Attorney General v the Bishop of Chester
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 07 May 1785 |
| Date | 07 May 1785 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 28 E.R. 1229
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
Followed, Sinnett v. Herbert, 1872, L. R. 7 Ch. 240; Chamberlayne v. Brockett, 1872, L. R. 8 Ch. 210. Approved, as to parsonage repairs being a charity, In re Vaughan, Vaughan v. Thomas, 1886, 33 Ch. D. 191.
attorney general against the Bishop of chester. [7 May 1785.] [Followed, Sinnett v. Herbert, 1872, L. R. 7 Ch. 240; Chamherlayne v. Brockett, 1872, L. R. 8 Ch. 210. Approved, as to parsonage repairs being a charity, In re Vaughan, . Vaughan v. Thomas, 1886, 33 Ch. D. 191.] Legacy towards establishing a Bishop in America, not void, though none as yet appointed. Legacy to repair parsonage houses is good, and the selection of objects to be in the Master, upon proposals laid before him. (See also Attorney General v. Parsons, 8 Ves. 186. Lord Eldon, C., approved of the principal case, ibid. 191. And see there his Lordship's observations that, as to a bequest to erect or to build a school, &c., imply now prima facie, that land is to be bought for the purpose. See also 3 Ves. 645, 646, and 4 Ves. 431.) The late Archbishop Seeker, among many charitable legacies, gave 1000 3 per cent. Bank annuities, to his trustees, the defendant, and the late Dr. Stinton, for the purpose of establishing a Bishop in His Majesty's dominions in America ; he also gave 1000 to be laid out upon repairing parsonage houses [to be chosen by the defendant and Dr. Stinton], and ordered, that if any charity to which he had given a legacy should no longer subsist, such legacy should fall into the residue. (Note : The words in R. L. are," should no longer subsist at the time of his decease, or should have been so grossly " perverted that they should think giving any thing, or so much, to it improper, then " they should give, what he had appointed for it, or such part of what they should " approve, or such as they should please, to any other charity." Reg. Lib.) Mr. Attorney-General [Arden] insisted, that a gift of money to be laid out in building upon land already in mortmain, is good in law; and cited for that purpose, the cases of Brodie v. the Duke of Chandos,(l) and the Attorney General v. Hutchinson.(1\ Mr. Mansfield, for the Bishop of Chester, did not controvert. this, but contended, the selection of the objects belonged, since the death of Doctor Stinton, to the Bishop 1230 ATTORNEY GENERAL D, CHESTER (SlSBOf of) .1BKO..C..C. 444. of Chester alone. As to the other legacy...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Fisher v Brierly
...The appeal did not settle this point, but we submit that the principal cannot be supported. [Attorney-dcne-ml v. Bishop of Chester (1 Bro. C. C. 444) ; Downiny dolleyt rase (Shelf. Charities,'131), 140), were also referred to.] The stat. 43 (ieo. 3, c. 108 was intended to introduce a new ru......
-
Loscombe v Wintringham
...Pearce, 2 Atk. 87, and Barnard. Ch. C. 208; legacy towards establishing a bishopric in America, Attorney-General v. Bishop of Chester, 1 Bro. C. C. 444 ; bequest of annual sum for repairs of a monument, Willis v. Brown, 2 Jurist, 987 ; bequest for the " perpetual endowment or maintenance of......
-
Bank of Ireland Trustee Company Ltd v Attorney General
...Ch. 237. (8) [1923] 1 Ch. 243. (9) [1956] 2 W. L. R. 449. (10) [1914] 1 I. R. 305. (11) 64 I. L. T. R. 50. (12) 82 I. L. T. R. 74. (13) 1 Bro. C. C. 444 (14) L. R. 12 Eq. 574. (15) [1906] 1 I. R. 247. (16) I. R. 10 C. L. 104. (1) [1906] 1 I. R. at pp. 268, 269. (2) [1943] I. R. 238. (3) [19......
-
Kelly v Attorney-General
...costs. W. L. (1) 2 My. & K. 576, 586. (2) 14 Sim. 230. (3) 4 Eq. 521. (4) 8 Ch. 206. (5) 110 L. T. 688. (6) [1901] 1 Ch. 715. (1) 1 Bro. C. C. 444; 4 Ves. (2) 6 Ves. 404. (3) 4 Eq. 521. (4) 3 Macq. 134. (5) 9 Ch. D. 576. (1) 6 Ves. 404. (2) 3 Macq. 134. (3) 4 Eq. 521. (4) 14 Eq. 45. (5) 18 ......