necessity of seizing 
 the corporation's rnace to get an answer to the bill, they swore by their, 
 answer the rent never exceeded ,163 it appeared, however* the im- 
 proved rent was o791. Many parts of the property were not set forth in 
 the answer. We were driven to an issue at the next assizes, the lands 
 
 F 2
 
 68 
 
 were chiefly let to the parties themselves, there were not two tenants, not 
 corporators, the rent of the land called the new pasture (75 acres, 3 
 roods, 15 perches) was stated at <'20 at the time of the filing the bill ; they 
 then raised it to o60, and 1 proved under the Commission it was worth 
 334>, it lies close to Huntingdon, other land equal to this was let for 
 an equal rent, though this is still more valuable, being added to commons, 
 used by the burgesses and corporation exclusively, they have added it 
 to their commons, and that increases the privileges of a burgess, and the 
 consequence is, that this Charity has greatly aided in returning two 
 members for the borough, .for they have increased the value of their 
 commons by it, the other burgesses have been suffered to build upon the 
 Charity estates, and retain the same as tenants at will, at rents inferior to 
 the value substantiating this enquiry, it has already cost me =1200 
 Out of my own pocket. The Rev. W. Edwards is master of the school, he 
 teahes no boys on the foundation of the hospital ; they have suffered 
 him to build chambers, and other things to make it convenient for a 
 boarding school. He contends he has nothing to do but to teach 
 Latin; and then he charges for the other things. It is a free grammar 
 school; the Master is a burgess and voter; 3Q a year has been 
 taken out of the rents of the hospital fo~r the mayor's feast Mr. Dawes 
 (who pays 14 a year for property, valued at 40,) is a burgess, who 
 has built upon this land, as tenant at will ; and if he did not follow what 
 the corporation wished, they would turn him out with all his money on 
 his head. ' The burgesses hold the property as tenants at will of the Cor- 
 poration ; the Corporation ought to appoint a Master, in whom the 
 estates would be vested : the Corporation are the special visitors of the 
 hospital; they always appoint the Mayor for the time being Master, and 
 he applied c 30 a year towards his entertainment : the Master receives 
 the rent I know nothing what is done with it the hospital was founded, 
 as well for a school, as the support of poor persons who were travelling 
 through (pilgrims and others), and the Corporations instead of applying 
 this money to the poor vagrants, levy constables' disbursements on the 
 inhabitants for more than the rents of this estate the 160 admitted 
 rent is applied in payment of the Schoolmaster's salary, which is I suppose, 
 with profits, altogether 120 a year. Two old women have 18rf. a week, 
 out of the Charity; the Corporation are all under the influence of Lord 
 Sandwich ; it is the report of the town, that the members sent by Lord 
 Sandwich pay the rnt of the new pasture. Indeed, I have old. letters 
 proving that members were asked to pay for it. Lord Sandwich's inte- 
 rest consists in land near the common, when they take stock off the 
 common, they turn into Lord S.'s land for wintering the influence is 
 exerted by the accommodation of that land to these burgesses who have
 
 69 
 
 the town common exclusively. The Corporation have occupied 80 acres 
 of the town common the town common belongs to the burgesses. They 
 had usurped 80 acres in right of the hospital, and laid this to their own 
 common, defacing the metes, and boundary stones. I consider the 
 leasing of the lands belonging to the Charity, inQuences the election 
 of members, by increasing the value of their commons, and they are 
 more desirous to have the privileges of a burgess, and being a 
 burgess, are obliged to have Lord Sandwich's land, because they could 
 do nothing in the winter, when their commons are short ; but there 
 are other burgesses, who live in the centre cf the town, who rent 
 these lands as tenants at will, and who would be turned out if they did 
 Dot go as the aldermen chose. All the leases and permissions to occupy 
 at will, &c. granted by the mayor and aldermen (the evidence to shew 
 the influence of Lord Sandwich in the borough need not be given of 
 course,) the object of the present suit is to have the land let for the 
 benefit of the inhabitants. In addition to the enormous expences f the 
 proceedings in the Court of Chancery, attempts have been made to ren- 
 der me miserable : my life has been rendered very uncomfortable during 
 the proceedings." 
 
 In addition to some remarks on other Charities in the 
 town, Mr. Wells observes, that there are other Charities, of 
 which the Corporation are Trustees, they having got more 
 or less into all the trusts ; and that, though the funds may 
 be applied according to the uses of the foundation, it is with 
 favouritism whenever it can be done. 
 
 These, probably, may be the observations of a man in 
 anger ; one whose life had been rendered miserable by perse- 
 cution, and who had suffered so severely in his pocket ; but, 
 as far as analogy served, Mr. Wells, in reasoning of the ad- 
 ministration of trust funds, was justified in openly attributing 
 to the Corporation the grossest mal-administration of any 
 Charitable Estates over which, unfortunately, they might 
 have the controul. 
 
 We think, also, the sufferings disclosed by Mr. Wells, will 
 be a sufficient beacon to warn any person from attempting 
 to seek redress against a Corporation in the Court of 
 Chancery. 
 
 On Mr. Wells, and his evidence, it is remarked in the
 
 70 
 
 Quarterly Review, " to stile the conversation of this person 
 " ' evidence? is an abuse of terms, it is intemperate rage, 
 " venting itself in the language of clamor and scandal.'' No 
 part, however, of the evidence of the gentleman is extracted, 
 except the two or three concluding sentences as to the gene- 
 ral supposed favouritism in the distribution by the corpora- 
 tion ; none of the prior facts are stated, nor the persecutions 
 he had undergone, alluded to ; the extract is made by the 
 Quarterly Review, as exhibiting a fair sample, and at the 
 same time, as being the last scene of' the last words of the 
 Education Committee. 
 
 Whether the evidence relating to the supposed influence of 
 Lord Sandwich^, over the worthy and independent burgesses of 
 .Huntingdon, is mere clamour and scandal, vented in intem- 
 perate rage by Mr. Wells, we shall not for an instant stop 
 to enquire. We presume our readers are too well aware 
 of the peculiar independence of these electors to require 
 any further remark. 
 
 Mr. Wells's character, hitherto, we believe, has been as 
 unimpeached, (except by the members of the independent 
 corporation of Huntingdon) as Dr. Ireland's, or any other 
 respectable gentleman whose name has been brought for- 
 ward in this controversy. 
 
 We are fortunately enabled to show from the report made 
 by Sir J. Simeon, that all the material points stated by Mr. 
 Wells, relating to the school and the Charity Estates, were 
 established before him to the full, and if it were not for the 
 purpose of entirely preventing any attempt at denial or 
 misrepresentation, we should stop at this assertion, for in 
 truth the report of the Master as to the value of the estates 
 and their administration is but an echo of Mr. Wells's 
 evidence. 
 
 '' The master finds that the estates consisted of valuable houses in, 
 the town, and 75 acres of rich pasture near it, very convenient for the 
 inhabitants; and of certain other estates, all of which had for several 
 years been greatly mismanaged, many parts having been for upwards of
 
 71 
 
 20 years, and then were let to persons who were burgesses, or members of 
 the corporation, at rents considerably less than the real value, the new 
 pasture which had been letat the time the Corporation put in their answer 
 at o20, afterwards was increased to <6Q, and was really worth of344 Is. if 
 the same were not commonable, (as was questioned by the 'Corporation) 
 if it was, then the value was .200 12f. 6rf. and that the value hud 
 been rendered still greater to the defendants by beinj laid to and 
 enlarging their commons, which they claimed the exclusive right of 
 stocking ; part of the property was let to an a'derman at 20 and by 
 him underlet for 63. Other of the property had been for many 
 years let to burgesses at small annual rerits, considerably less than the 
 real value. No scholars were gratuitously educated at the Grammar Scltool. 
 The master's salary and emoluments, ol20. The rental of the estates 
 admitted by the Corporation to belong to the Charity at the time of 
 putting in their answer, was <\63. When they put in their exami- 
 nation it was<230 2*. the present value 191 16s. 9rf. And the master 
 has stated in a schedule to his report, estates found by him to belong to 
 the Charity, but which were omitted by the Corporation in their answer, they 
 not admitting them to belong to the Charity." 
 
 Here let us pause for one moment, to mark the gross 
 misrepresentations of the Quarterly Review, and Sir W. 
 Scott's correspondent. Their charges against Mr. Brougham, 
 and the Education Committee, almost all resolve themselves 
 into that of resting on ex parte evidence ; and the Hunting- 
 don case is the principal ground of this accusation. No one, 
 with the feelings of an Englishman, says the Quarterly 
 Reviewers, could rest on such testimony as that of Mr. 
 Wells. Now, having shewn that the master's report confirms 
 Mr. Wells, we shall add, as a proof, that the authors of these 
 charges must have known them to be entirely groundless, 
 that Mr. Brougham's statement that the charity estates are 
 underlet by the corporation to its own members, rests on the 
 schedule annexed to the master's report. This paper was only 
 delivered in by Mr. Wells. Any one who reads the evidence 
 must see that it is so. But further its title states it to be 
 taken from the particulars, "as set forth in the answer?' 
 that is as the admission upon oath of the corporation 
 itself.
 
 72 
 
 Thus the case stands : if this is not a gross case of 
 abuse of Charitable funds, both as far as the school or 
 the town of Huntingdon is concerned, we must admit 
 that Mr. Brougham did overstate his case; and that they 
 are right who represent the suit against the Corporation 
 as a trumpery party squabble ; and who contend that 
 the fraudulent abolition of the Grammar School, and the 
 subterfuge (if he uses it) of the master, in refusing 
 to teach gratis any thing but Latin, and charging for 
 the rest, is in fact only a specimen of the finery or fasti- 
 diousness of the inhabitants of Huntingdon, who not content 
 with the institution of a Grammar School, must have some* 
 thing better. 
 
 Of what ought to be taught by Grammar Schools, we have 
 in another part expressed our sentiments, observing, that 
 this and the Croydon case are only amongst hundreds 
 where the-same stratagem is adopted by masters, who pretend 
 that the statutes, give them this loop hole for evasion. 
 
 Croydon Charities. 
 
 At Croydon there is an Hospital founded by Archbishop 
 Whitgift, for certain poor, of which the Archbishop of 
 Canterbury for the time being is visitor ; a school was an 
 nexed by the founder.* 
 
 For half a century past there have been no scholars, al- 
 though there is a schoolmaster appointed and paid on the 
 
 * The master of which was freelye to teache suche of the children 
 of the parishe of Croydon, without exacting any thinge for thryre 
 teachjnge, as were <>f the poorf sorie, such as ih'd be SQ accounted by 
 ike Vyiar or Curate of Croydon, and two of the better sorte of 
 the inhabitants in Croydon, but yet it shall be lawfuil to and for 
 the said schoolemoster to receive that which is voluntarily bestowde 
 uppon him by any of the saide poorer sorte of Parishioners, and for 
 the children of such as be of the better sorte of the Parishioners of 
 Croydon.
 
 73 
 
 establishment, who is allowed to keep a private school for 
 his own emolument, and performs no public duty what- 
 ever. 
 
 When in 1812, a new school was opened in connection with 
 the national institution, the present Mr. Justice Park,' Mr. 
 Justice Best, and Mr. Sergeant Taddy are stated (but it is 
 hardly credible) to have advised, that it was both meritorious 
 and legal that the Archbishop of Canterbury should permit 
 the Hospital school-room to be perverted from its original 
 destination and used for the new institution, and accord- 
 ingly, Dr. Ireland, now Dean of Westminster, and then 
 Vicar of Croydon, states, he applied to his Grace for 
 the old room, which was instantly and cheerfully granted, 
 and a new cchool room was afterwards (with the consent of 
 the Archbishop) built on the hospital land, for the scholars 
 of Archbishop Whitgift> if they chose to come. 
 
 Such is the plain case of this school now grown into disuse, 
 either with the sanction of the visitor, or without his know- 
 ledge; if it is with the sanction of the visitor, it is in direct con- 
 travention of his duty, for the statutes say, that the school 
 room shull be for ever employed for that use only, and 
 that the ordinances of the Archbishop shall not be con- 
 trary to those of the founder if he is ignorant of it, it is a 
 complete confirmation of what Mr. Brougham has through- 
 out sought to establish, namely, that there is quite as much 
 necessity for enquiry where there are special visitors, as 
 where there are none. 
 
 Dr. Ireland throughout his pamphlet, which we shall pre- 
 sently particularly notice, states this school to be a grammar 
 school, whereas by referring to the words of the ordinances, 
 it will be seen that it is there ordered to be a common 
 school : but many of the poorer people were led to believe 
 that only Greek and Latin would be taught, and therefore 
 abstained from attempting to send their children. But 
 suppose it should be admitted that this is a grammar school, 
 why is it not taught. Dr. Ireland says, that notice has been
 
 74 
 
 given, and the parents did not send their children ; in other 
 words, he desires us to believe, that in the whole parish of 
 Croydon, containing above 8000 inhabitants,, there are none 
 who desire to have their children taught free, at what ought 
 to be a excellent grammar school. 
 
 The revenues of this Hospital it appears in 1812, 
 were 336 7*. 9d. in 1818, 860 4s. Id., but the real 
 value is stated at 2673 2s. 6rf., this arises from the 
 improvident mode of taking fines for the renewal of the 
 leases ; the former schoolmaster it is distinctly admitted, 
 embezzled large portions of the Hospital money ; at last the 
 Archbishop of Canterbury was prevailed upon to dismiss 
 him, and the money was recovered from him by course of 
 law. 
 
 The evidence relating to Whitgift's Hospital and the other 
 charities was furnished by Mr. Harding, who states him- 
 self to have been engaged eight years in searching into the 
 abuses of the Charities of Croydon, and it may be well to 
 observe here, that there appear to have been considerable 
 disputes and lawsuits carried on respecting these Charities, 
 and much ill-blood subsisting on both sides. He was con- 
 firmed by the two church -wardens, but the evidence of un- 
 derletting produced by him, was the account of estates 
 prepared by the Surveyor " appointed under the hand and 
 " seal of the hospital officers," another proof of the fairness > 
 of the clamonr raised about ex parte evidence. 
 
 Mr. Brougham in his letter, without mentioning Dr. 
 Ireland's name, observed on the Charity of Whitgift's 
 Hospital, that, from the evidence, it was full of abuse, al- 
 though, as only a small proportion of the foundation related 
 to education, the Commissioners under their restricted 
 powers are debarred from all enquiry and speaking of the 
 abuses, asserts, " he believes them to be unknown to the 
 " distinguished Prelate who is visitor of the Hospital, add- 
 " ing, that whoever fills his station in the church, has 
 ' beside the ordinary functions of his province, the super-
 
 7'5 
 
 , \ 
 
 " intenclence of a vast number of Charitable institutions in 
 " various parts of the kingdom, and it is quite impossible 
 *' that his eyes should always be fixed upon the abuses 
 ' which silently creep into each " 
 
 It seems that the Archbishop, according to the opinion of 
 Sir Samuel Romilly on a case, stated to him, some years since, 
 has not any authority as visitor, to interfere in the adminis- 
 tration of the property of the Hospital, and therefore 
 so far as he is concerned, he is relieved from all imputation 
 of dereliction of duty, as to the abuses in the disposal of the 
 property of the Hospital ; but it leaves the case just where it 
 stood and, that which is worth 12673 a year, is now let for 
 .'860 and with -respect to the school, the Archbishop is 
 undoubtedly the sole person who has controul over the master: 
 and how is it that His Grace has thought it proper to let 
 the school die away, to permit the master year after year to 
 enjoy a salary as a sinecure, when he at the same time en- 
 courages a subscription for the maintaining a school on Dr. 
 Bell's plan in the very town, and in the very house, de- 
 voted by the founder to be used as a school-house for his 
 Charity for ever. 
 
