HL Deb 18 July 1844 vol 76 cc1000-3
The Earl of Mountcashel

proceeded to submit to their Lordships the Motion of which he had given notice, and in the outset disclaimed being actuated by any desire to deal in personalities, or to make reflections on any parties except those whose conduct was, in his apprehension, open to censure. The subject to which he wished to call the attention of their Lordships, had reference to the endowed school of Clonmel, and to the course adopted by the Commissioners appointed under the Act of the 53rd Geo. III. with respect to income derived from the lands belonging to that charity. This school was originally endowed by his ancestors, and it so happened that he was one of the trustees, and that his noble Friend the Marquess of Ormond was another of the trustees; but although the trustees had never violated their trust, the whole management of the charity had been taken out of their hands. What he complained of was, that the Commissioners to whom he alluded, and who had now the management of the lands connected with the charity, had not done what they were bound to do. He was prepared to satisfy their Lordships that the Commissioners had greatly transgressed the duty they were bound to perform, and if he succeeded in this he thought he would establish grounds to make them answerable for their conduct to Parliament. Now, his first charge against those Commissioners, the Commissioners under the Act of the 53rd Geo. III. was, that they had unlawfully usurped the Clonmel school lands. His second charge against them was, that they had not furnished correct accounts of all the instalments of the rents which they had received, and which ought to have been applied in liquidation of an advance of 4,000l. made to the charity by the Government; and, thirdly, he charged them with having received two years' rents, amounting to 1,200l., and although they had paid only 100l. to the schoolmaster, they had re fused to give the trustees any account of what had become of this money. These were the charges which he brought against the Commissioners, and he contended that they were bound to apply the rents which they received in reduction of the 4,000l. advanced by the Government.

The Lord Chancellor

thought, from the statement of the noble Earl, that this was a subject for inquiry in the Court of Chancery and not in their Lordships' House.

The Earl of Mountcashel

said, that he meant no reflection on the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, but being a member of the Board of Education the trustees did not think it would be right to appeal to him.

The Lord Chancellor

Well, then, why not go to the Master of the Rolls.

The Earl of Mountcashel

said, that the Master of the Rolls stood in the same situation, and this rendered it necessary that their Lordships should interfere.

Lord Wharncliffe

did not think the House of Lords could do anything in such a case.

The Earl of Mountcashel

said, if their Lordships would only allow him, he would show cause against all objections to his Motion.

Lord Wharncliffe

did not mean to say that the statements of the noble Lord were wrong, but he would put it to the noble Earl whether it was worth his while to go on with his speech when it was clear their Lordships could not interfere in that which seemed to be a disputed question of right between the trustees of this school and the Board of Education in Ireland.

The Earl of Mountcashel

thought he should be able to show to their Lordships that there were grounds which would justify their interference. He had already said that the Commissioners had rendered no account of the rents which they had received, or in reference to the 4,000l. advanced by the Government, and even by their own Report it appeared that there was a sum of 240l. for which they had not accounted. Not only had the Commissioners refused to give any account to the trustees, but they had acted oppressively towards the master of the school; and as the trustees had never neglected their duty, he thought the management of the property belonging to the school should not have been withdrawn from them.

The Duke of Wellington

wished to know what the Motion was which the noble Earl meant to make.

The Earl of Mountcashel

said, that if the noble Duke would undertake to have the subject inquired into, he would withdraw his Motion.

The Duke of Wellington

was understood to decline giving any promise.

The Earl of Mountcashel

then moved that a Select Committee be appointed to inquire into the endowment of the School of Clonmel.

The Lord Chancellor

said, the Notice on the Paper was for a Committee to inquire into the subject generally of Education in Ireland.

Lord Wharncliffe

said, that having seen the Motion as it stood on the Paper, he had made inquiry on the subject, but no one connected with the Irish Government seemed to know anything about it. If his noble Friend would allow him to offer a recommendation, he would say that the best way would be for his noble Friend to draw up a statement and forward it either to the Lord Lieutenant or Lord Eliot, and then he would get some answer. In this way the Board of Education would be called on to defend themselves, and no doubt would explain their conduct, whether to the satisfaction of his noble Friend or not he could not determine; but, at all events, even if their Lordships could interfere, it would be preposterous to appoint such a Committee at this period of the Session.

The Earl of Glengall

said, that he was aware of the whole case, and knew the master of the school in question, who was a most respectable clergyman. He would advise his noble Friend to withdraw his Motion and adopt the suggestion which had been thrown out.

The Duke of Richmond

said, he must join in the recommendation which had been given to the noble Earl. If this case got into Chancery, it was possible it might come before their Lordships' House, and that was an additional reason why their Lordships should not agree to the Motion of the noble Earl. Although the Lord Chancellor of Leland might be a member of the Board of Education, that was no reason why he should not deal out impartial justice.

The Earl of Mountcashel

said, he had guarded himself from casting any imputation on the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, for whom he entertained the utmost respect, but on principle he must object to any one being a judge in his own case. In a Bill recently before the House, relating to Irish charities the name of the Lord Chancellor was expressly omitted, on the ground which he had stated.

The Duke of Wellington

Well, you can move an Amendment to that Bill.

The Earl of Mountcashel

said, he only mentioned the case of that Bill as a proof that the principle on which the trustees refused to appeal to the Court of Chancery was right. He also thought that a Chancery suit was not likely to contribute to the means of usefulness of a charity.

The Duke of Wellington

My Lords, this seems to me to be a case that ought to be brought before the Court of Chancery in Ireland, because, from what I can gather from the noble Earl, it seems to me that what he complains of is a breach of trust. It is somewhat difficult to understand the questions to which the noble Earl has called on your Lordships to attend. The Board of Education in Ireland is composed of some of the first persons in that country, and the Commissioners are also persons of the utmost respectability, and whether the complaint of the noble Earl is directed against one or the other of these parties it does not appear to me that your Lordships can interfere. His proper course is to make his complaint to the Executive Government of Ireland, to either the Lord Lieutenant or the Secretary of State, and if he adopts that course no doubt whatever statements he may make will be taken into consideration, and the Commissioners will be required to answer them. If the result of such a course shall not prove satisfactory to the noble Earl, why he will have gained the advantage that Parliament will be in possession of the whole case, and enabled to deal with it accordingly. If the noble Earl does not take this course, I hope your Lordships will negative his Motion.

The Earl of Mountcashel

said, that he never meant to make any charge against any one except the Commissioners.

Motion negatived without a division.

House adjourned.