Doe dem. The Governors of the Hospital of Queen Elizabeth, of Bristol, and Others v Anna Norton
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 10 July 1843 |
| Date | 10 July 1843 |
| Court | Exchequer |
English Reports Citation: 152 E.R. 1076
EXCHEQUER OF PLEAS.
S. C. 12 L. J. Ex. 418; & Jur. 751.
[913] r OB DEM. THE GOVERNORS OF THE HoKI'rTAT. OF QtlEEX EuZABETIL, OF bristol, and otheiis /;. anna nokton. Exch. of Picas. July 10, 1843.- A testator, by his will, dated in 15JSG, devised the manor of C., and all his lands in C., to trustees for the founding, by the mayor and aldermen of Bristol, of an hospital for the education of poor infants and orphans, and that they should be for ever the governors, &c., of the same. Queen Elizabeth by charter ordained, that the said mayor and common council, aud their successors, should be called "The Governors of the Hospital of Queen Elizabeth of Bristol," and should have the government of all the said orphans, &c., and of all the lands, tenements, &c., arid should be a body corporate and politic of itself, for ever, capable of holding lands, &c The hospital and lands continued vested in the mayor and common council as Governors of the Hospital down to the passing of the Municipal Corporation Act (5 & 6 Will. 4, c. 76). By the 71st section of that act it was enacted, that, in every borough in which the body corporate shall stand seised of any hereditaments in trust for charitable uses or trusts, all the estate, right, interest, and title, and all the powers of such body corporate, in respect of the said uses and trusts, should continue in the persons who, at the time of the passing of the act, were such trustees as aforesaid, until the 1st of August, 1836, or until Parliament should otherwise order, and should immediately thereupon utterly cease and determine : Provided that, if Parliament should not otherwise direct on or before the 1st of August, 18.'i6, the Lord Chancellor should make such orders as he should sec fit for the administration, subject to such charitable uses and trusts as aforesaid, of such trust estates. Parliament having made no provision, the Lord Chancellor, by an order dated the 19th of October, appointed ) certain persons (being in fact the members of the new corporation) to be trustees I of the cparity estates lately vested in the corporation of Bristol. An action of ejectnaeit having been brought on demises by the Governors of the hospital, and also by the old and new corporation of Bristol, to recover possession of the charity estates:--Held, first, that, notwithstanding the 71st section, the legal estate remained, and had always been vested in the corporation as Governors of the Hospital, and that the 71st section affected only the equitable interest in, or 1 rather the right of administering the charitable funds; and therefore that the plaintiff was entitled to judgment on the demises from the corporation.-Secondly, that the meaning of the 71st section was, that the estate and interest, in respect of the uses and trusts only, arid not the legal estate, waa to continue in those in vvhnm HfBL&W. 914* DOE '('. NORTON 1077 it wua tben vested.-Qiuere, whether the 71st section applied to this case, because the parties seised of the land were not the municipal body corporate of Bristol, but a separate corporation, viz. the governors of the hospital, though the natural members of both bodies corporate were the same : but Held, that the plaintiff was at all events entitled to recover under the demise from the governors of the hospital, [S. C. 12L. J. Ex. 418; 7 Jur. 751.] This was an action of ejectment, to recover possession of a messuage and lands, with the appurtenances, situate at Congresbury, in the county of Somerset. The declaration contained two sets of demises-the first set were laid on the 1st of Jdne, 1836, and the second set on the 1st of January, 1842. The first set of demises were respectively by the Governors of the Hospital of Queen Elizabeth of Bristol, by the mayor, aldermen, and burgesses of Bristol, and by the members of the old corporation by name. The second set of demises were by the governors of the hospital, the members of the old corporation by name, the mayor, al-[914]-dermen, and burgesses o| Bristol, and the members of the new corporation by name. The action was commenced on the 14th day of April, 1842. The cause was tried before Cress well, J., at the Wells Summer Assizes, 1842, when a verdict was found for the plaintiff, subject to the opinion of the Court upon the following case. John Carr, of the city of Bristol, gent., by his will, elated 10th of April, 1586, willed and ordained (amongst other things) that his manor or lordship of Congresbury, and all his lands, tenements, and hereditaments, with their appurtenances, in Congres-bnry and elsewhere, in the