 Does this not sufficiently shew, either that it is impos- 
 sible the Archbishop's eye should be always fixed on the 
 abuses which creep into the different Charities under his 
 inspection ; or, what it is impossible to assume, "namely, 
 that his Grace intentionally winked at the fraud which has 
 been committed by the present master, in taking the salary 
 and not performing the office, but keeping a school for his 
 own benefit. 
 
 It is absurd to say, the inhabitants who are so well 
 convinced of the necessity of educating the poor, as to 
 subscribe for the master of a school on Dr. Bell's plan, 
 would not gladly avail themselves of a foundation ex- 
 pressly provided for the Education of the Poor, if im- 
 pediments were net thrown in their way ; it is true, Dr. 
 Ireland states, that notices were stuck up at the church
 
 76 
 
 door, inviting the inhabitants to send their children, 
 but it was the interest of the master, that his boarding 
 school should be undisturbed by the intrusion of the " lower 
 " orders," it was unseemly that the sons of the Patrician 
 order of Croydon, should read out of the same book and be 
 jostled by any of their plebeian townsmen, and so the mas- 
 ter was content to accept the school.house and the salary, 
 without troubling himself with the duty annexed to it, not- 
 withstanding the vicarial attention of Dr. Ireland. 
 
 In addition to the evidence relating to Whitgift's Hospital, 
 some evidence was given, as to what was conceived to be the 
 state of another Charity in the hands of the trustees of the 
 parish, let, as is supposed, for 143 a year for a long lease, 
 though worth from 1000 to cl500; but this was only stated 
 as a conjecture, and it appears from a printed statement of 
 the agent, of Mr, Drummond, a solicitor, of Croydon, that 
 the property was in fact let out on a building lease, which 
 was beneficial to the Charity. 
 
 In mentioning this Charity and Whitgift's Hospital, Mr. 
 Brougham alluding to their being let so very far be- 
 low their real value, (as he was led to believe in both 
 instances from the evidence,) says, " there are two estates 
 " belonging to the poor of Croydon, which ought to bring 
 " in between 1000 and ,1500 a year," and yet are worth 
 nothing from being badly let " on long leases," and an out- 
 cry is raised about the word nothing here used, as if any one 
 could misunderstand it, or doubt that it meant " comparatively 
 " nothing ;'' followed as it is by the words, " from being 
 " badly let on long leases," which plainly admit that the 
 letting was for something. 
 
 In addition to the questions put to the witnesses in the Com- 
 mittee were the following, Was the Dean of Westminster, 
 Dr. Ireland, Vicar of Croydon ? Yes, he was for 20 years. 
 Has he any official connection with the Charities ? He is 
 trustee of the farm at Mitcham belonging to the Hospital, 
 which he will not give up. Is he lessee ? Mo. Had he
 
 77 
 
 any thing to do with Archbishop Whitgift's Hospital ? Yes 
 he had, for 20 years as Vicar. 
 
 It does not appear who put these questions, nor indeed 
 should we (but for the consequences) have thouglit it 
 very important. 
 
 We have before observed, that many questions in these sort 
 of examinations arise out of interlocutory conversations not re- 
 ported, and that many members put questions besides the chair- 
 man. The reader is in possession of all the material part of the 
 evidence relating to Croydon, and to all that was said of 
 Dr. Ireland ; it is supposed that he will be as much sur- 
 prized as we were at the following exordium of an address 
 from the Dr. to Mr. Brougham. 
 
 " If you have ever started at the sound of unexpected and unmerited 
 reproach, if you have ever felt the glow of shame, that your character 
 and actions had not secured you from the imputation of crimes, of which 
 you were incapable ; and if your bosom has ever swelled with indigna- 
 tion, that any bold accuser had dared to charge you with practices 
 equally abhorrent from your nature and your station in society ; you 
 \vill know how to judge of the feelings which have been excited in me 
 by your letter to Sir Samuel Romilly, and by the evidence on which 
 it professes to be founded. But if you have never experienced this moral 
 tenderness, these observations will be lost upon you j you will be a 
 stranger to the injury of which you are the author j you will smile at the 
 pain which you have produced} you will have scattered your " firebrands," 
 and be at ease while others burn in the flames kindled by your cruer 
 sport. , 
 
 "There are those, however, who will peruse this remonstrance with 
 suitable emotions; and I shall be secure of the protecting feelings of 
 all who know the charm of pure character, and, therefore, shrink from 
 the attempts of unsupported and unprincipled slander." Dr. Ireland's 
 Letter, p. 5, 6. 
 
 It took us some time to find out, what in the examination r 
 Mr. Brougham's Speech, or Letter, had excited the sensi- 
 bility of Dr. Ireland thus strongly ; but after a minute 
 search, we find nothing more than the questions put to one of 
 the witnesses in the Committee above noticed. The Quarterly 
 Review, who have most studiously laboured to produce a 
 striking effect, to deck out innocent victims one after ano-
 
 Y. 78 
 
 ther, cruelly sacrificed to Mr. Brougham's vengeance, 
 without going at all into the facts, bring forward in the 
 most pathetic manner the case of Dr. Ireland, and by an in- 
 genious fiction, join with the Doctor in an assumption, that 
 his character has now been for the first time in the' de- 
 cline of a long life questioned, and that only when Mr. 
 Brougham thought fit to publish his pamphlet and his minutes 
 of evidence ; but the Doctor's name is not once mentioned, 
 nor is he in any way alluded to in the Letter of Mr. B., though 
 in the minutes of evidence, the questions we have quoted 
 did occur: and it is very natural that it should be asked, 
 whether Dr. Ireland as vicar had any thing to do officially 
 with the Charities, because it was known that he was 
 trustee of part of the Charity estates, that a sum of 
 money was invested in his name, and that of others, in 
 the funds, which it was contended ought to have been in 
 the hospital chest ; and it was also apparent, that he was or 
 ought to have been officially concerned, (though he denies 
 it, or perhaps was ignorant of it) ia the administration of 
 the school, which seems to have drooped so much during 
 his residence at Croydon. But in asking, these questions, 
 not a syllable was said to impeach Dr. Ireland's character 
 or his conduct ; and it will be absurd in us to enter into his 
 gratuitous defence of them. After all the explanations given, 
 and information furnished, as to the managemeut of the 
 funds of the poor, every impartial observer will see how ma- 
 terially intercepted they are in their destination towards the 
 support and comfort of the indigent. 
 
 We can have no doubt but that Dr. Ireland is exactly the 
 person mentioned in the Quarterly Review, " reflecting 
 honour upon the high situation he fills." And that his 
 character solely, to use his own words, which was long his 
 only possession, has thus raised him to his present " affluence 
 and honour.' 1 * 
 
 * Dr. Ireland was Chaplain to the late Lord Liverpool, and it is said, 
 author of a political pamphlet, signed Fabius, addressed to Mr. Pitt.
 
 79 
 
 It is pleasing to see a good man thus raised high in 
 honours and the world's esteem, without having paid the base 
 price of political subserviency so often however bartered for 
 that affluence and honour, but though it may have been 
 most praiseworthy in the Doctor, instantly to have taken 
 the alarm, when his character was attacked, it seems to us, 
 that in this instance, his injuries have their creation merely 
 in the day-dream of his own imagination. 
 
 It is true, that considerable party animosities have existed 
 at Croydon, relating to the Charities, and it may be possible, 
 that some imputations, however groundless, have been cast 
 upon Dr. Ireland, respecting his conduct as a trustee, but 
 what shadow of evidence is there to support the idea, that 
 Mr. Brougham has lent himself to the dissemination of these 
 imputations, or that they were alluded to, when it was simply 
 asked, if Dr. Ireland was vicar of Croydon, and as such 
 connected with the Charities. 
 
 And may it not be with justice complained of by Mr. 
 Brougham, that by Dr. Ireland thus coming forward and 
 assuming that his character was attacked ; and without even 
 alluding to the evidence taken before the Committee, or 
 having the justice to state, that no mention of his name was 
 made by Mr. Brougham, that he has been unfairly dealt 
 with, that Dr. Ireland has joined in adding one, to the host 
 who are striving to raise clamour and prejudice against Mr. 
 Brougham, and through him, its chief support, to strike 
 deep at the root of the cause he has so much at heart ; 
 a cause which is worthy of the support of the most enlight- 
 ened statesman that ever graced any age ; and which its 
 numerous and interested enemies in vain attempt to obscure 
 and confound. 
 
 Dr. Ireland concludes his address to Mr. Brougham in 
 the following terms. 
 
 " While the calumny was confined to the persons with whom it began, 
 it was too Contemptible to b<-~. noticed. But your adoption of it compels 
 me to address yon thus publicly. It may appear to you, perhaps, that I 
 have spoken with too much warmth. I cannot do less. You have at-
 
 80 
 
 tempted a serious injury lo my name. For a considerable part of my 
 life, character was almost my only possession. By the blessing of Pro- 
 vidence, it has raised me to affluence and honours: but, valuing them 
 highly as I do, I would cast them from me, and return to any station of 
 privacy or humbleness, rattier than wear them with such stains as you 
 seek to throw upon me. 
 
 " In taking rny leave, I will add a general declaration concerning my 
 conduct as to those Charities, to which I call your serious attention. 
 
 " I was never treasurer, or receiver, in my own person, of the income 
 ef any of them. 
 
 " I have never rented anyof the property of which I was trustee. And 
 
 "From no part of them have I evtr received, directly or indirectly, 
 to Ikebeil of my know'er!e and belief, any gain or benefit whatever. 
 
 " I am told indeed, that, in private, you have disclaimed all imputation 
 of this kind to me, and that you have expressed all the respect which I 
 could desire from yon, for my character. 
 
 " I am not satisfied, however, with these personal acknowledgments j nor 
 indeed can I reconcile them with the ambiguous position in which you 
 have thought proper to place me before the public. 
 
 " I have been impelled, therefore, by feelings which I cannot resist, 
 to address you in this open manner." 
 
 Now, if it had been established, that there was any cause 
 of complaint, any attack, or misrepresentation of character, 
 if he had been placed before the public by Mr. Brougham 
 at all in an ambiguous position ; every one must have ad- 
 mired the manly and open manner with which ' he had 
 come forward : but take away the ground of complaint, the 
 whole character of the production is at once changed, and 
 we turn with contempt and disgust from the paltry artifice 
 of courting an inquiry where no blame was cast, for the pur- 
 pose of an officious exhibition of independence, and a de- 
 mand for redress of injuries which never were inflicted. 
 Then as to the impulse of irresistible feelings, to which he 
 ascribes his violence ; how happened it that they remained 
 dormant exactly four calendar months, and were roused into 
 into action only as the meeting of Parliament approached. 
 
 Before taking leave of this case, it may be well to ob- 
 serve that Dr. Ireland has expressly asserted that his 
 situation of vicar gave him no controul over the hospital
 
 81 
 
 fcf Archbishop Whitgift, or the School ; by referring how- 
 ever to the ordinances, c. 21, it will t* seen the vicar of 
 Croydon 
 
 " for the time being is to have the oversight of the warden and poor in 
 the hospital, and to direct them in the observing the ordinances, and to 
 punish them according to the laws and statutes of the hospital, if 
 they in their several places and offices do not their duties accordingly, 
 and the vicar is to determine amongst the children of the poorer sort 
 of inhabitants of Croydon, who are to be sent to the school at the 
 Hospital.'-' c. 7. 
 
 This at least shows, that the vicar of Croydon is t (if 
 he performs his duty) concerned both in the adminis- 
 tration of the hospital and the school. We shall not 
 attempt to enter into the cases which have been circulated 
 in Croydon, respecting the actual interference of the vicar in 
 the administration of the hospital, they may be grounded in 
 ex-parte or prejudiced evidence. And we are unwilling to 
 give cause of complaint on this head. 
 
 In the examination of this case, we have in a great de- 
 gree omitted the remarks of the correspondent of Sir W. 
 Scott; in this instance we have had the principal, rather 
 than the second, to deal with. 
 
 In the Letter to Sir W. Scott, it is as usual lamented 
 that this case was taken up on ex parts evidence, as if 
 examinations before a Committee of this nature, could, in 
 any instance, be any thing else but ex parte evidence; 
 nothing was meant to be conclusive; a case for inquiry 
 was made out, and it was sufficient. It is not, as is 
 suggested by the learned writer, the churchwardens 
 versus the Archbishop of Canterbury and Dr. Ireland, 
 nor is it that by a ' perverse mode of reasoning pecu- 
 liar to the honourable chairman,' the rank and appoint- 
 ments of the supposed culprits, which ought to put 
 them above suspicion, have constituted a presumption 
 against them, and because the churchwardens are the ac- 
 cusers, and the archbishop and dean are the defendants, 
 G
 
 the charge is inferred to be so final and conclusive, that 
 he does not even desire to hear the defence. 
 
 We shall fatigue our readers no further with this mawkish 
 nonsense, the author should have confined himself to his 
 " final and conclusive law statements ;" the department of 
 general accusation and misrepresentation is by far more 
 worthily filled by the Quarterly journalists. The reason 
 was obvious for augmenting party clamour by the addition of 
 a personal topic. May it not be suspected that the Rev. 
 Doctor having through life found his character so useful to 
 himself, thought he might make it serviceable to his own or 
 his party's purposes, by pretending that it was attacked, and 
 making a swaggering defence against a man of straw ? 
 
 It is sufficient to remark, that the abuses are admitted ; 
 and that they do not in fact all rest on ex parte evidence. 
 
 There are some expressions or phrases so much in 
 common use, that their meaning is supposed to be gene- 
 rally understood. When the terms of rich and poor, high 
 and low, are introduced in the intercourse of mankind, it 
 is not usual to ask for their explanation. It is only when 
 they are employed by Reviewers or Fellows, that any doubt 
 occurs what ideas they are intended to convey, or whether 
 any whatever can be annexed to them. Petronius has, 
 indeed, in a dialogue, introduced a person at a feast, who 
 commences the narrative of a story, by the words : Dives 
 et pauper erant inimici; and it is represented, that he was 
 immediately interrupted by his opulent host, with the inter- 
 rogation of surprise: quid est pauper? of which no expla- 
 nation was there attempted to be given. Since that period, 
 it does not appear that the difficulty has been suggested, 
 or its solution undertaken until the present times, and it is 
 believed very satisfactory reasons might be given for this 
 omission,^ 
 
 It is not requisite in the present instance to examine mi- 
 nutely the nature of poverty, it is sufficient for us to esta
 
 83 
 
 blish that under such denomination riches are not comprized. 
 The poor cannot be so accurately defined as some mathema- 
 ticians have defined a point, by affirming they are without 
 parts, and the nearest approximation to this abstract perfec- 
 tion, may perhaps be, that the poorest man is a human being 
 without one necessary of life. From the lowest degree of 
 poverty, as we proceed to add one necessary, or (if it be 
 divisible) a portion, we introduce gradations in its scale, 
 until it ascends to the freezing point of comfort and of ease. 
 The particular line of graduation which would contain the 
 objects of our observations, might be distinguished by 
 the expressions " of a person who by want of substance 
 " of his own, or by the defect of ability in his natural pro- 
 " lectors, cannot be sufficiently instructed in the rules of 
 " religion and morality, in writing and reading, and such other 
 " useful knowledge that may be acquired consistently with 
 " his indispensable avocations." An attempt to describe 
 this gradation has been made in the instruments executed 
 by Founders of Colleges in the Latin of those days, by 
 the words indigens et pauper scholaris. In some instances 
 a portion of previous education is required in the subjects 
 to be chosen for such establishments, and sometimes their 
 future destination for the higher branches of learning is 
 announced. 
 
