HC Deb 09 May 1893 vol 12 cc457-9
MR. JOHNSON-FERGUSON (Leicester, Loughborough)

I beg to ask the hon. Member for Merionethshire whether his attention has been called to the fact that, under the scheme sanctioned by the Charity Commissioners on 7th August, 1883, for the administration of the Charity of John Lambert, in the Parish of Sheepshed, in the County of Leicester, the Trustees are directed, after paying all proper costs of the administration of the Charity, and setting apart an annual sum of £15 as a repair fund, to divide all the net yearly income of the Charity into three equal parts, two such parts to be applied to the advancement of the education of children who are residents in the Parish of Sheepshed, and the remaining part to be applied for the benefit of necessitous persons resident in the Parish of Sheepshed, either by subscriptions in aid of the funds of any hospital, or by contributions towards the cost of the outfit, upon entering upon a trade or occupation, of any person under the age of 21 years; and that in 1892 the net income of this Charity was £67 1s. 3d.; the amount applied in aid of education, £16 7s.; the balance contributed to dispensaries, hospitals, and infirmaries, £11 11s.; the balance of net income, £39 3s. 3d., being unexpended; whether he is aware that, notwithstanding the provisions of the scheme, deserving and necessitous persons, residing in the Parish of Sheepshed, have been unable to obtain recommendations to the Loughborough Dispensary, while there was unapplied income available for the purpose; and that a duly qualified parishioner has been refused by the Trustees an opportunity of examining the scheme of the Charity and the accounts for 1892, although it is provided in the scheme that every parishioner shall be entitled to do so; and whether the Charity Commissioners will take steps to prevent such irregularities in future?

*THE PARLIAMENTARY CHARITY COMMISSIONER (Mr. T. E. ELLIS,) Merionethshire

The statements made in the first question as to the scheme for regulating this Charity are accurate. The trustees assert that there are already more recommendations for the Loughborough Dispensary than there are applicants, and that the scheme and accounts are open to inspection; but in consequence of complaints conveyed by the hon. Member the Commissioners have written to the trustees, pointing out the necessity of carrying out the scheme in the matter of the production of the scheme and proper publication of the accounts.