Bignold and Another v Springfield and Others
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 24 April 1837 |
| Date | 24 April 1837 |
| Court | House of Lords |
English Reports Citation: 7 E.R. 992
House of Lords
Mews' Dig. i. 334; iii. 226, 250. S.C. Macl. and R. 837; 5 Bing. N.C. 745; 8 Scott 101; and, in Court below, sub nom. In re Norwich Charities, 2 My. and Cr. 275. Discussed and explained in Doe d. Governors of Bristol Hospital v. Norton, 1843, 11 M. and W. 930, 931; and see Christ's Hospital v. Grainger 1848, 16 Sim. 102; A.-G. v. Exeter (Mayor of), 1852, 2 De G. M. and G. 507; s. 133 of Mun. Corp. Act 1882 takes the place of s. 71 of the Mun. Corp. Act 1835.
VII CLARK & FINNELLY. BIGNOLD V. SPRINGFIELD [1837-39] [71] SAMUEL BIGNOLD and Another,-Appellant*; THOMAS OSBORN SPRINGFIELD and Others,-Respondents [April 24, 1837; Feb. 19, 21, June 25, August 5, 1839]. [Mews' Dig. i. 334; iii. 226, 250. S.C. Macl. and R. 837; 5 Bing. N.C. 745; 8 Scott 101; and, in Court below, sub nom. In re Norwich Charities, 2 My. and Cr. 275. Discussed and explained in Doe d. Governors of Bristol Hospital v. Norton, 1843, 11 M. and W. 930, 931 ; and see Christ's Hospital v. Grainger 1848, 16 Sim. 102; A.-G. v. Exeter (Mayor of), 1852, 2 De G. M. and G. 507; s. 133 of Mun. Corp. Act 1882 takes the place of s. 71 of the Mun. Corp. Act 1835.] By Act 5 and 6 Will. 4, c. 76, s. 71, it is enacted that ah1 the estate a,nd interest of such bodies corporate, or members thereof, as were seised or possessed of any real or personal estate in trust for charitable uses, should, in respect of such uses and trusts, continue in the persons, who at the time of passing the Act (1835) were such trustees, until the 1st day of August 1836 or until Parliament should otherwise order, and should thereupon utterly cease and determine : Provided that, if Parliament should not otherwise direct on or before the said 1st of August, the Lord Chancellor or Lords Commissioners of the Great Seal sho'uld make such orders as they should see fit, for the administration, subject to such charitable uses, and trust as aforesaid, of the said charity estates and funds. Parliament did not pass any subsequent Act on the subject before the 1st of August 1836.- Held that the administration of the charity estates and funds did not continue in the person so described, alter the 1st of August 1836 ; and that it was competent to the Lord Chancellor, after that day, to make orders for the appointment of new trustees for their administration. Orders made by the Lord Chancellor in the matter of such charitable estates and funds, by virtue of tile said Act and of the Act 52 Geo. 3, o. 101, which last gives an appeal to' the House of Lords, are subject to such appeal. Whether orders made by virtue of the Act 5 and 6 Will. 4, c. 76, alone, are subject to appeal, quaere. At the time of passing the Act of Parliament, of the 5th and 6th W. 4, c. 76, in-titled, " An Act to provide for the regulation of Municipal Corporations in England and Wales," the corporate body of the city of Norwich, or some members thereof in their corporate capacity, stood solely, or together with other persons elected solely by such body corporate or solely by some par-[72]-ticular number of its members, seised or possessed for some estate or interest in various hereditaments, sums of money, chattels, securities for money, and other personal estate, producing an annual income of about 8000, in trust for various charities. The 71st section of the said Act is as follows: " And whereas divers bodies corporate now stand seised or possessed of sundry hereditaments and personal estate, in trust, in whole or in part, for certain charitable trusts; and it is expedient that the administration thereof be' kept distinct from that of the public stock and borough fund be it Enacted, That in every borough in which the body corporate, or any one or more of the members of such body corporate in his or their corporate capacity, now stands or stand solely, or together with any person or persons elected solely by such body corporate or solely by any particular number class or description of members of such body corporate, seised or possessed, for any estate' or interest whatsoever, of any hereditaments, or any sums of money, chattels, securities for money, or any other personal estate whatsoever, in whole or in part, in trust or for the benefit of any charitable uses, or trusts whatsoever, all the estate, right, interest, and title, and all the powers of such body corporate, or of such member or members of such body corporate, in respect of the said uses and trusts, shall continue in the persons who at the time of the passing of this Act are such trustees as aforesaid, notwithstanding that they may have ceased to' hold any office by virtue of which before the passing of this Act they were such trustees, until the 1st day of August 1836 or until Parliament shall otherwise order, and shall immediately thereupon utterly cease and determine: Provided [73] always, that if 992 BIGNOLD V. SPRINGFIELD [1837-39] VII CLARK & FINNELLY. any vacancy shall be occasioned among the charitable trustees for any borough before the said 1st day of August, it shall be lawful for the High Lord Chancellor or Lords Commissioners of the Great Seal for the time being, upon petition in a summary way, to appoint another trustee to supply such vacancy; and every person so appointed a trustee as last aforesaid, shall be a trustee until the/ time at which the person in the room of whom he was chosen would regularly have ceased to be a trustee, and he shall then cease to be a trustee: Provided also, that if