 These terms of indigens et pauper (from some cause 
 which it is not now important to examine) convey to 
 the mind images of misery, wretchedness, and hopeless 
 despondence. To dispel this gloom, a great variety of 
 learning and expedients of interpretation have been most 
 charitably employed, and it is suggested, that when such 
 words are united to scholaris, their malignity is consi- 
 derably abated, and that not only indigens et pauper, is 
 raised in rank and riches by its union with scholaris, but 
 that even scholaris is improved by its connection with the 
 profitable titl of indigens et pauper. 
 
 An eminent critic and philosopher has observed, that 
 G 2
 
 Mr. Brougham was not aware, that the epithet pauper is 
 attached to Scholaris, with the same reference to his situa- 
 tion in life, as pauper Episcopus, pauper Rex, a poor Bishop, 
 or a poor King. It is to be wished for the sake of these 
 exalted personages, this comparison or illustration had not 
 been introduced. These attempts to level all distinctions, 
 is the most ominous symptom of modern times, and every 
 lover o regal dignity and episcopal rank must rejoice, that 
 this resemblance only exists in the imagination of the 
 writer. By the expressions of a poor King, or a poor 
 Bishop, no more is really intended, than that the individual 
 is poor for a King, or poor for a Bishop ; or as the author 
 of the Diversions of Purley would have explained the pre- 
 position for, cause he is a King he is poor, cause he is a 
 Bishop he is poor ; but as a man without such title, his 
 possessions may enable him to be considered as rich. The 
 reference is here made to some average quantity of wealth 
 such persons are presumed to possess ; poor cannot be 
 here used in its literal sense, and implies none of the con- 
 sequences which attend on a plague, to which neither philo- 
 sophy nor religion quite reconcile mankind. Is it thus with 
 scholaris, can his poverty be so contrasted with the riches of 
 the man? his title has no reference to wealth, nor excites 
 any idea of enjoyment. The epithet of poor sets closely and 
 naturally on him, and suits well the meagre image j indeed 
 when thus united, they appear to form a hard and tena- 
 cious mass, and it is only by processes known to par- 
 ticular societies, the members of which are sometimes 
 sworn to secrecy, that they are made to combine with any 
 considerable portion of wealth. The phrase of a rich scholar 
 would be no impropriety of language, but with the name of 
 'King and Bishop, splendour and ease, and comfort startup 
 in their most admired forms, and glowing colours, poverty 
 in their company is resolved into a metaphor, and loses all 
 its simplicity and truth. 
 
 It is not pretended, that the definition of the poor and 
 indigent scholar we ha.ve proposed, may not be liable to
 
 nice objections. If the founders of colleges were restored 
 to life, and desirous to recast their statutes and rules, we 
 should not recommend it as a nostrum to prevent their 
 charitable objects from being defeated. Wherever endow- 
 ments of this nature are established, sufficiently valuable 
 to attract the attention, and excite the desires of the 
 powerful, attempts on the purity of these Institutions 
 are generally made, and rarely fail of success. The bat- 
 teries of intrigue, solicitation, influence, and power, soon 
 reduce their laws, and the paper on which they are written, 
 to the wind and rags which compose their elements. The 
 casual and unassuming care of the special visitor, and the 
 expensive friendship and ambiguous powers of the Court 
 of Chancery, afford Httle protection, and k is only in 
 Charities to which great degradation, disease, or pestilence* 
 are unalienably annexed as a condition of enjoyment, that 
 the rich will not intrude in the garb of the poor, or un- 
 load into the cells destined for the friendless, the burthen of 
 their relations and dependants, and by one and the same 
 exertion, which necessity seldom fails to excite, ease their 
 conscience of its compunctions, and their property of an in- 
 cumbrance. 
 
 Swift has said, that a man is sometimes punished for of- 
 fences in Westminster Hall, of which he will not hear in the- 
 day of judgment. But in the case of the abuse of Charities, 
 the observation may be reversed, and the consequences are 
 easily foreseen. Who but the unexperienced will set the 
 machinery of a court of equity in motion, or offer to any 
 court on the behalf of the poor, a problem for solution, 
 of which one of the conditions is to reduce all the parties 
 to the same denomination ? 
 
 As the jurisdiction of a court of equity cannot be re- 
 sorted to, even to settle the doubts of tender consciences 
 on questions of Charities, without hazard both to the 
 plaintiffs and defendants, it may not be improper to offer 
 some consolation to such, persons, who as visitors or
 
 86 
 
 trustees, have unadvisedly misconstrued the intention of 
 the founders of endowments for the Education of poor 
 and indigent Scholars; it is the duty of a Christian to 
 correct the mistaken, not to heap coals of fire on the head 
 of the unwary sinner. 
 
 For the purpose of illustrating our case, let us suppose 
 that the trustees of a College founded for the Education 
 of poor and indigent scholars, were accused before the 
 highest tribunal for malversations in their office, and that 
 the charge was, for having selected objects for Education 
 on these endowments from the lower orders of mankind, 
 the poor, the naked, the destitute, and oppressed, and for 
 not having introduced the rich and high born, whereby 
 the founder's prohibitions of comparationes generis ad 
 genus, nobilitatis ad nobilitatem, vel ignvbilitatem would 
 have no elements on which to work, and that one main 
 object of the donor's intention would be thereby defeated. 
 Such being the charge, what would be the defence ? 
 
 They would perhaps plead the excuse, that pauperes el indi- 
 gentes scholareswere very powerful expressions, that they were 
 introduced in the commencement of the grant, as describing 
 the main objects the founder had in view, that, the poor 
 and the indigent were the favourites of the Author of our 
 religion, in whose holy name*, in cujus visccribus, the donor 
 obsecrates and implores obedience to his directions, that 
 in all the records that remain of the sublime doctrines 
 of this divine personage, we find but one meaning of the 
 word poor, as it respects physical enjoyments, and that 
 in no instance can it be interpreted as pointing at the 
 rich. They might also alledge, that all the words in an 
 instrument should be construed consistently with its chief 
 design, expressed in clear and unambiguous terms, and that 
 no inferences from rules which admit of various construc- 
 tions ought to defeat this end, and if they cannot be re- 
 
 * See Mr. Clarke's Letter to Mr. Brougham.
 
 87 
 
 conciled to it, they ought to be rejected. It Is not said, 
 that their defence before the highest tribunal would be- 
 complete, but if such was their guilt, what would be their 
 punishment ? 
 
 We have been led to make the foregoing observations, 
 by the particular class of cases, next about to be considered. 
 
 It is curious to remark the violent and virulent activity, which 
 takes place on the slightest encroachment on the property of any 
 chartered or incorporated body, and the alarm which electrically 
 spreads throughout the whole mass. Mr. Brougham in hie 
 letter, has treated the foundations of the great public schools 
 and certain parts of the funds of the two universities as designed 
 for Charitable purposes, as well as the advancement of learning ; 
 but these bodies seem to have taken the alarm at once, and 
 all strive to do away the stigma of being Charitable founda- 
 tions, as a libel on their constitutions, and to throw off the 
 odious appellation of poverty and indigence, taking the estate, 
 as Mr. Brougham observed, but unwilling to take the name. 
 And yet in this assertion, Mr. Brougham has only followed 
 Lord Coke and' the other judges of England ; for Lord 
 Coke, in his report of a decision touching a Charity School, 
 says, that the judges all held it applied to Oxford and Cam- 
 bridge, and mentions their foundations as works of Charity, 
 and speaks of their members as poor scholars. It is because the 
 Committee have scathed the proud towers, as well as dived into 
 the recesses of the pitiful frauds of the village schools, that the 
 clamour has been raised ; that the well-fed and rich members of 
 the great institutions, have proceeded militant from the gates of 
 their palaces, to resist enquiry as encroachment, as they would 
 even death itself, and government is called upon to protect the 
 chartered bodies and corporations, lying at the mercy of an arbi- 
 trary and overweening House of Commons. 
 
 Their secret laws, however, have been given to the light, and at 
 least the public will hereafter judge of the plain import of the 
 statutes of the foundations, now and for ever hereafter before their
 
 88 
 
 eyes ; they will not be content to adopt the nice distinctions, and fol- 
 low the fellows through the subtile and antiquarian researches, into 
 the relative value of money ; now ransacking this chronicle and then 
 the other to support their liberal construction in their own favour, 
 and their strict construction against the poor. They will no longer 
 be guided by assertions, that the lower orders in early times 
 were forbidden to receive the blessings of education ; no, not the 
 richest monk of these foundations would aow dare to express 
 (whatever he might feel) a wish to keep the poor in darkness, 
 the public will be content to come to a plain sober understanding 
 of the whole case, they will find the interpreters of the statutes 
 busily engaged in the relative value of money for two pur- 
 poses, one to raise and extend their own payments with the most 
 perfect accuracy, according to the advance of the price of neces- 
 saries, and next, staving with care to keep distinctly to the letter 
 of the founder's law, in the distribution of the alms directed to 
 be disbursed, or the price and the quality of the provisions to 
 be furnished ; but is not all this a matter of perfect notoriety ? 
 it is only the defence ot- such practices that makes it neces- 
 sary any thing like a restatement of them should be made. ' 
 
 Some observations of Mr. Brougha;p in his Letter, p. 53, on 
 the foundation at Winchester, have given rise to the answer of 
 Messrs. Clarke and Bowles, it will be our aim to shew, that he 
 was in the main justified in all his assertions, and that no inten- 
 tional error was committed. 
 
 Mr. Clarke, it set-ms, is willing to appease the fury of Mr. 
 Brougham's thirst of enquiry by a sacrifice of the Charter 
 fiouse, and Mr. Bowles wishes him " good luck In the name of 
 " the Lord'," so that he come not near " St. Marie Winton" 
 
 This power of seeing faults in others, and all virtues in their 
 own establishments, is in nowise uncommon, and it might, perhaps, 
 be no difficult task to reform the abuses in these great establish- 
 ments by a sort of interchangeable enquiry, and find the Charter 
 House guilty by a jury of Wykamists ; and the Carthusians 
 perhaps would be willing that the fat revenues of the Winchester
 
 89 
 
 fellows, should in part go to enrich the impoverished and 
 stinted scholars.* . 
 
 Mr. Clarke has not, any more than the rest, let slip the oppor- 
 tunity of spreading the alarm about the titles of private pro- 
 perty being shaken. His letter opens with a rhetorical enumera- 
 tion of views inimical to the national education, and public 
 schools and univeriities, attributed by him to Mr. Brougham, 
 without, we contend, the slightest foundation ; Mr. Brougham 
 has no where said, that it is enough to employ funds origi- 
 nally destined for particular charitable purposes, in general 
 charity, where it can be better done than in the following 
 the will of the donor a position of this sort would be 
 pregnant with evident danger : but the position itself hat 
 only been supposed, that the consequent fear of its effect 
 might be excited. 
 
 The report of the Committee states, that unauthorized 
 deviations from the plan of the founders, had been made 
 in Eton and Winchester, and recommends that the fel- 
 lows should do themselves honour by the correction of the 
 abuses which had thus crept in, and it is Mr. Brougham's re- 
 marks respecting these abuses, that have excited so much anger, 
 and the tenor of which were, that the statutes of Winchester re- 
 quired the selection of persons answering the words of fiau~ 
 feres et indlgentes to be admitted on the foundation, while 
 the children of parents in easy or opulent circumstances were in 
 fact admitted. That the boys are made solemnly to swear at the 
 age of 15, that they have not c3. 6s, a year to spend, and yet 
 the whole seventy, (with a few occasional exceptions,) give the 
 masters 10 guineas each a year as a gratuity, as it is called, and 
 
 * The object of these gentlemen is pretty clear, though not very in- 
 genuous, each desires to fix public attention on a case worse than his 
 own, rejoicing that in the punishment of his neighbour, his own back 
 escapes the b!ow. 
 
 Quse sibi quisque timebat, 
 
 Unius in miseri exitium conversa tulere.
 
 90 
 
 that their average expences exceed c60. and that it is ordered, 
 when a boy becomes possessed of ,5 a year, (which is now 
 construed <66. 13.5. 4tJ. regard being had to the diminished 
 ralue of money) he shall be expelled the College that the 
 fellowships are augmented in revenue by a liberal interpretation 
 of the terms describing the money payments, whilst the strictest 
 interpretation is adopted in the payments to scholars, including 
 even the founder's kin. 
 
 In answering Mr. Brougham's letter, it has been assumed, 
 that he has maintained, that all persons above the lowest classes 
 should be denied the advantages of a liberal education, con- 
 ducted on the plan of our public schools by Mr. Clarke it 
 is contended, that in using the words pauperes et indigentes 
 scholares, and by omitting the remainder of the sentence, he has 
 attempted to shew what is not true, namely, that this is evidently 
 the stututable- designation of the scholars. 
 
 The words of the statutes in which the founder expresses his 
 views in founding both his Colleges, are, (speaking of Win- 
 chester,) qwiddam uliud Collegium perpetuum aliorum pau- 
 pcrum indigentium scJioLa>ium CLER.ICORUM grammaticam addi- 
 cere ; dericorum, is added, merely because every one who was 
 to be admitted to the school was designed for the church, no 
 one who did not immediately take the tonsure was to be admitted, 
 and does the reader think that clcricorum has added any thing 
 to Mr. Clarke's argument, or subtracted somewhat from Mr. 
 Brougham's ? it was after they became scholars that they would be 
 clerici. Pauperes et indigentes remain, and how was Mr. 
 Brougham wrong in affirming, that only the poor and indigent 
 were by the express terms of the statutes to be admitted. But 
 the absurdity of Mr. Clarke's argument is carried to the very 
 height of its bent when he further infers, that although pau- 
 peres et indigentes stands first, they were not to exceed the 
 other qualifications in importance. The statute " in scholares 
 ** eligendis'' after enjoining that they must be pauperes et indi- 
 gentes, enjoins also that'thry must be bene moribus et conditionibus 
 perornati) they must be ad studium halites convertatione honesti
 
 91 
 
 in lectura piano cantu et antiquo Doneto (a Grammarian of an* 
 cient times) competenter instructs. 
 