county of Somerset, together with their profits, and the rents reserved upon certain grants and leases of divers parts thereof in his aaid will mentioned, should be and remain unto Thomas Aishe, Thomas Aid worth, Robert Dowe, and John Bythesea, and their heirs for ever, in trust, after paying his debts, funeral expenses, and legacies, to bestow the residues of the aforesaid lands, tenements, and hereditaments in the said county of Somerset, and the issues and profits of the same, so that they should be and remain for ever to the erecting and founding in due form of law, within the city of Bristol, in some convenient house and place, by the mayor and aldermen of the city aforesaid for the time being to be appointed ;md provided, ati hospital or place for the education of poor infants and orphans born in Bristol or the manor of Congresbury aforesaid, upon a foundation like as the Hospital of Christ, nigh St. Bartholomew's in London, was founded ; and that the mayor and commonalty of the city aforesaid should and might for ever be the patrons, guiders, and governors of the same hospital or house. The testator died shortly after making the above will; and, in the year 1589-90, application was made by the corporation of Bristol to Queen Elizabeth for a charter [$15] or the better establishment of the charity-school; and such charter was granted by her said Majesty by letters patent under the Great Seal, bearing date 21st March (32 Eliz.), 1589-90, by which, after reciting the will of the said John Carr, and that he had died seised in his demesne as of fee of the premises in his will described, and that the said premises, at the date thereof, were held by the said trustees (naming them) by lawful assurance to the uses and intents aforesaid, her said Majesty did give and grant license to the then mayor and commonalty of the city of Bristol and their successors for ever, to build, erect, found, and establish an hospital within the city aforesaid, to be and remain for ever for poor orphans to bo brought up, educated, and instructed; and that the said hospital, after that it should have been so founded arid established for ever thereafter, should be and be called, "The Hospital of Queen Blizabeth of Bristol: " and further, her Majesty did ordain that the mayor and common council of the city aforesaid, and their successors for the time being, should be and be cfilled for ever thereafter "The Governors of the Hospital of Queen Elizabeth of Bristol," and should have the government of all the persons within the said hospital from time to time living, and of the said orphans and children, and of all and singular the lands, tenements, hereditaments, goods, chattels and other things whatsoever, for tie maintenance and sustentation of the same hospital; and that the same governor's in deed and name thenceforth for ever should be one body corporate and politic of itself for ever, by the name of the Governors of the Hospital of Queen Elizabeth of Bristol, and should have perpetual succession and a common seal, and by the same 1J078 DOE V. NORTON 11M. &W. 916. name should and might be able and in law capable to hold lands, tenements, ;md rents, reversions, heredittiments, goods, and chattels, to hold to them and their successors for ever, and might implead...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Christ's Hospital v Grainger
...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 penalty on the trustees in case they neglected their duty; a......
-
Attorney General v The Mayor, Bailiffs and Commonalty of the City of Exeter, & ; Attorney General v The Mayor, Aldermen and Burgesses of the City of Exeter, Thomas Hill Lowe and Others, and The Governors of the Hospital of St. John; and St. John's Hospital in the City of Exeter; and The Acts 52 Geo. III. c. 101, 5 & 6 Will. IV. c. 76, 3 & 4 Vict. c. 77
...corporation, the latter is clearly neither within the letter nor the spirit of the Act 5 & 6 Will. IV. c. 76. The case of Doe v. Nortm (11 M. & W. 913) is conclusive on the point, that the legal estate, of which the Corporation of St. John was seised, remained in them, and was not affected ......
-
Earl of Mountcashell v Viscount O'Neill
...case 9 Q. B. 651. Gardiner v. BlesintonUNK 1 Ir. Ch. Rep. 64. In re Derosue's Patent 4 Moo., P. C. C., 416. Doe v. NortonENR 11 M. & W. 913. The King v. Poor-law Commissioners 6 A. & E. 7. COMMON LAW REPORTS. 345 E. T. 1854. Exch. Chain. erdequtt. ebandier.* TROVER, for trees growing in and......
-
Earl of Mountcashell v Viscount O'Neill
...Derosneƒ€™s Patent 4 Moore Priv. Coun. Cas. 416. The King v. The Poor-law Commissioners 6 A. & E. 7. Bristol Hospital v. NortonENR 11 M. & W. 913. The King v. The Justices of LeicesterENR 7 B. & C. 12. The King v. The Inhabitants of BirminghamENR 8 B. & C. 35. Galwey v. Baker 7 Cl. & F......