Parliament shall not otherwise direct on .or before the said 1st day of August 1836, the Lord High Chancellor or Lords Commissioners of the Great Seal shall make such orders as he or they shall see fit for the administration, subject, to such charitable uses or trusts as aforesaid, of such trust estates." On the 16th of August 1836, the Appellants presented their petition to the Lord Chancellor, by their description of " two of the inhabitants of the city of Norwich, and also two of the persons who at the time of the passing of the Act of Parliament (the said Act) were members of the body corporate, called the mayor, sheriffs, citizens, and commonalty of the city of Norwich, on behalf of themselves and all other the persons who at the time of the passing of the said Act were members of and constituted such body corporate." The petition-which was intitled, " In Chancery; In the matteir of the cKaritable estates and funds heretofore vested in the mayor, sheriffs, citizens, and commonalty of the city of Norwich, as trustees for charitable purposes," and which was certified and allowed by his Majesty's Attorney-general, under the provisions of the Act authorising the Court to give summary relief [74] by petition in cases of abuses of charitable trusts (52 G. 3, c. 101; commonly called Sir S. Romilly's Act)-set forth the said section of the Act 5 and 6 Will. 4, c. 76, and stated that at the passing thereof there were vested in the corporation of Norwich, or some of its members in their corporate capacity, various estates, etc. in trust for various charities; all which were stated to be detailed in the 27th volume of the reports of the Charity Commissioners, to which reference was made: that the said corporation was composed of the mayor, who was an alderman, 23 other aldermen, two. sheriffs-one of whom was one of the 23 aldermen:-and 60 common councilmen, making in all 85 persons, two of whom had recently died: that petitioners were two of the aldermen: that consequently under the said Act, as they ware advised, all the said charitable estates and properties became and continued in the survivors of the said 85 persons, upon and for the trusts, etc. to which they were properly applicable, and they had accordingly the management and administration thereof up to the 1st of August (1836): that no subsequent Act of Parliament had passed in relation to these matters, nor had any direction been given by Parliament in respect of the same: that from the nature of the said charities by reason of their magnitude, the number of persons entitled to participate in them, and the purposes to which they were applicable, it was of essential importance that they should be administered by. persons lawfully authorized ; and that petitioners and the other members of the said corporation, could not safely proceed with the administration thereof without the sanction and direction of the Lord Chancellor. The petition therefore prayed [75] that it might be declared that, " according to the true construction of the said Act of Parliament, all the said charity estates, funds, and properties do now remain and continue vested in your petitioners and the others of the 83 surviving persons aforesaid, or in such of them as are or may be living at the time of making the order to be hereupon made, upon the uses and trusts and for the purposes to1 which, at the time of the passing of the said Act, the same were applicable as aforesaid; and that your petitioners and the said other persons may be at liberty and may be authorized to administer and apply the same, and the rents, interests, dividends, and annual profits thereof, upon and for such uses, trusts and purposes, in like manner as the same have been heretofore applied; or in case it shall appear to the Court that such is not the true construction of the said Act, then that your petitioners and such other persons as aforesaid may be appointed trustees for the aforesaid purposes, or otherwise that it may be referred to the Master of the vacation to appoint proper persons to be such trustees, with liberty for your petitioners and the said other persons to propose themselves as such trustees, and that in the meantime your petitioners and the said other persons may be at liberty to act in the administration of the said estates and funds, rents, and income thereof; and that all proper directions may be given...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Christ's Hospital v Grainger
...cumpersonA," every action or suit which their misconduct might have given rise to has perished with them. Eignold v. Springfield (7 Cl. & Fin. 71 ; see p. 117; see also Doe v. Norton, 11 Mees. & Wels. 913). Mr. Bacon said that the gift over in the will was introduced in tenorem, or as a pen......
-
Re Hall's Charity
...Attorney-General v. The East Betford Grammar School, 17 L. J. (N. S.) Ch. 450 (1848); to appoint new trustees, Bignold \. Springfield, 7 Cl. & Fin. 71, 74 (1837-39); to sell the charity estate, In re ParJce's Charity, 12 Simons, 329 (1841-42); but semble, contra, In re Suir Island Female Ch......
-
Doe dem. The Governors of the Hospital of Queen Elizabeth, of Bristol, and Others v Anna Norton
...B. Does that mean that the estate should cease and determine, or only that the new estate should cease?] In Biynoltl v. tiprinyfield (7 Cl, & Fin. 71), it was held, on the construction of the 71st section, that the administration of charity estates and funds did not continue in the corporat......
- Samuel Bignold and Another, Appellants. - Knight Bruce-Jacob-Girdlestone; Thomas Osborne Springfield and Others, Respondents. - Attorney General (Campbell)-Pemberton-Blunt