 Can it be maintained for a moment, that these directions as to 
 choice, controul the words pauper et indigens, or are inconsistent 
 with them. Is it not reasonable, that the founder should say, 
 let the choice at all times fall on none but those who are 
 poor, and in need of my bounty, none who without it could get 
 a good education, but take care that you only select such as 
 are distinguished from the rest by their good conduct, and who 
 may have already made a competent proficiency in reading, the 
 rudiments of Latin and of chaunting. 
 
 " And here," says Mr. Clarke, " I will ask, whether the state 
 " of general education or the history of the times in which Wil- 
 ' liam of Wykham lived, authorize us to suppose, that boyt 
 " thus qualified were to be sought only from a class of parents 
 who did no*: possess even the means of maintaining them, 
 " much less of bestowing a portion of their goods, however 
 " small it might be, on their previous education." 
 
 The question may be asked but no such assertion was ever 
 made by Mr. Brougham, that the scholars were to be taken from 
 the lowest class ; from paupers, as we now use the word, 
 from parents entirely unable to afford assistance to their 
 children neither would these scholarships be within 
 the means of such persons, nor desirable as such ; but he 
 contended, that by the statutes the floor were to be chosen, 
 and with the exception, perhaps, of the sons of a few clergy- 
 men not in affluence, this direction is now totally disregarded. 
 It cannot for a moment be contended, that there is any preference 
 given to poverty, it is well known that presentations to scholar- 
 ships are too much sought after to be ever attained by the poor 
 or the friendless, nor indeed would the gift be of much service 
 to any one who could come within the meaning of poor a,ol 
 indigent, for his parents would have above =60 a year to dis- 
 burse, which includes a shameful exaction of 10 guineas 
 annually wrung from his pocket by a master already amply 
 paid, and this, by the connivance of the fellows, also en-
 
 92 
 
 joying considerable incomes, owing to their skilful calcu- 
 lations in the relative value of money. It is of no avaiF 
 that this payment is made with the assent of some former 
 special visitor, the special visitor is to decide on the statutes "ac- 
 ' cording to their plain, literal, and grammatical sense and 
 " understanding," and no one will attempt such an outrage on 
 the sense and understanding of men, as to contend that their plain 
 intent warrants a payment of 10 guineas by way of forced bene- 
 volence from poor scholars, who were to swear that they had 
 pot ^3. 6s. to spend. 
 
 Admitting that education was not common at the time of the 
 foundation as it is now, that in fact, according to law, the lower 
 orders weie forbidden its blessings, yet it is clear that it was the 
 intention, that the selection should be from the poorest of those 
 who were then in a situation to accept the benefit, and now, as 
 education is become more general, and as the lowest are in a 
 situation to accept, the benefit, it becomes the fellows to regard 
 their oath, to observe the statutes, to cut off these soures of pa- 
 tronage, to cease to make a traffic of it by its sacrifice, either to 
 private friendship or public influence ; and in the words of the 
 founder, only to select the poor and indigent, of good character 
 and morals, and not to let the sacred bread of charity go to 
 enrich those who want not, but who are willing unbluihingly to 
 snatch it from more deserving objects. Names have been fur- 
 nished to us without number, of persons of considerable 
 property, whose children have eaten the bread of charity 
 at Winchester, but who would have scorned to be told, 
 that they were placed on the foundation, only because the guar- 
 dians of their benefactor had, in the conscientious exercise of 
 their sacred duty, selected them from the poorest they could 
 discover, as fit objects of eleemosynary education ; it is the 
 perpetual robbery of the scanty rights of the poor, the constant 
 and eager encroachment on the inheritance of the needy, who 
 are unable to keep watch on the land marks and boundaries of 
 their property, that leads to the disgust and the hatred the poor 
 bear to the great.
 
 93 
 
 Nobody contends that fiavfur is to be used in its modern 
 sense ; no, that wretched class of beings, the melancholy 
 inhabitants of our workhouses, now rivalling our palaces 
 in size, iiad not then crept into existence. It will be re- 
 membered that the sum fixed by the founder as the maximum 
 which a scholar may have, is 3. 6s. a year, and if any 
 scholar comes into possession of property of the amount of ,>. 
 a year (now made 66. 13s. 4-rf.) he is to be expelled. With 
 that spirit which pervades Mr. Clarke's argument, he infers from 
 this, that the founder contemplated a class far above the lowest, 
 but this was the maximum, this was to be the utmost extent of the 
 richest scholar (a boundary beyond which no one's possessions 
 were to extend) and it is easy to imagine that in fixing it, 
 the founder might have gone beyond his first meaning, by leav- 
 ing in the discretion of his trustees a power, in particular cases, 
 of selecting even from those who were rich, compared witlfc 
 his general description of pauper et indigens. According to 
 Mr. Clarke's argument, the bulk are to be made up of those who 
 are in fact only at the extremity of the rule ; it would be as just 
 an inference to maintain that the general class of voters were to 
 to be poor, because the qualification required them to have a 
 freehold of 4Os. a year. There is another passage quoted, ax 
 shewing that the scholars were not all to consist of persons 
 of the lowest order*, but before this could be made to answer 
 the writer's purpose, he must have shewn that the nobilitas did 
 not allude to the founder's kin, who were to be always pre- 
 ferred, or to fioor and indigent children of noble families, who 
 
 * " Item -quod non era detractor, tusurro, sen Jacicns obloqula, aul proso-. 
 ''cant odium, irant, di>cortliat, INTIDIAM, ccntumdiat, rixat, vel jurgia, out 
 
 " SPECIAL?.?, vel PRJECELLENTES PlUF.ROGATIVAS NOBILITATIS, GENERIS, 
 
 " scientiarum, facidtaium, aut DIVITIARUU aliegans, nee inter Sociot Presby- 
 " teros ejuidem Collegii, aut aliot DICTI COLLECII SCHOLABES, Aiutralei, 
 " Aq'iilonares, seu Boreales, aul Patrice ad palriam, GENERIS AD GENUS, 
 " NOBILITATIS AD NOBILITATEM, vel AD IGNOBILITATEM, seu. alias quauter- 
 " cunque COMPAAATIONES, qua odiota tunt, in verbo vel in facto, cauta com- 
 " mwendi ntalitiose socios vel SCHOLARKS, fociam quovitmodo tacite eel r- 
 "preite." Mr. Clarke's Letter, p. 20, 21.
 
 94 
 
 had ruined themselves in following the sovereign in the wart, 
 or whose estates were forfeited in the civil troubles, or even to 
 the children-of the nobility and neighbouring gentry who were 
 allowed to attend the school for education, so long as they did 
 not interrupt or interfere with the welfare of the foundation. 
 It may be well to remark here, that both at Winchester, as we 
 learn (and at Eton, as the master tells us himself, in his evidence) 
 there have been a few instances in which the gratuities have not 
 (from shame, we suppose) been exacted from the parents, in 
 which case it has been found necessary that it should be kept 
 tecret from the other boys : that is, for fear of a breach of 
 their oath, by any comftaratioaes generis ad genus, nobilitatis 
 ad ignobilitatem ; this we consider as conclusive of the real 
 state of these charitable institutions ; when by chance a fit 
 object of the charitable institution is admitted, his situation is 
 considered so degraded, that to save him from the scorn and con- 
 tempt of his more aristocratic schoolfellows, his poverty is con- 
 cealed by the governors themselves ! With respect to division 
 of ranks, in the sense of modern society, they cannot be con 
 sidered as having any real existence in these days. As far back 
 as when Sir Thomas Smith wrote on our constitution, he marked, 
 as one of its features, the intercommunication of ranks, and the 
 facility with which honest exertion is rewarded by an advance- 
 ment in social reputation : considering a boundary between classes 
 as a thing unknown to us. 
 
 Much stress is laid by Mr. Clarke on the words, cujuscunque 
 gradus status -vel conditionis, alsque per&onarum generis, &c. ; the 
 fact is, that the vassals were at the time of the foundation beginning 
 to receive education*, and the founder, it is possible, foresaw that 
 amongst these, many deserving objects of his bounty would 
 spring up, and it is as fair to infer, that these words were 
 for the purpose of expressly and guardedly including the ignoble, 
 as that they were for the purpose of comprehending the 
 
 * "Whilst I was master, about ten out of the seventy did not pay for 
 their instruction, but the fact is generally conceded from the other boys." 
 Evid. of the Rev. Dr. Goodatt, 3rd Rep, 71.
 
 96 
 
 noble. You shall elect the poor and indigent scholar, let him be 
 of what rank, station, or family soever.* Is this an argument 
 in favour of exclusion of the poor ? 
 
 Further, the fact of there being sixteen choristers, who 
 were to perform the menial offices, and who were to be 
 admitted intuitu charitaiis, is brought forward to shew, that 
 there was to be a lower rank still than the scholars: but 
 this proves nothing. As to the scholars, they were to have 
 a liberal education, were designed for the Church, and it was 
 requisite that they should be versed in the rudiments of educa- 
 tion before their admission. The choristers were menial servants, 
 educated from charity, and as a return for their services, but from 
 whom none of the preceding qualifications, either as to education 
 or manners were expected. The principal object of the founda- 
 tion of William of Wykham, was to found two colleges for stu- 
 dents intended for holy orders ; this we are willing to admit ; 
 but it must be shewn, that the poor were not admitted td holy 
 orders before the object of the Charity will alter the rank of the 
 scholars, who were to be admitted : it seems, according to 
 the arguments of Mr. Clarke, Mr. Bowles, and Messieurs 
 of the Quarterly Review, quite sufficient, if the necessary 
 number of persons receive an education at these schools, whe- 
 ther they are of the class of persons originally designed to be 
 benefited, signifies little. It has been found convenient to the 
 rich to put up with the fare provided for the poor : and the 
 same number, it is contended, (but not truly) received their 
 education ; for if the rich did not usurp the places of the 
 poor, if the Masters did not take gratuities from the stu- 
 dents, the poor might be educated as well as the rich ; the 
 rich from their own inheritance, the poor from that devoted to 
 them by their pious benefactors, but of which they have now 
 been long disseised by more powerful intruders. 
 
 * It is at least a questionable point whether William of Wykham did 
 not himself spring from the lower orders j but we are quite unwilling to 
 advance any position on this subject, which might bring down the angT 
 of the " founder's kin."
 
 We shall not go into any further detail on the passages addu- 
 ced by Mr. Clarke, to prove that the founder contemplated that 
 the scholars might not be entirely destitute : such as that if any 
 friend of the scholars came to them at the Coljege, he might be 
 entertained, but that it was to be at the scholars' expence : that 
 only one gown was allowed, &c. 
 
 Ego (A. B.) ju.ro quod non habeo aliquid de quo mihi const at 
 vnde possum expendere annual lm ultra quinque marc as sterlingat, 
 is the oath of every scholar : which Mr. Brougham renders I 
 have but 3. 6$. to spend. Mr. Clarke suggests, that from the 
 liberality of his friends, a scholar may have that, and more ; 
 and reads, " I have not any property which I can call my own, 
 as to be able to spend from it yearly above five marks." But 
 this maximum was only an additional restrictive caution super- 
 added to the original directing words, pauper et indigent. The 
 founder throughout shews the utmost care not to leave any loop- 
 hole by which his directions might be evaded.* It is obvious, 
 that the property of children cannot, in most cases, be considered 
 as any criterion of their real situation or expectances, and if the 
 actual possession of five marks a year was the sole ground of 
 exclusion, the first duke's children in the kingdom, might be 
 admitted under the description of indigent and poor scholars, 
 swearing conscientiously they had not 3. 6s. which they could 
 call their own to spend : but these arguments are too trifling to 
 controvert in earnest. 
 
 Mr. Brougham in his Pamphlet says, no boy was to be ad- 
 rnitted beyond twelve years of age, though this direction was 
 disregarded. It appears, however, that in a subsequent part of 
 the statute there is a provision for the admission of scholars 
 till the age of seventeen, if they are sufficiently advanced in 
 learning. This oversight is not passed by lightly j no allow- 
 ance is made for the mass of evidence to be inspected, for 
 
 That the founder was well acquainted with the abuses of governors 
 and trustees there can be no ijoubt, he having been many years 
 employed as visitor of the hospital of St. Croix, in reforming the abuses 
 which had then taken root in that institution.
 
 97 
 
 hurry or accidental omission, or, indeed, the unimportance of 
 the error, as regards the rest of the arguments : it stands first ia 
 array of Mr. Clarke's list of the errors and misrepresentations. 
 And after all, the argument remains the same, for is there any 
 enquiry as to the sufficient advancement, when a boy above 12 is 
 admitted ? 
 
 Again, Mr. Brougham stated in his Letter, that the fellow- 
 ships were augmented in revenue by a liberal interpretation of 
 the terms describing their money payments, whilst the strictest 
 construction was observed as to the payment to scholars, inclu- 
 ding even the founder's kin. Now it appears, that there are no 
 money payments made by the statutes, except in a case in which 
 the founder's will is now entirely disregarded, namely, absence 
 by sickness : but Mr. Brougham was led into the err6r in 
 some degree by Mr. Clarke's own evidence, as that gentleman 
 admits, and by seeing that the founder's kin were never to 
 have more than .20 expended on them in any one year (nearly 
 j300 of present money according to the rule of computation 
 of Mr. Clarke) and observing that an annual payment of .20 was 
 actually made to the founder's kin, it was inferred that this was a 
 tatutory payment ; it appean, however, that the ^20 a year is 
 paid by way of gratuity to these favoured objects of the founder's 
 bounty. A boon granted to them in charity by the richer and 
 more fortunate fellows, who have pared down the allowances of 
 every kind to the scholars, and helped to pay the master by 
 a forced benevolence of .700 a year out of the pockets of the 
 poor and indigent scholars, that they, the residuary legatees, may 
 enjoy the greater part of the bounty entrusted to them for divi- 
 sion and of which they indeed take the Lion's share. 
 
