HC Deb 23 June 1870 vol 202 cc783-4
COLONEL BERESFORD

said, he wished to ask Mr. Attorney General, Whether representations have been made to him on behalf of the inhabitants of Dulwich and Camberwell as to the conduct of the governors of Dulwich College in the following particulars:—As to the diversion of £14,500 from income to "suspense account," and the application of part of that money in the construction of roads, sewers, &c, and in payment of part of the cost of the new College buildings, notwithstanding the governors had a capital sum of upwards of £80,000 at command; as to the raising of the capitation fees payable by boys in the Upper School from £6 (the lowest) to £12, and from £10 (the highest) to £18, and the appropriation of the fees in a manner not authorized by the scheme sanctioned by Parliament; as to the non-establishment of the Exhibitions and Foundation Scholarships provided for by the Parliamentary scheme, and the establishment of scholarships in a manner unauthorized by such scheme, and under the authority of the "advice and opinion" of the Charity Commissioners, whose powers have been taken away by the "Endowed Schools Act;" as to the erection of the new College buildings, such new buildings being estimated to cost £87,000, to accommodate not more than 600 boys; and, what course he intends to take in reference thereto?

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

said, in reply, that such representations as those referred to in the hon. and gallant Member's Question had been made to him. Several deputations of the inhabitants had waited upon him in re- ference to that subject, and he invited the Governors to depute some of their body, or some one to represent them, to appear before him and answer the allegations that were made against them; but they did not consider it consistent with their dignity to do so. He had no power to compel them to do so, and he tad to consider as well as he could between the conflicting statements that were made to him. With regard to the Question generally, he was not altogether satisfied on the subject of expenditure, and especially with regard to the building expenses. It appeared to him to be very large; but, at the same time, he was bound to say that he believed it had received the sanction of the Charity Commissioners. With respect to the other matters mentioned in the Question, although he was not perfectly satisfied with all of them, everything that had been done had been done by the sanction of the Charity Commissioners. Now, he had only two courses to pursue. One was, to do nothing; the other, to file an information in Chancery. It was not usual for the Attorney General to file an information in Chancery except on the certificate of the Charity Commissioners, and as they had approved of what had been done it was not likely they would give a certificate. At present, no sufficient cause had been laid before him to justify his taking the somewhat unusual course of filing an information under the circumstances.