§ Mr. Thomas Duncombepresented a Petition from the reverend Thomas Dupre, master of the grammar-school at Berkhamstead, in Hertfordshire, complaining of a false and most unjust and slanderous attack made upon his character in a petition some time ago presented to that House by the 690 noble Lord, the Member for Hertfordshire. That of which the reverend gentleman had to complain was not confined to the petition, for in the Standard newspaper of the day following the presentation of the petition, there appeared an article commenting in terms of great severity upon the conduct imputed to Dr. Dupre by the petitioners, in which the writer accused him not only of neglecting his duties as a clergyman, but also of neglecting the duties which ought to be performed by any one filling the situation of master of the school at Berkhamstead. The writer gave great praise to the noble Lord, not only for presenting the petition, but for doing so with energy and effect; and the right hon. Gentleman, the Member for Cambridge, likewise expressed his approbation of the petition for exposing the misconduct of a person so situated, and endeavouring to place the circumstances in such a point of view, as that the Church should stand aright before the public. Dr. Dupre also wished to stand right with the world, and, therefore, forwarded the present petition to the House. The former petition set forth, that from the year 1811 to 1833, he had never resided at Berkhamstead, but at a place called Willoughby, where he had another living. Now he was not inducted into Willoughby until the year 1815. From 1805 till 1815 he resided at Berkhamstead without the least interruption, nor did he ever leave that place for Willoughby, except during the short intervals that elapsed between the resignation of one curate of that parish and the appointment of another. The former petitioners also alleged that he and his usher were trustees of this school, that they had grossly abused the trust, and misapplied the funds. The fact was they could not have misapplied the funds, seeing that a receiver had long since been appointed by the Court of Chancery. The petitioner also denied the violation of agreement imputed to him, and affirmed, that he was at all times willing, and always had fulfilled the obligations imposed on him by the foundation. It had been charged against him that, altogether, there had been, since he came to Berkhamstead, an expenditure of 15,645l., that the repairs of the school-house only amounted to 1,711l., and that Dr. Dupre received for salary 5,933l. Surely the House would agree with him, that putting the gross sum was not a fair and candid way of treating the matter; it was obviously an attempt to make it appear that the annual payment was 5,000l. What 691 would any hon. or right hon. Gentlemen opposite think of a discussion on their pensions if they were always to be spoken of as having received the gross and not the annual sum? A further accusation brought against the petitioner was, that he had expended 2,700l. in law costs. He certainly had somtimes been obliged, by legal means, to resist aggression, but in no case had the Court of Chancery awarded costs against him, which they would not have been backward in doing had he been guilty of the least impropriety, and let it not be forgotten that he was the defendant in every case. For these several reasons the petitioner prayed that the matter might be inquired into, and he pledged himself, as a gentleman, a clergyman, and a Christian, to substantiate the whole of his statements; he staked his character and reputation upon the result, and he prayed that the whole matter might be brought before that hon. House and the country at large.
Mr. Goulburnregretted that the reverend gentleman should have considered him as adverse, for he should rejoice in any opportunity that might be afforded him of setting himself right with his neighbours and the public in a matter of so much importance.
§ Mr. Wardsaid he had been requested to reaffirm the statements in the first petition, notwithstanding the statements of the reverend gentleman. The petition bore the signatures of men of all parties, including that of the rector of the parish.
Petition referred to the Select Committee on Charities.