 An incautious suggestion of Mr. Brougham's for the lowering 
 the amount of these fellowships (now far beyond those of the uni- 
 versities) and thereby increasing the number and comforts of the 
 scholars, has drawn down (as may well be supposed) the full 
 weight of Mr. Clarke's vengeance. But, perhaps, he has over- 
 reached himself in the blow ; to prove that no increase is ever 
 to be made, he shews, that the founder has only contemplated 
 
 H
 
 98 
 
 a dtcrcaie, which is used as an argument that 'increase wa 
 contrary to his will ; in case any unforeseen misfortune should 
 arise to the college property, whereby the establishment ' In 
 formft predictd non potent suttentari," then, and then only, the 
 numbers may be rateably diminished ; and when things became 
 prosperous, the numbers were to be restored, and the rubric de 
 iotali numero scholarium concludes with a direction that -the 
 aforesaid number (70) semper tubsisttre debit, and this semper i* 
 brought forward as a positive answer that the numbers were 
 never to be encreased, because he has said, when by any mil- 
 fortune You cannot " maintain the scholars as I have directed, 
 " decrease them, for a while," but is it not fair also to infer, 
 that if he had contemplated the vast increase of his property, 
 coupled with the construction strictits'mi juris, put oa the pay- 
 ments to his next of kin, and the antiquarian research into the 
 best mode of preserving the simplicity of the ancient manners, 
 in the accommodation of his scholars, that he would not 
 have wished some further augmentation in the number of the 
 objects of his bounty might be made, and that it might be 
 more equally shared ? that if they had more than would 
 uppbrt the establishment in forma prcdkta, they should extend 
 his bounty. That a princely revenue of 14-,000 a year 
 should do more than to educate and partly support 70 boys 
 and the fellows.* 
 
 * It is sometimes advanced in argument that in fact the property re- 
 mains the same, and that the depreciation of money considered, the in- 
 come enjoyed by the fellows, is in reality no more than what was origi- 
 nally designed for them ; but this is not so. Every one must be aware, 
 that many properties have from accidental circumstances of locality, &c. 
 encreased in value in a ratio different from that which has taken place 
 in the depreciation of the value of money, and independent of this acci>- 
 dental increase of some landed property, its value has generally increased, 
 and it will not be controverted that a landed estate which was sufficient ta 
 maintain seventy persons in the time of Wykham would not now be 
 more than sufficient for the same object: it must be remembered that 
 there was no data when Wykham wrote his statutes, that could lead him
 
 99 
 
 Mr. Clarke's letter concludes with an account of the 
 mode that wai adopted by the Committee to procure the 
 attendance of the proper persons, to give an account of 
 the foundation, as usual, the letters written by the Clerk, and 
 signed, we suppose by the Chairman, are printed as specimens 
 of the peculiar harshness and ill will which was borne towards 
 this foundation and its members ; but with reasonable people 
 this affectc-d sensibility will have its dug weight, and no more. 
 By the statutes they are not to be made public, nisi causa 
 necessaria vel utili, this claim of exemption was put in, but 
 rejected by the Committee. And the chief grievance, after all, 
 is the giving to the public the contents of these statutes. Were 
 we inclined, as is done in the Quarterly Review, to treat the 
 subject now in discussion with ridicule, the picture drawn by 
 Mr. Clarke of the anxiety with which the fellows watched 
 the phases of the malignant planet, in the nature of which 
 they seemed to have regarded the Education Committee, and 
 their distrust, whether its disastrous influence might not attract 
 them within its sphere, would not leave us without means. 
 
 In taking our leave of Mr. Clarke, we are willing to give 
 him credit for all his professions of gratitude to the founder, and 
 his more than pious wish of defending the institution which has 
 been to him so splendid a benefactor, and that as far as in 
 him lies, .he has endeavoured to maintain and support the 
 spirit of the founder's institution- but while he at a fellow 
 shares in the receipt of an overgrown residue, and limits 
 the allowance to the founder's kin to a trifling gratuity, and, 
 on the paltry pretence of antiquarian simplicity, deprives the 
 scholars, of their rights, and joins in placing the rich where 
 the poor were destined to be, we cannot think his professions are 
 quite borne out by his actions, nor his arguments entitled to the 
 credit on the score of disinterestedness he wishes them to obtain. 
 
 to anticipate the vast changes in the value of property which subsequently 
 took place by the discovery of America, and latterly by the establish- 
 mentof a paper currency. 
 
 H 2
 
 In addition to the different arguments which have beeri adduced* 
 to prove that the " poor and indigent" scholars now selected for" 
 the foundation at Winchester are taken from the class which it 
 was the original intention of the founder should furnish them ** 
 it it stated that in the time of Richard the Second, the feelings 
 of hostility against " scholares" of any description, was too ge- 
 neral in the minds of the lower orders " to incline them to have 
 " a wish to belong to that despised class ; nor can we,-" says 
 Mr. Bowles, " otherwise account for the instantaneous feelings 
 " of indignation so widely excited, and so exclusively directed 
 " to particular objects in the rebellion of Wat Tyler.-j- If 
 " " learning were not offered to the children of the Villani or 
 M Cotelarii (nor would have been accepted probably when 
 " Wykeham wrote his statutes, if it had been,) for whom was 
 " it intended, but for those in the middle classes of life who 
 " wanted assistance in breeding their children scholars ?" 
 It is true, that by law it was not till the 7th of Henry IV. 
 that villains, farmers and mechanics, were permitted to put 
 their children to school, and dared not, without a licence 
 from the lord, educate a son for the Church. The nobles by 
 their petition to Richard II. sought to have a law enacted which 
 should repress the desire of acquirement then beginning to dif- 
 fuse itself amongst the lower orders. But we are of opinion 
 that the conclusions drawn by Mr. Bowles from the facts, 
 relating to the classes, whom he supposes to have derived be- 
 nefit from learning, will, on consideration, prove unsound ; and 
 that the enmity of the lower orders to learning, is no evidence 
 of the appropriation by Wykham of his college, to classes far 
 removed from villenage, and could it even be shewn that 
 his intention was ruled by this barrier of separation, it ran- 
 aot now be contended that this legal exclusion any longer exists ; 
 
 * Vindiciae Wykamices, p. 36. 
 
 f The rising of Wat Tyler was against despotism and feudal customs, 
 of which some scholars were in part the contrivers and depositaries.
 
 101 
 
 the unceasing operation of natural causes having long since 
 totally deranged the classifications amongst men, which conquest 
 and feudal tyranny had established. Notwithstanding the 
 laws, when Winchester school was founded, the Church in all 
 its offices was in part supplied from the Bondmen, and it was a 
 maxim that service in the monasteries exonerated the villain 
 from feudal duties, while the secular clergy, taken from that 
 class, were still subject to them. It is not denied, that the en- 
 tering into the church by the Villains, without the licence of 
 the lord, was strictly speaking a fraud upon him ; still a very 
 considerable part of the church was composed of the lower 
 orders. Adrian IV. the only English pope, it will be remember- 
 ed, was of the lowest origin, and his mother died in an hop : tal at 
 Canterbury. When it is considered, that mankind are disposed 
 to look forward earnestly to an improved condition, and the 
 oppressed are continually inspired with expedients for escaping 
 oppression, the evasion of the laws in this respect will be easily 
 accounted for ; and the conflicting interests of the kings, nobles, 
 and commons, in a great degree promoted this species of 
 emancipation. That learning had early extended itself to the 
 lowest classes, is sufficiently to be inferred from the statute, 35 
 H. 8. which prohibits the reading the bible privately by " any 
 " women, artificers, apprentices, journeymen, husbandmen, la- 
 " bourers, or by any other servants of yeomen or under.'* 
 In addition, the following curious picture from Langland's 
 allegorical satire, the Vision of Peers Plowman, shows that in 
 William of Wykham's time, the boundaries between the 
 classes, were in some instances, already removed, and in 
 others beginning to be obliterated ; and we also see what was 
 felt by some upon these changes in the previous artificial order 
 of things. William being interrogated by " Sir Reason" upon 
 his idle way of life, Peers Plowman answers, that 
 
 * When I was young, my father and friends supplied me with money 
 to put ine to school, until I learned clearly the meaning of Holy Scrip- 
 ture, and knew what was best for the body, as that book teacheth, and 
 safest for the soul. In this way, I will persevere; for in good faith,
 
 102 
 
 since my friends died, I never found any way of life, which I liked, bust 
 in these long eloths. Moreover, I think, Sir Reason, that men ought to 
 compel no clerk to do labourer's work. Therefore it becomes clerks to 
 sing and to serve, and unshorn servants to cart and to work; for no 
 clerk should receive the tonsure, unless he were come of gentlemen and 
 freemen, or at least of married couples. But slaves and bastards and 
 beggars' children, to these it belongeth to labour, while lords' children 
 shouM serve both God and good men, in state, as their degree requires; 
 some to celebrate mass, or to sit and keep account, or tq read and re- 
 ceive what Reason ought to spend. But, of late the sons of slaves hare 
 been made bishops,andthe bastards of barons have been made archdeacons, 
 &c. and their sons for money have been made knights, and the sons of 
 lords have become their labourers and mortgaged their rents, that they 
 might ride in defence of the realm, against our enemies, together with 
 the commons and the king's worship. Besides, monks and nuns, who 
 ought to supply mendicants with food, have made their, kinsmen knighti, 
 and purchased knights' fees moreover, popes, and patrons, and benefices, 
 refuse poor clerks of gentle blood, and take the sons of Simon Magus 
 as keepers of the sanctuary. 
 
 From this passage and others in the book, it appear! that the 
 poor were the decayed gentry, licensed beggars, and indolent 
 labourers, and their children might in every sense have been 
 within the meaning and purview of the statutes of St 
 Marie Winton ; it must be recollected that there was no 
 standing body at all approaching to the proportion which the 
 " paupers" of (he present day bear to the rest of the com- 
 munity, the, lower orders were then composed almost exclusively 
 of industrious labourers (bondsmen) possessing various degree* of 
 substance and perpetually escaping from that condition and the 
 inferior burgesses and citizens, and they became more or less 
 instructed, in defiance of the prohibitions, and were also in full 
 communication with the Church, adding to its treasures and 
 supplying its vacant stalls. How then can it be maintained, 
 that the founders of schools and colleges had not individuals of 
 their rank and state in their minds, when they framed their 
 statutes, and directed that the poor and indigent scholar should 
 be selected ? -Besides, when it is considered what vast numbers 
 of persons were necessary to fill the different offices in the 
 Church, and for whom a learned education was requisite, and
 
 103 
 
 Vhen the martial spirit and prejudices amongst the nobles and 
 gentry are recollected, there can be little question, but that a 
 very considerable portion of the students at the universities, 
 were of the lowest order. In my time, says Richard Fitz 
 Ralph in an oration against the Mendicant Friars (A. D. 1357,) 
 there were 30,000 students in the University of Oxford, and 
 now there is hardly 6000, which prodigious diminution is owing 
 chiefly to the Mendicant Friars, who entice away so many of the 
 young scholars to enter their order, that parents are afraid to send 
 their children to the University.* 
 
 One more remark on the meaning of pauper scholaris, and 
 we have done. " For many generations past," it is observed,f 
 " a scholar whether rich or poor, has in England, held the name 
 *' and station, of a gentleman." We are very willing to ad- 
 mit, the becoming a scholar, makes a gentleman of a beggar ; 
 but he must first become one. Wolsey, by leaving his father' 
 trade became a gentleman by becoming a scholar ; and so did 
 Latimer, the son of an inferior yeoman, and 500 others, down 
 to our own times, who, by quitting their rank amongst the lower 
 orders, became gentlemen after they had become scholars, and 
 it is impossible to imagine for a minute that the clergy will 
 endeavour to separate themselves from some of these, the 
 brightest ornaments of their profession, who sprung from 
 the lowest orders of society. Who, in reading the preface to 
 the translator of Juvenal, can contemplate the pathetic picture 
 of the penury and indigence of the author, without wishing 
 that the new construction put on the words " poor and in* 
 digent," had not in fact disqualified him from being enabled to 
 partake of the bounty of Wykham ; and how fortunate is it that 
 the hand of private bounty snatched from obscurity one, who by 
 his talents and attainments now fills in society the rank of a scho- 
 lar and a gentleman. And it must be remembered that the term 
 paufures tt tndigentet was applied to scholares, because in fact, 
 lotupletet tcholaret were to be found in every foundation school 
 
 * Hepry's Hist, of England, p. 259. f Quarterly Review, p. 159.
 
 104 
 
 in the kingdom, in the same way as they are now found at Eton, 
 the Charter-house, &c. And before the year 1 724-, Christ's Hos- 
 pital was resorted to by the rich and noble, but they were wisely 
 forbidden to come, after it was seen that their presence injured 
 the more peculiar objects of the foundation. 
 
 The preference to be given to the poor, was not confined to 
 the statutes of Winchester, when the Committee proceeded to ex- 
 amine into the establishments destined, as it is now said, for 
 the upper clatses only : We found, observes Mr. Brougham, 
 that the objections to our jurisdiction rested upon the very 
 abuses we were investigating, not upon the real nature of the 
 foundation. 
 
 " One free schoole for the instructing, teaching, maintenance and education 
 of POOR CHILDREN and Scholars," says the charter of the '* Hospital and 
 " Free Grammar School in the Charter-house."* " Unum Collegium per- 
 " petuum FAUPERVM ET INDIGENTIVM icholarium Cantabrigite, elquoddam alium 
 " collegium perpetuum ALIOROM PAUPERUM ET INDICBNTIUM scholarium 
 *' Etoniee," say the statutes which founded King's College, Cambridge* 
 and Eton College. The Westminster statutes, expressly prohibit anj 
 boy being elected on the foundation, " who has, or at his lather's death 
 " will inherit a patrimony of above six pounds." The same poverty is 
 the qualification required by the statutes of Trinity College, Cambridge ; 
 the scholars are there called " FAUPERBS," and in chusing them, where 
 ether merits are equal, the preference is ordered to be given " INOPIJB." 
 IH chusing the fellows of St. John's College, a preference is prescribed ir 
 favour of the most deserving, " et inter hot, Him qui INDIGENTIORES 
 "fuerint ;" for scholars, the " INOPES" are directed to be preferred, and 
 an oath of poverty, similar to that of Eton and Winchester, is solemnly 
 taken." (Letter to Sir S. Romilly.) 
 
 In observing on what we conceive to be the mal-administra- 
 
 r * Lord Bacon urged as an argument against permitting the foundation 
 of the Charter-house being established against the heir at law, that the 
 Commonwealth would suffer from drawing scholars from the laborious nc- 
 cupaliont. And Evelyn saw a foundation in Amsterdam ''like our Charter- 
 *' house for the education of decay fit perso :s, orphans, and poor children, 
 " where they are taught several occupations," and a distinction is taken 
 in the real rules of the Charter -house, between the b'>ys more fitted for 
 trades and the classical boys.
 
 105 
 
 tion of the funds of the public schools, it is necessary to guard 
 against the imputation of general hostility towards these institu- 
 tions ; all we lament is, that it seems to be thought necessary to 
 their well-being that the rich should be partakers of what 
 both the words and the spirit of the endowments declare to 
 be for the poor. We trust, however, that some means may be 
 devised by which the poor may reap the benefits so explicitly 
 bequeathed to them, without detracting from the high cha- 
 racter of these institutions, or lessening their utility in the forma- 
 tion of the national character and habits of the upper chsses of 
 ociety. In noticing deviations which have been made from 
 the wills of the founders, we must not be considered as generally 
 reprobating all changes as alterations for the worse ; it is obvious 
 that many changes have become necessary by the circumstances 
 of the times and the alterations of religion. By the statutes of 
 Eton, an abjuration of the heresies of WicklifF was required, 
 Sec. We have not thought it necessary to extend our observa- 
 tions in detail, already made too much at length, to the cases of 
 Eton, and other public schools, nearly the same observations 
 which have been made on the administration of Winchester 
 apply to all other similar institutions which were examined into. 
 
