HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.slavery/ssactsengr0801 and id is 1 raw text is: ATTORNEY-GENERAL V. IRONMONGERS' COMPANY 2 BEAV. 332.
in some degree, that abuse, which arose from the deviation from the old practice,
which, even in my remembrance, was that the Attorney-General should always
attend before the Master by counsel upon the consideration of a scheme, Sir John
Leach directed that counsel for the Attorney-General should always attend, not as a
distinct party, but to prevent the persons who were there retained by the relators
having the sole control of the promotion of a scheme, that is, the counsel for the
Attorney-General was to attend there to control the counsel who were retained by
the relators, and in order that that important public officer might be present at the
proceedings and protect not only the charity but the public.
If I could do what I think right, I would take care that the Attorney-General
personally, or some gentleman retained under his direction, should be present upon
every charity proceeding, because without that vigilance and sanction which he in
that way could bestow, there is no protection for charities or the public.
In this particular case, as the matter has proceeded so far, and as any change
would be productive of considerable expense, it appears to me better to go on with
the present arrangement; upon any future occasion I hope that a different arrange-
ment will be made.
[332] THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL observed, that it had been the practice for the
Attorney-General to appear by his counsel separately from the counsel of the
relators. That he had personally appeared in the House of Lords in the case of
Lady Hewley's Charity in opposition to the information, when the House intimated
a clear opinion that it was regular. That he was anxious to have it understood that
the Attorney-General did not give his sanction to the scheme of the relators, though
it was his wish that the Court should hear everything and then decide.
THE MASTER OF THE ROLLS remarked that he did not know anything more
important to the general interests of charities and of the public, so far, as it was
interested in charities, than that the authority and discretion of the Attorney-
General in all these proceedings should be maintained perfectly unbroken, unfettered,
and unbiassed.
Appeals were presented by the Attorney-General and the trustees of the Mico
Charity ; the Lord Chancellor, however, held that the latter, not being parties to the
suit, were not entitled to be heard. His Lordship on the 23d of January 1841
rejected all the schemes, and held that the released fund ought to be applied in
support of charity schools in England, without any restriction as to place, where the
education was according to the Church of England, but not giving to any one more
than £20 a year.
(1) Attorney-General v. Gibson.
Lady Mico, by her will, dated in 1670, gave and bequeathed the moiety of a sum
of £2000 to redeem poor slaves, which she directed should be put out as her executors
thought best for a yearly revenue to redeem some yearly.
In 1680, an information was exhibited by the Attorney-General against Robinson
and others, the executors of the testatrix, for the establishment of the charity; and
by a decree, made in June 1686, it was ordered that the £1000 should be laid out in
the purchase of land, and the rents should be applied according to the directions of
the will. The money was laid out, but the only part ever applied was £1500 South
Sea annuities, which in March 1737 was paid to Sir Charles Wager for the redemption
of poor captive slaves. In 1827, an information was filed against Gibson and others,
the executors of Barker, a trustee of the fund; and by a decree dated the 7th of July
1827, and an order of the 15th of November 1827, varying it, it was referred to the
Master to appoint new trustees, and to approve of a scheme for the application of the
income of the charity property according to the will of the testatrix; or if he should
find that the same could not be executed according to her will, then as near the intent
of the will as could be, regard being had to the existing circumstances and to the
amount of the fund.
There were accumulations of the charity fund, amounting to £115,510 consols.
In January 1834 the Master made his report, appointing Mr. Gibson, Dr. Lush-
ington, Mr. Fowell Buxton and Mr. Barker trustees of the charity.
The Master by his general report, dated in July 1835, after finding these facts,
1208](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.slavery/ssactsengr0801&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)