 In perusing the evidence given before the Committee on 
 on the education of the Poor by the persons, through whose 
 exemplary industry and disinterested charity we are enabled 
 to dive into the recess of want and misery, numerous and 
 important considerations press irresistibly on our minds. 
 When the veil that covered this abyss of wretchedness is 
 removed, and the eye can penetrate undisturbed by illusions, 
 and unimpeded by darkness, to the bottom of the gulph, 
 we are startled with the idea that such scenes should exist 
 in an age in which religion is supposed to have considerable 
 influence, when sciences and arts are advanced beyond 
 all former bounds, and when Government has arrived at such 
 perfection, that every innovation in its measures is resisted 
 as an attempt hostile to the ease and happiness of the com- 
 munity. We hear from authority that ought not to be dig-
 
 106 
 
 puted, accounts of our wealth and prosperity, their images 
 glide before us on streams of eloquence, whose smoothness 
 tranquillizes our incredulity, and lulls us into unsuspecting 
 belief. When roused from this dream by the reality of 
 human misery, we seek around for the causes of such 
 wretchedness, and naturally enquire, if at this advanced 
 period of civilization such a portion of unhappiness is to be 
 found, what must have been the condition of former ages ? 
 Our ancestors have left us many memorials of their wisdom, 
 but gradual improvements and more extended views are 
 supposed to have augmented the convenience and utility of 
 the edifice they had erected. The history of man affords us 
 no grounds to imagine, that at any period a considerable 
 portion of society was not subjected to want and misery, 
 but it is most material to determine, whether in the lapse of 
 ages they have increased or diminished, and examine with 
 care the principles and measures by which such important 
 changes have been effected. He that omits such enquiries 
 will be confined by narrow views and shallow expedients, and 
 soon perceive, perhaps, that he is treading in a path the 
 experience of former times must have taught him, would 
 end in disappointment. Far be it from us to insinuate, that 
 the persons who conducted these examinations were not 
 actuated by the views of accomplished statesmen ; we trace 
 throughout the marks of consummate knowledge, and admire 
 the perseverance and courage with which they probed the dis- 
 gusting sinks of corruption and abuse, and only lament that 
 they were thwarted in a course which afforded any chance 
 of cleansing the impurities. 
 
 The governments of early periods appear to have been 
 in the hands of persons generally tainted with the military 
 spirit of the age in which they lived, and who were alter- 
 nately employed in attempts to invade the rights, or in re- 
 sistance to the unsettled claims of their subjects. The care 
 of the forlorn and destitute was chiefly abandoned to the 
 pious charity of individuals, and numberless monuments,
 
 107 
 
 founded in conformity to the purest doctrines of Christianity, 
 have been left by persons of various ranks, whose virtuous 
 intentions we may yet trace in the mouldering records of 
 the statutes and laws which they prescribed with the hope 
 to regulate their endowments. 
 
 They were erected in times when a blind zeal for humanity 
 supplied the place of political science, and experience had not 
 informed the founders of the dangers to which such es- 
 tablishments are exposed from corruption, and of their ten- 
 dency when abused, to increase the evils they were destined 
 to avert. 
 
 It is not our intention to enter into any further details of a 
 comparison between the state of the poor at the present time, 
 and their situation in former periods of our history. We may 
 assume without any hazard of contradiction that misery is 
 now rapidly augmenting. Such is its alarming progress 
 amongtst the lower orders, that all that learning and ex- 
 perience can afford of information, all that genius can supply 
 by its invention and resources, and all that humanity and the 
 most exalted virtue are enabled to bestow of assistance and 
 comfort, are accumulated to impede the advance of this 
 dreadful calamity. 
 
 It is clear, however, that whatever temporary expedients to 
 which we may resort to alleviate instant distress, no permanent 
 change can be expected inthe lot of the poor, without an 
 ardent endeavour on their part to assist the arm that is 
 held out for their protection ; it is by education alone they 
 can be taught the duties of industry, patience, forbearance., 
 and resignation ; it is by enlightening them they can alone 
 be effectually convinced that the unalterable law imposed by 
 the Creator, that man must live by the sweat of his brow, 
 cannot be evaded with impunity. It is by teaching them to 
 reflect that they will learn to distinguish between their 
 friends and their oppressors, to assert with firm moderation 
 their right to the fair fruits of their labour, and disarm the 
 powerful and rich of their pretences for terror and dismays.
 
 108 
 
 Before we can determine how far charitable endowments 
 have been available for such instruction of the poor, how far 
 they may have contributed to promote the evils that exist, 
 or have retarded their progress, it is absolutely necessary 
 we should be acquainted with the value of such donations, 
 and the mode in which they have been administered. 
 
 The foregoing pages have detailed the means that were 
 proposed to effect this just design. It is mortifying to reflect 
 that the basest interests and most unfounded pretences were 
 successfully combined to shelter a mass of abuse, the enor- 
 mity and extent of which is the real cause of the protection 
 it received. 
 
 It is useless to argue on the probable result of an effi- 
 cient enquiry, which the most ardent speculator in human 
 integrity may for the present consider as nearly hopeless ; but 
 only requires a practical knowledge of the management of 
 an opulent foundation for education to perceive (that with 
 no other means of correction than existing tribunals and 
 visitors afford), the combination of interest and power that 
 protects these institutions must prevent them from becoming 
 a resource for the defenceless and the poor. Of whatever 
 force or clearness the expressions may be which direct the 
 application of the funds: the tendency of those who hold 
 lucrative situations under such establishments, who inter- 
 pret their rules or influence their construction, is to avail 
 themselves with vigour and sagacity of every ground, to 
 exclude the class of mankind which is not adapted to 
 promote their interests, and to glide with dexterity over 
 the surface of such terms, on which a pause would open 
 a contngious connection with poverty and want. The prin- 
 ciple of self-interest which excites so powerfully OUT indus- 
 try, and awakens our intellects in the usual pursuits of life, 
 cannot well be brought to act in combination wilh the pro- 
 posed objects of such charitable endowments, and is fre- 
 quently opposed to their intentions. Every investigation of, 
 the management of such establishments proves beyond the
 
 109 
 
 hope of contradiction, that wherever a public fund of this 
 nature is raised by compulsory contribution, or originates in 
 fixed property, however sacred the destination may be, it 
 rarely escapes being made the prey of the designing, the 
 powerful, or the impostornd ; wherever abuses of this de- 
 scription can only be rectified by complaints to the tribunals 
 known to our constitution, and that an individual has only 
 a common interest with a multitude of others in the purity 
 of an institution the body that directs such establishments 
 soon ceases to be animated by the breath that chanty had 
 inspired to succour the friendless and forlorn. 
 
 The poor who would resort to charitable foundations 
 where learning only is afforded, are frequently ignorant how 
 access is to be obtained. Encouragement is rarely given to 
 applications, and timidity is soon repressed by arrogance or 
 neglect. The instructor who receives the emoluments of 
 his office, is well pleased it should be enjoyed without the 
 counterpoising evils of trouble and fatigue, and the gentle 
 ticklings of his conscience are soon allayed by the reflec- 
 tion, that it is the duty of those who want the waters of 
 knowledge to seek the sources that supply them. A strict 
 adherence to the absurd modes of instruction which ancient 
 founders have prescribed, contributes much to the inutility 
 of such establishments, while more important regulations are 
 neglected without scruple, nauseous potions of useless know- 
 ledge, composed of the indigestible and innutritious theorems 
 of latin syntax and prosody, administered and retained alone 
 by the astringent powers of the birch, revolt the most powerful 
 stomach. The poor parent who may have experienced both 
 the inutility of the learning and of the tortures, is prevented 
 by humanity from exposing his offspring in these scientific 
 hospitals, either to the barbarity of the jargon, or the instru- 
 ment at the point of which it is communicated. The con- 
 tinuance of imposing such materials under the name of 
 learning, has found its justification in various interests, with 
 which the poor it is suspected have no connection.
 
 110 
 
 If it were possible to prevent corruption in opulent fourf" 
 dations, and to mitigate the unrelenting pride of the rich, 
 some of these institutions might be made the instruments of 
 elevating the sentiments of the poor, the means of exalting 
 them from degradation, and teach them that the paths to 
 comfort and to wealth are not wholly closed before their 
 teps. If it be seriously intended to promote the happiness 
 of mankind, the great object must be to interweave the 
 materials that compose a nation, to place the labourer and the 
 poor nearer in contact with the employer and the rich, and 
 not to forge society into a lengthened chain, one of whose 
 extremes is suspended in the abyss of misery and want. To 
 assist our endeavours, many charities, entirely useless in their 
 present state, might be vested, without interfering with any 
 great principle of justice or right of property, as a sinking 
 fund for the redemption of the immense debt of wretched- 
 ness and woe, contracted in the main by the wastefulness of 
 profligacy and the oppression of tyranny, but sometimes 
 augmented by the guiltless errors of virtue and benevolence. 
 They might be rendered subservient to the purposes of the 
 societies for the Education of the Poor, subsisting by volun- 
 tary subscriptions ; the wisest and most effective mode of 
 conferring benefits on mankind ever contrived by the united 
 force of policy, beneficence, and religion. 
 
 It is not obvious on what principle a portion of the profits 
 of some of these institutions might not be considered as 
 devolved to public use. In many of them the offices are 
 sinecures. The absurdities of their rules and statutes in- 
 consistent with the change of habits and opinions, have 
 rendered the intentions of the founders absolutely effete, 
 and their objects are unattainable in practice. If an alter- 
 ation is necessary to render them efficient, why cannot they 
 be applied to the most essential wants of education, upon the 
 plans which experience convinces us to be most judicious ? 
 In their original destination, the masters and instructors 
 were not the objects of the charity, but the instruments of its
 
 Ill 
 
 purpose. It may be said they are prepared to perform their 
 duty ; but if circumstances prove beyond dispute, that none 
 will be performed without an essential change, why not effect 
 it, or release the" conscience of the officer from the burthen 
 of receiving the profits without paying the consideration, 
 and let him purchase its redemption by a sacrifice of a 
 portion of his emoluments. 
 
 The grounds of public morality are not always intelligible 
 or consistent. We see at various periods under the pre- 
 tence of public good, individuals deprived of their liberty, 
 (the most valuable of all property,) harraased with un- 
 founded accusations, released with scorn, and indemnified 
 by insult. 
 
 Our courts, by an admirable contrivance, impound con- 
 tested property, and when the lingering hope of the claimant 
 is succeeded by the despair of his posterity, and expectation 
 has breathed its last, humanity forbids us to raise it from the 
 grave, and the riches are applied to enlarge the walls that 
 had immured them, and to pay the faithful guardian that 
 prevented their escape. But the perversion of mistaken charity 
 is irremediable and irrevocable. We suspect the intricate 
 and deep laid interests of patronage are linked to the tender 
 delicacy that is professed for the nature of these rights, 
 and that if nothing but the shadowy claims of the poor 
 had intervened to protect them, they would have been swept 
 away by the same torrents that have overwhelmed the hap- 
 piness and prosperity of a nation. 
 
 We shall now take a cursory view of the existing laws 
 relating to the government of Charities, and the mode 
 of obtaining redress in cases of abuse or fraud of the 
 trustees. As far back as the reign of Elizabeth, it was 
 admitted, that the existing laws were insufficient to pro- 
 tect Charities from the frauds and robberies of the 
 trustees, and consequently the statute of charitable uses 
 was passed in the 43d of her reign, the title of which is, ' an 
 act to redress the misemployment of lands, goods, and
 
 Mockc of money heretofore given to Charitable uses ^ by thir 
 statute, the Lord Chancellor is authorized to grant Com- 
 missions to enquire respecting all abuses, breaches of 
 trust, negligence, misemployments, and frauds, in Charitable 
 donations. The words of the preamble shew what was 
 then the opinion of the mode in which Charity estates 
 were governed, " Whereas lands, fyc. given, some for relief 
 of aged, Sfc. some for education, Sfc. which have not been em- 
 ployed according to the Charitable intent of the givers thereof, 
 by reason of the frauds, breaches of trust, and negligence in 
 those that should pay, deliver, and employ the same, and for 
 redress and remedy whereof j be it enacted, fyc." The 
 Universities, Eton, Westminster, Winchester, and all Cha- 
 rities having special visitort, are excepted from the opera- 
 tion of this act.* 
 
 It is remarkable, that this statute originated in a charge 
 preferred against the Universities, for abusing their pos- 
 sessions, contrary to the will of the founders, but the 
 Lords exempted these very bodies from the operation of 
 the law. This statute may be considered as nearly obsolete, 
 not more than three commissions having been issued in 
 this reign, only six in the last 75 years, and only one since 
 the year 1787 ; th whole number from 1643 to 1760, was 
 964-. 
 
 The cumberous and expensive machinery necessary to 
 be set in motion, is quite sufficient to account for the dis- 
 use of commissions, but although the remedy has proved 
 'ineffectual, not a symptom of the inveterate disease has 
 
 * This exemption was adopted by the Lord Chancellor, as a precedent 
 for the like exemption in the bill appointing Commissioners; hut it is 
 well to ohserve, the two cases are perfectly dissimilar, the Commissioners 
 under the statute of Elizabeth were a Court of Judicature, who would 
 of course supersede the jurisdiction of the special visitor, which would 
 have been unjust, but the Commissioners now appointed were only to 
 enquire and report, and their duties therefore would in nowise clash with 
 those of the special visitors.
 
 113 
 
 abated, but on the contrary, seems to have been daily and 
 hourly taking deeper root; the necessity of enquiry has 
 been admitted on all hands, now, and at all times here- 
 tofore. Mr. Perceval, many years ago, recommended a 
 Committee to examine into the state of charitable founda- 
 tions, and other institutions for the Education of the Poor. 
 The Court of Chancery is in effect, the only place in 
 which redress is to be now sought ; it would be no easy 
 task to picture all the dreadful and appalling features of 
 this remedy in stronger terms, than those presented to the 
 House in Mr. Brougham's Speech*. 
 
 Those who enter the " eternal gates" of the Court, remain 
 spell bound ; the mode of protraction seems to have no end, 
 the expense is ruinous, and yet, are the poor (of whom the law 
 has constituted the crown and the public the guardians), 
 tauntingly told, the Chancery Court is open to them. One 
 commission has been stated to have been issued since 1787 
 this commission was completely finished in 1803, and the 
 Court of Chancery in 1804-, was applied te, for confirmation 
 of it; exceptions were taken, and by 1808, the matter was 
 ripe for decision ; and since that time, says Mr. Brougham, 
 (in 1818,) it has stood over for judgment, and for ten years 
 after the whole cause was completely ripe for decision, 
 did the parties, the poor, await this boon of the judge, 
 standing year after year, first amongst the causes 
 for his final decision. Putting the delays and expences 
 attending on a Chancery suit out of the question, the 
 jurisdiction of the Court of Chancery is not capable of 
 affording relief in all cases, nor will the Court interfere with 
 the governors of a Charity established by charter, unless they 
 have also the management of the revenues, and abuse their 
 trust. If any doubt be yet entertained as to the meffi- 
 cacy of the Court of Chancery to afford relief in abuses of 
 Charities, the following extract from the speech of Sir 
 
 * Sthof May, 1818. 
 T
 
 Samuel Rom illy in the House of Commons, on being expressly 
 called on by .Lord Castlereagh for his opinion, must when 
 the high character, the peculiar knowledge and experience 
 of the speaker are considered, put this point beyond aH 
 question. 
 
 " Having been so directly called on by the noble lord to state h! 
 opinion as to the chance there was of obtaining any remedy in cases of 
 abuse of Charitable trusts through the Court of Chancery, be felt he 
 should be acting improperly towards the House if he did not answer 
 that call. He most sincerely thought that, in such a case, the remedy 
 which the Court of Chancery -was capable of affording, Was not an 
 adequate remedy, and that it was impossible, through that Court, to 
 obtain redress for the abuses of Charitable institutions. There were 
 expedients of delay peculiar to that court, which, if resorted to, as they 
 naturally would be in such a case, would throw such obstacles in- tho 
 way of obtaining redress, as few would be disposed to encoiuiter. And 
 when he considered, that an information in the Court of Chancery 
 would be filed by some- stranger, who had not, like a suitor in Chan- 
 cery, an interest in the result of the decision, it could not be expected 
 that such a person would be disposed to pnt himself to the great expensr 
 which this would occasion, for the public benefit. The delay might 
 occasion, him to be out of a great expense for a number of years. If 
 a person hearing of any abuse, should think of having an information 
 filed, he must make up his mind to disburse a considerable sum, with 
 the chance of recovering, if he gained the suit after a great number 
 of years, strictly taxed costs. It would be difficult to find a man s 
 public-spirited as to advance a large sum of money to carry on a cause* 
 in which he had no personal interest, imputing gross misconduct to a 
 neighbour with a chance of recovering part of his expenses after so 
 great a lapse of time. Two years ago a bill had been introduced by 
 an honourable gentleman to which be proposed an amendment, which 
 afterwards became a separate bill, providing that all stamp duties 
 should be dispensed with in cases of this description, which would con- 
 sequently have been a great saving of expense ; but it had been de- 
 cided by the Court of Chancery, that this provision did not extend 
 to actions against persons who had got lands of Charities into their 
 possession. With respect to the proceedings in the Court of Chancery, 
 there was no man who practised in that court who must not be con- 
 vinced, that very great expedients of delay might be resorted to in it, 
 which ought not to exist in any court. His honourable and learned 
 friend had conceived those expedients of delay to belong necessarily
 
 115 
 
 to a court of equity ; but it was his opinion, that a great part of the 
 abuses in the Court of Chancery might be remedied, and might be 
 remedied without any U-gislative interference. He considered himself 
 at present as giving evidence with respect to the Court of Chancery, 
 and he had no hesitation in saying, that if gentlemen went to vote 
 with an idea that a remedy for abuses of Charities might be found in 
 that court, they would be voting under an erroneous impression." 
 
 Can it be for a moment doubted, but that it is neces- 
 sary some means should be afforded to Charitable institu- 
 tions for obtaining justice, and that the remedy will not be 
 found in the Court of Chancery as the law is now admi- 
 nistered ? 
 
 The tedious and incalculably expensive process of pro- 
 ceeding in Chancery by way of bill filed by the Attorney 
 General, led to the Act of Parliament (52 Geo. III. c. 101.) 
 alluded to by Sir S. Romilly, by which any two persons 
 directly interested in a Charity, may apply in a summary 
 mode by way of petition to the Court. This law it was an- 
 ticipated, would much facilitate the means of obtaining redress 
 in case of abuses of Charities, but it will be seen from the 
 opinion of the present Chancellor, nevertheless, that nearly 
 all good intentions in this respect at least, may be considered as 
 having failed. ' The Act," observed Lord Eldonin the debate 
 on the bill which is the subject of the present observations, 
 " was well meant, and gave a summary application to Chan- 
 " eery by way of petition, he and Sir W. Grant, had ap- 
 " plied themselves in every way to redress the evils which 
 " were pointed out to them, as far as was consistent with the 
 " rules of distributive justice ; but in the end they found so 
 " many difficulties in the application of the act, that in their 
 " opinion, and that. of almost every gentleman at the bar, 
 " who had been in any way concerned in it, they could do 
 " nothing else but desist : when indeed it is clear who was 
 " the Trustee, and who the cestui que trust, there was no 
 " great difficulty, but they were all obliged to agree that 
 " they were unable to adjust any thing under the limited 
 " powers of the act, when the parties concerned could not 
 
 I 2
 
 116 
 
 ** be very clearly ascertained." With this feeling and un- 
 derstanding, it at least is to be lamented that some attempt 
 has not been made by the learned Lord, who is so well 
 aware of the existence of the abuses, and of the good in- 
 tention of the Act, that he himself has not thought it worth 
 his while to bestow some relief to the poor, at least by the 
 uggestion of a more perfect remedy of the flagrant abuses, 
 fated, it should seem, to continue unredressed, as far as 
 regards the jurisdiction of the Court of Chancery ; ami it 
 may be remembered, that when this act passed, his lordship 
 presided as he does now in the House of Lords. It may 
 seem absurd to have. made use of the term summary, applied 
 in any wise to the proceedings of the Court of Chancery. 
 The harrassing delays wln'ch take place in the administra- 
 tion of justice in that Court, are justly to be considered as 
 one of the most pressing grievances existing in the country. 
 The Act by rendering it necessary that the parties should be 
 interested, and that two should concur, has prevented the 
 interference of those who would have been more likely to 
 have interfered, and who would have been satisfied with the 
 reputation of well-doers, as a recompence for the labour and 
 anxiety which they must have undergone in the institution, 
 of a suit. It has left the reform to men who of necessity 
 must be more or less influenced by fear or affection for the 
 delinquent Trustees, in whose neighbourhood the probability 
 is that they live. 
 
 By the 52 Geo. Ill, c. 102, all proceedings under the pre- 
 ceding act are exempted from stamp duties. And it is in 
 the discretion of the court to award which party shall pay 
 the costs. It is material to observe, Sir Samuel Romilly, 
 in his evidence given before the Education Committee, ob- 
 served, that he conceived that the costs would in very few 
 cases exceed fifty pounds. Lest, therefore, what has been 
 said should induce any two persons excited either by private 
 enmity or public spirit, on the occasion of some gross misma- 
 nagement, upon the invitation of the act, (for invita-
 
 117 
 
 tory it is) to commence proceedings, it is fair that the fol- 
 lowing historiette of the presentation of a petition should be 
 known, observing that the case was as simple as possible. 
 Nor was it at all apparent, at first setting off, how any delay 
 could arise. 
 
 Fortified with the assurance that the expenses must be mo- 
 derate, that this new and summary remedy would be quickly 
 obtained, the petitioners entertained none of the dread of 
 costs, nor the terror usually experienced on embarking in a 
 Chancery suit. The petition they thought would be presented, 
 and a hearing soon obtained, justice done, the delinquent 
 Trustee punished, and the flagging Grammar School revived 
 by yirtue of the specific, the summary remedy. It may be 
 proper now to descend from the delusive and visionary pros- 
 pects, to the reality ; first, a whole year was spent previously 
 to the presentation of the petition in every species of negotia- 
 tion to induce the Trustee to act with justice, and without 
 the aid of the strong arm of the law. This was neces- 
 sary to put the petitioners as much in the right as possible : 
 but was ineffectual : the advice of counsel was then 
 taken as to the probability of success, and the course to be 
 pursued, and the petition was presented. On the first 
 hearing, the patriotic petitioners were somewhat astounded 
 by assertions on the part of the delinquent Trustee, so ut- 
 terly devoid of truth, and so entirely destitute of foundation, 
 that it would have been marvellous had the proper replies 
 been prepared. Instead of the case being then decided on 
 the merits, an adjournment takes place, the court advising 
 the parties to come to some amicable arrangement as to what 
 minutes of facts should be referred to the Master. The 
 whole summer was consumed in meetings of counsel, and in- 
 effectual negociations of solicitors ; piles of affidavits are 
 BOW prepared, for a fresh hearing : the counsel for petitioners 
 then consent to waive the past, and a short reference to the 
 Master is directed for the future guidance of the Charity ; 
 this, however, not being acquiesced in by the defendants, the
 
 118 
 
 Trustees themselves, re-hearings begin with all the accompany- 
 ing infliction of expence, and acrimonious personal attacks 
 (the solicitors' bill from time to time demanding an advance, 
 to defray the current expences; afterjffwe more regular appear- 
 ances in court, and numerous briefs prepared beyond the 
 common calculation, and after this interruption and continual 
 conferences, then succeeds 18 months of delay in the Master's 
 office, (one of the most frightful stages in a Chancery suit,) this 
 period chiefly passed in a continued interchange of warrants, 
 filing of affidavits and counter affidavits, ordering and 
 making surveys, making and correcting calculations, 
 schemes for education proposed and opposed, new trustees 
 nominated, their characters discussed and after a three 
 years war comes the final decree, the Charity is revived, 
 the delinquent Trustee visited with the payment of 
 a portion of the costs, and the petitioners find, when 
 they come to pay their share of the costs, which the rule of 
 the court could not, in any case, compel the defendants to pay, 
 independent of the vexations they had undergone, they 
 were 200 or ,300 out of pocket by this " summary remedy" 
 all for the satisfaction of having thus stood forth, the *' pub- 
 " lie spirited" reformers of evil Deceived in their con- 
 struction of the plain words of an Act of Parliament, which 
 was professedly made to afford relief in their exact case, 
 calumniated by counsel, abused by the solicitors, unceas- 
 ingly harrassed by the proceedings in the master's office, 
 their motives hourly called in question, and one f the two 
 actually challenged to fight at Chalk Farm in the course of 
 the suit ; such is the end of the summary proceeding. 
 Having thus set forth what appears to be the different 
 existing modes of obtaining justice in the government 
 of Charities, it may be important to canvass the light in 
 which this point is considered by the correspondent of 
 Sir W Scott, our readers will bear in mind the praises 
 which have been bestowed upon his legal knowledge. 
 The statute of Elizabeth, now quite in disuse, is absurdly
 
 119 
 
 enough, discussed, and its powers considered, p. 84, 35. al- 
 though it is stated, it is true the statute has become " rather 
 ' obsolete in use," though this is only because the Court of 
 Chancery, under its equitable jurisdiction executes its power 
 by an easier process. " Rather obsolete in use on account of 
 " the easier process of a Chancery suit !" the writer, it 
 must be remembered, has composed his pamphlet with 
 " a knowledge of the legal bearings, superior to Mr. 
 " Brougham." " This mode of proceeding," continues the 
 acute and accurate writer, " is indeed, subject to the appro- 
 " bation of the crown officer, but it is notorious, that this 
 " assent is given almost as a matter of course upon any 
 " reasonable suggestions. But the 52d Geo. III. is a still 
 " easier remedy, (still easier remedy !) and of so little cost 
 *' and difficulty that any Charity, however inconsiderable, 
 " may have recourse to its powers, p. 35*. The parties 
 *' complaining, have little to do but to petition, no stamps pay- 
 " able ; the remoteness of the place where the Charity is es- 
 " tabiished, adds nothing to the expence, the ordinary delays 
 " of the Court of Chancery do not occur in a proceeding 
 " under this act, the costs in few cases can exceed .50, and 
 " even they are in the discretion of the Court. Thus, neither 
 " the law nor the administration of it are so difficult and de- 
 " ticient as the honourable chairman seems to think ; again 
 *' the proceedings are as speedy and summary as can be 
 " consistent with a Court of Justice, and at an expence 
 " almost insignificant." In answer to this sunshine view of 
 Chancery proceedings under the New Act, we can only 
 refer to the history just given, and in addition to which 
 many others could be furnished. The remedy will be found 
 neither go summary, nor the expense so trifling. As to 
 
 * This remedy, says the quack, although so effectual, is in itself so 
 bland and gentle, that the infant at the breast, and ladies in the most 
 delicate state of health, may take the largest dose without danger. Hare 
 not the correspondent of Sir W. Scott and Dr. Brodum drank at the 
 same spring ?
 
 120 
 
 proceedings by the old mode, by relators, the evidence 
 in the Yeovil and the Huntingdon cases, which we en- 
 treat our reader to refer to, will give the aspiring relator, 
 if any such read this, some hints of what he may expect. 
 We feel some regret at thus repressing (as we must) the com- 
 mencement of divers suits and the presentation of petitions, 
 which those who have only read the misrepresentation of 
 these processes by the correspondent of Sir W. Scott, 
 might have been inclined to become engaged in. 
 
 On the subject of costs, the statements are only made to 
 delude ; the Court adjudges no more than taxed costs, and the 
 difference between the taxed costs and the real ones is very 
 considerable. Petitioners who may have been ill advised, 
 may be compelled to pay their own and also their adversary's 
 costs, and it must also be remembered that an appeal to the 
 House of Lords would at least add 1 or =^00 to the usual 
 expenses. The evidence of Sir Samuel Romilly before the 
 Committee on the effect of the proceeding by information, 
 and by the " summary process," and as to the costs, is im- 
 portant in every point, and has been misrepresented by the 
 correspondent of Sir W. Scott. The substance was as fol- 
 lows, <' that the relator in a Chancery proceeding, may 
 " be made subject to all the expenses, which are in general 
 *' extremely high, so high that it would be an act of great 
 " imprudence in any person to become relator in such a suit, 
 " unless he is quite clear of success. Cases when costs were 
 " directed to be paid out of the Charity Estates, have made 
 ". it impossible that the purposes of the Charity could be ful- 
 " filled for many years. The costs on petition are inconsi- 
 " derable, though when there are many affidavits they may 
 '* amount to a great deal. I should consider," continues 
 Sir S. Romilly, " of 50 to be a large amount of costs, but 
 *' must observe I knatv little 'of the amount of costs : it is 
 " possible an issue to try facts may be directed, in which 
 " case the expense would be increased very much." 
 Here we conclude the view of the subsisting remedies,
 
 121 
 
 observing that the Court of Chancery will not interfere 
 with governors or visitors at all, as to the controul of the 
 Charities or abuse of them, unless they meddle with the 
 funds, when the jurisdiction of the Court attaches, and they 
 are like any other person liable to account. It will be im- 
 possible that any one should consider the general question, 
 taking into consideration the present state of the Charities, 
 without being convinced of the necessity of some con- 
 trouling power over special visitors and governors, who are 
 thus left, with no responsibility but to God and their 
 conscience. 
 
 We have omitted to remark, that in 1786, the attention of 
 Parliament was called to the general abuse of Charities, 
 and the law called Gilbert's Act was passed, directing the 
 registration of all Charities ; and the report of the Com- 
 mittee which sat on the returns under this act, states, that 
 many charitable donations had been lost, and that others 
 were in danger of being lost, from the neglect and 
 inattention of those who ought to superintend them, and 
 recommend the matter to the speedy attention of parliament. 
 But however important the subject, it was superseded by 
 others of more weight and interest : and this act, though 
 it shews the general opinion that the greatest publicity 
 should be given to Charitable foundations, must be con- 
 sidered as having failed in its operation ; the returns being 
 in the greatest degree imperfect. There are, according to the 
 returns under this act, in the East Riding of Yorkshire, 
 73 places said to possess 67 charitable donations for 
 schools, and their united revenue is stated at ^'880. It is 
 now ascertained (and it can hardly be from excessive in- 
 crease of rent) that Pocklington alone has a revenue of 
 about 900 a year. 
 
 In Middlesex, the whole revenue is returned under 5000 
 a year, in 151 donations possessed by 64- places : but the re- 
 venues of three schools, the Charter-house, Christ's Hos- 
 pital, and St. Paul's school, are proved now to exceed 
 .70,000 per annum.
 
 122 
 
 Most of our public seminaries, it is obserred in the Quarterly 
 Review, April, 1817 were founded in the early, or at least the 
 middle periods of English history, and may therefore be sup- 
 posed .not always exempt from the languor and the decay inci- 
 dent to establishments of long standing ; they were also founded 
 in time* of comparative ignorance and prejudice, if not of semi- 
 barbarism : hence their systems of education are occasionally 
 faulty, and even when these are corrected, they cannot entirely 
 shake off the clogs of ancient forms, but have to run the race of 
 improvement in shackles. 
 
 With respect to the state of these schools, we entirely coincide 
 with these writers ; but it is on the means of administering the 
 relief that we differ. The languor and decays are, wrongly we 
 think, attributed to lapse of time ; it is, in fact, the languor or 
 the fraud of the trustees, the visitors, or the schoolmasters, to 
 which this decay is attributable ; and to correct which no suffi- 
 cient remedy now exists ; the supineness and negligence of 
 visitors, must be admitted, when such a case as that of Pock- 
 lington school is brought forward, and yet the cry is, that 
 the judgment of the special visitor and trustee is a domestic 
 forum selected by the founder: it is a court set up to watch 
 over and regulate the administration of his property, and which 
 the law has allowed ; and therefore to interfere with property so 
 circumstanced, is in fact to break down the boundaries of private 
 possessions : but in what manner can simple enquiry, (and which 
 there can be no doubt will in almost every' case be effectual) be 
 considered as trenching on property ? how would the founder'* 
 property at Pocklington or at Croydon be affected by the Com- 
 missioners reporting to the House, that at the one place they found 
 large revenues enjoyed by a runaway schoolmaster, with one 
 scholar ; and at the other, by a master and no scholar at all. How 
 could private property be affected by any such proceeding ? Can 
 it be supposed that any founder, if he were now in existence, could 
 complain ; would it not in fact just be what he desired, not hav- 
 ing it in his power to appoint any public officers like the Commis- 
 sioners always to be on the watch, and whom it is not probable
 
 12S 
 
 /ean ever be swayed by their prejudices or affectioas, he has, as 
 far as in him lies, substituted private individuals to perform that 
 office for him ; but how can he complain, if it is said to him, 
 your trustees or your visitors at some period through distant 
 ages, may from negligence or worse motives cease to watch over 
 your institution as you expect, we wili therefore appoint for you 
 a set of individuals of high character and attainments, who 
 will from time to time examine with an impartial eye into your 
 directions, and the conduct of those to whom you have entrusted 
 the execution of your wishes. And should any deviation 
 therefrom take place, such will be reported to us. Is not this 
 the exact proceeding proposed to be adopted ? and is it possible, 
 jet what ingenuity there may be exerted, to find one single 
 objection to it ? Nothing is to be abrogated, nothing altered. 
 So long as charities under the guidance and controul of special 
 visitors or trustees are protected from enquiry, no real benefit 
 can be hoped to result from any measure which may be brought 
 forward. That the languor and abuses is in fact rightly attributed 
 to the criminality or negligence of the trustees and governors 
 themselves, in most instances will, we think, be conceded by 
 any one who has had occasion to enquire into this subject, and 
 it will be perceived, that the ordinances of most of these schools 
 provide a remedy for original oversights, and certain individuals 
 are sometimes authorized to make discretional changes. Yet 
 during many years the poorer classes have not attended these 
 schools, and the object of the founders has in a number of in 
 stances been so far defeated, as that these schools have ceased in 
 a great measure, to be the means of disseminating useful learning, 
 and the funds have either been consumed without instruction having 
 been given to any one, or the scholars have belenged to classes 
 who could have procured tuition, if these eleemosynary founda- 
 tions had not afforded it to them. At the time of the founda- 
 tion of most of the grammar schools, the system of education 
 was materially different from what it is now, and what is termed 
 in the regulations, " Scientia Grammatically^ was in general the 
 chief object of the founders, what is to come within the exact
 
 124 
 
 meaning of these words, it is not now, perhaps, very im- 
 portant to consider. But it appears almost universally the prac- 
 tice with the school masters, as soon as they are appointed, to 
 narrow as far as is in their power, the meaning of the words di- 
 rectory of what they are to teach, and this with one of two ends, 
 either to drive away altogether any one who may be inclined to 
 avail himself of the charity, or to make the teaching other 
 branches of education a matter of separate charge, so in effect 
 doing away the benefit of the charity. 
 
 This was the case with several of the schools noticed before 
 the Committee, and there is hardly a person who reads these 
 pages but must himself know of the existence of some similar 
 abuse ; and a better illustration cannot be given than the con- 
 duct of a master of a free grammar school in Sussex, who 
 wishing to prevent the trouble of having charity scholars, re- 
 fused to teach the rightful candidates any thing but Latin, 
 though his own boarders received all the attributes of an 
 "elegant education." And this conscientious personage, hav- 
 ing discovered a mechanic's son teaching himself arithmetic 
 and writing out of school hours, increased his Latin lessons so as 
 to occupy his time, that in fact, the boy might be driven 
 from the school, where he was nothing but an intruder in the 
 eye of the master, who loved the hire, but hated the labour. 
 
 And as to these -cases in which it should be found that the 
 strict letter of the original ordinances do not admit of an 
 adaptation of the prescribed course of teaching, to the wants 
 and habits of the present day, it is at least worthy of consideration, 
 whether the adopting a-doctrine of construction, guided by the 
 same principles, as what in Courts of Equity is termed cy pres, 
 might yet be found highly beneficial. 
 
 Thus where funds are given for any particular purpose, and 
 they turn out to be of greater value than is sufficient to effectuate 
 the original intent, till the general intention to give, being 
 expressed, the Court applies the surplus to purposes as nearly 
 similar as they can devise, (cy pres,) to those declared by 
 the founder. As where money was given to put out a
 
 125 
 
 certain number of apprentices, or educate a certain number 
 of childreo, if the funds exceed the requisite sum, the Court 
 applies the surplus in furtherance of the same objects, and 
 where there was property appropriated to apprentice two poor 
 boys, children of the members of a particular Presbyterian 
 congregation, and living in a particular parish. The Court 
 according to this doctrine of construction before mentioned, 
 extended the surplus of the Charity funds to boys in other 
 parishes, then to daughters, and then to sons of Presbyterians 
 generally. And it is laid down that when a Charity cannot 
 be executed as directed, and the general purposes appear distinct, 
 and may in substance be attained by another mode, it shall 
 be executed cy pres. 3 Ves. 141. 
 
 It is impossible to consider the effect of this doctrine of 
 construction, without seeing the benefit which would result from 
 it, if it was extended to the resuscitation as well of these in- 
 stitutions, now sunk into disuse from the change in society and 
 habits, as well as of those whose funds are become in many in- 
 stances far more than sufficient to effectuate the objects of the 
 founder. But it must always be borne in mind, that in this 
 respect the power of the Court of Chancery is limited, it a 
 only where there is a mis-application of the funds, not of the 
 rules that the jurisdiction attaches. And therefore when the 
 usher and master of the Berkhampsfead school had but one boy 
 between them on the foundation ; the Court of Chancery was 
 itself the hand to deal out to them, several thousands of 
 pounds to which they established their legal right, without per- 
 forming for it any actual service, the court having no power to com- 
 pel the special visitor to do his duty. Although we do not think 
 it would be either wise or just to do away with or alter the foun- 
 der's directions, when it is possible that they can be obeyed, and 
 where objects are to be found ; still it will be difficult to bring 
 forward any argument to shew that it would not be as just as 
 beneficial to make such additions in the things to be taught, 
 as the wants and habits of mankind now make necessary, 
 and which would render those foundations available, which
 
 126 
 
 were before grown into disuse^ and would in truth tend more 
 to the advancement of the general intention of the founders^ 
 than a rigid adherence to the letter of it. And as to the school- 
 master at Croydon, when it was found that no children at- 
 tended his school, by reason that nothing but Latin and Greek 
 was taught, can it be questioned that the general intention of 
 the founder would not have been obeyed more completely by di- 
 recting him to teach other branches of learning in addition to 
 Latin and Greek, rather than to suffer him to enjoy the salary, 
 and not perform any duty for it in return? that this would be 
 to may be inferred from the following opinion of the present 
 Lord Chancellor. 
 
 There being at Leeds a charity school for the purpose of 
 teaching Latin and Greek, it was proposed to have other masters 
 paid out of the funds for the purpose of teaching writing, arith- 
 metic, and the modern languages ; such a system of education 
 in fact, being more congenial to the present wants and habits of 
 a commercial town, and in this case it was determined that the 
 nature of a Charity can be changed, by application to objects dif- 
 ferent from those intended by the founder, when it is clear that 
 by a strict adherence to the plan, his general object will be de- 
 stroyed. But the Court would not in that case, permit the ap- 
 plication of the funds to procure the proposed additions, (11 
 Ves. 241.) Though supposing it had appeared that the founder** 
 intent would have been destroyed by a strict adherence to his rules, 
 as that there were none in Leeds who were inclined to avail 
 themselves of the Charity, can it be doubted that it would not 
 have been more congenial to the founder's will, that education., 
 such as the inhabitants were willing to receive, should be fur- 
 nished to them, rather than the funds should be enjoyed by the 
 master as a sinecure, as in the cases of Croydon, Huntingdon, 
 and an hundred other places which could be named : and it is 
 important to remark that in the case above noticed, the Lord 
 Chancellor himself says, that experience justifies the obser- 
 vation, that where there is a school with a large establishment, 
 and the scholars go to it gratis ; there is a strong temptation
 
 127 
 
 not to struggle to obtain many scholars ; and therefore tftc 
 amount of the salary sometimes defeats the purpose.* 
 
 According to this doctrine there is not a single grammar 
 school in the kingdom, which might not be made to answer 
 the real end of its benevolent founder, and after such an 
 innovation has once had the sanction of the learned Lord 
 whose observation we have referred to, the most inflexible 
 lupporter of existing rights may follow blind-fold without fear, 
 and there cannot, we conceive, be a question if at a free 
 grammar school, writing, arithmetic, and English reading, were 
 under particular regulations permitted to be taught, even 
 admitting the founder's chief object to have been the ac- 
 quirement of the Latin, still that his intention would be more 
 generally attained, by admitting a wider range of candidates 
 for the attainment of it, and the talents and capacity of a 
 larger number would be examined, and such as displayed any 
 peculiar abilities, would avail themselves of the higher branches 
 of instruction, whilst the remainder would receive the full be- 
 nefit of the rudiments of education. The Latin, it should be 
 recollected, was, when most of these schools were founded, the 
 principal object of study, and its attainment absolutely necessary 
 by all above the lowest ranks in society.f 
 
 It was intended to have exposed more in detail some of the 
 numerous and purposed misrepresentations on the subject of the 
 Education Committee and Mr. Brougham, contained in the 
 Quarterly Review and the Letter to Sir William Scott, but it is 
 useless to tire the reader on a subject after all of no real im- 
 portance. 
 
 * In the case of the Leeds school above noticed, the Lord Chancellor 
 observed, his opinion was, it was a free grammar school " for teaching 
 " grammatically the learned languages," according to Dr. Johnson's de- 
 finition: the adopting in a court of justice the definition of a gram- 
 marian himself on the meaning of a grammar school, would be a matter 
 of some surprise. 
 
 f A letter on the best method of restoring decayed grammar schools, 
 printed in the Pamphleteer, contains much curious information on th 
 subject of these institutions.
 
 128 
 
 . The writers in the Quarterly Review had in view the doubla 
 object of preventing a radical enquiry into the Abuses of Chanties, 
 and of vilifying Mr. Brougham. As no ingenuity could invent ar- 
 guments which could be brought to bear against the real question 
 of enquiry and reform, it was necessary that it should be first 
 distorted, and that then the monster should be held up as an 
 object of terror to the public. With respect to the jokes and 
 the witticism* with which the Essay in the Quarterly Review is 
 so plentifully interlarded, we must admit ourselves to be some- 
 what prejudiced, and therefore shall venture no very positive 
 opinion on them, except that we consider if there had been a 
 more strict adherence to truth, and a nicer attention to pro- 
 priety, it would have been more laudable, although it must be 
 admitted some of the best hits could have been marred. 
 
 That, which we should have selected as the best specimen, 
 however, is grounded on a purposed mis-representation. The 
 Bill, it will be recollected a-s it passed in the Commons, directed 
 an enquiry into the " state of the Education of the poorer 
 " classes,'' and the omission of this part of the duty of the Com- 
 missioners was much regretted by Mr. Brougham, but for the 
 joke's sake Mr. Brougham, in his Letter to Sir Samuel Ro- 
 milly, is made to lament that the House of Lords had deprived 
 the Commissioners of the power of pursuing an enquiry into the 
 state of education IN GENERAL, and then follows an entertaining 
 enumeration of what would have been the probable course of 
 . enquiry to be pursued amongst the London and country board- 
 ing schools, dancing, singing, and fencing masters ; the canvassing 
 of plain work, and embroidery, and the use of the globes, &c. 
 The passage can hardly be forgotten by any one who has seen 
 it, and with the exception of the false assumption on which it is 
 grounded, may be considered as perfect in its kind. 
 
 Of the same nature is the joke about Messrs. Parry and Koe, 
 the whole joke is made to turn on the fact of the name of Mr. 
 Koe not having been before mentioned in Mr. Brougham's 
 Letter, when in truth it had been so, as will be seen by looking 
 to the 36th page of it. We could add considerably to this list,
 
 but after all, the exposure of the bad or the praise of the good 
 jokes of the Quarterly Review, is of no yery great importance 
 to the real question. 
 
 The following, however, may be taken as a good specimen of 
 the legerdemain mode of misrepresentation of this journal. Mr. 
 Brougham, speaking of the appointment of Sir W. Scott to be 
 a Commissioner, observed, that his constituents were known to 
 be the warmest enemies of the enquiry. If, say the Quarterly 
 Review, by this it is intended to imply, that the University of Ox- 
 ford are, generally speaking, averse to the enquiry into abuses of 
 Charities : we have no hesitation in pronouncing the charge to be 
 ill-founded ; no persons have a greater interest than the CLERGY 
 in promoting the education of the poor, and none in fact do' con- 
 tribute so large a portion of their time to it. The most careless 
 reader must have observed how ingeniously " clergy" is slid in 
 for " university of Oxford," and meaning that it should be in- 
 ferred, Mr. Brougham considered the clergy as hostile to the 
 proposed measure, when in fact, both in his speech and letter he 
 had highly praised the labours and assistance afforded by that 
 body, towards the furtherance of the objects of the Committee 
 but enough we shall now bring our observations to a close, 
 by remarking that no real benefit will result from the labours and 
 the exertions of the Education Committee, without a full and 
 searching enquiry is made into the foundation, funds, and ad- 
 ministration of every charitable institution in the country, 
 whether visited or not, and that, by persons fully authorized to 
 compel the production of all necessary documents and evidence. 
 
 THX BMD.
 
 li Brj'er, Printer, Bridge-street, Blackfriw s, London.
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY 
 
 Los Angeles 
 This book is DUE on the last date stamped below. 
 
 SEP 1 8 1950 
 
 JM) 1 
 FEB281B5V 
 
 Form L9-42m-8,'49(B5573)444 
 
 THE LIBEARY
 
 LIBRARY FACILITY