CHARITABLE TRUSTS (1855) BILL. (Hansard, 16 April 1855)

THE LORD CHANCELLOR,
in moving the second reading of the Bill, said, it would be in the recollection of their Lordships that two years ago a Bill was passed for the purpose of constituting a Board, and that certain powers were given to the Commissioners for the purpose of superintending and regulating the charities of the kingdom. Under that Act the Board consisted of a permanent Chief Commissioner, two other Commissioners—one permanent, and one appointed only for four years—two inspectors, and a secretary. There was also to be at the head of the Board a functionary who was not paid. The Board was constituted soon after the close of 1465 Session 1853. Unfortunately for the interests of the public, the temporary member of the Board, a gentleman of considerable experience in these matters—Mr. Jones—had since died, and it was necessary to fill up the vacancy. The first object of this Bill would therefore be to give powers for the appointment of a new permanent Commissioner, because the business of the Commission had been found to be so great, that it would be impossible for the Government to get any competent person to accept the office for a period of merely two years from the present time. He had seen it stated in the public papers, that the Board had done nothing; but he could not admit that to be a fair representation of the fact. They had not done as much as could be wished, because they had not the powers which he was going to ask should be conferred by the present Bill; but they had done a great deal, as was evident from the Report, which had been some time in their Lordships' hands. They were only appointed in the autumn of 1853, and during the year 1854 they had received 1,100 applications for advice from persons connected with the administration of charities. In questions of a minor nature and involving matters of small pecuniary amount, the great object was to have the funds administered with tolerable discretion, if not in strict conformity with the trusts; and for that reason a clause was introduced into the Bill of 1853, by which trustees, doubting how they should administer charities, could ask the advice of the Commissioners, and, acting upon that advice—which in ninety-nine cases out of every hundred was not only discreet, but in conformity with the trusts—they were indemnified. That most beneficial and important power had been very largely exercised. Another power, which had also been exercised to a very considerable extent, and was also of a very useful character, was that which enabled the Board to give authority to trustees to lease land, not only on fair leases, but on building and mining leases, and in some cases even to alienate them. Many charities had been inquired into, and numerous had been the applications to the Board for permission to institute proceedings where abuses existed, which, accordingly as they thought themselves warranted, the Commissioners had either sanctioned or refused. There were a great many other minor matters in which the Commissioners had acted, and upon which they observed in their Report. The 1466 very useful power which enabled the Commissioners to call for distinct accounts of charities had not been complied with by anything like the whole of the charitable trusts of the kingdom. They had received returns only from about 10,000 out of 25,000 trusts, and it was obviously necessary that some legislative interference should take place in that matter. The Board, to a certain extent, had been efficient, and with more extensive powers could be rendered far more efficient. In the first instance, it was proposed by this Bill to sanction the appointment of a third permanent, instead of the late temporary, Commissioner, because the business was found to be more than had been contemplated, and no person who was competent would accept the office, to be turned out of it in a very short period. In the progress of the working of the Act, the Commissioners had discovered a number of minute matters, with respect to which they suggested that alterations would be expedient. They were of too trifling a nature to make it necessary for him to enter into details, and he would therefore confine himself to the more prominent alterations which he proposed. By the Act of 1853 the Commissioners could only recommend and authorise trustees to appeal either to the Court of Chancery or some local court for the purpose of doing certain acts, such as appointing new trustees or settling schemes for the administration of the Charity; but it was found that, in matters of small amount, the sanctioning an appeal to a Court of Justice was really refusing the trustees what they wanted, because they allowed the matter to drop rather than be involved in expense, vexation, and delay. In by far the larger number of cases which the Commissioners had sanctioned no application had been made, and, to obviate that difficulty, power was given by this Bill to the Commissioners to do the acts themselves, subject to an appeal to the Court of Chancery, in a summary way, if what they did were not satisfactory to the parties. Another case in which the Commissioners found they had no authority, and in which it would be of great advantage to the public if authority were given them, was that of charities appropriated to particular parishes, which parishes were divided; and the question was then raised how such charities were to be appropriated. This Bill would give the Commissioners power to apportion the parochial charities, subject, as in the other 1467 case, to an appeal to the Court of Chancery if their apportionment were disapproved. The Commissioners found that it would be in many cases a great saving of expense, if the legal estate, as lawyers called it, was vested in an official person; and this Bill would give facilities for vesting lands and other property in an official trustee, the management of the charity however would be left entirely in the hands of the previous trustees. The Act of 1853 was deficient in reference to enabling parties to make exchanges or partitions, and by this Bill that defect would be remedied. There was no power under the former Act of taxing costs, and it was proposed to enable that to be done by reference to a taxing Master of the Court of Chancery. In cases where Commissioners called for accounts under the authority either of this or the former Act, and their request was disobeyed, it was proposed to treat the default as a contempt of the Court of Chancery, as the most efficient means of compelling parties to comply with what the law enjoined them to do. The Bill also pointed out generally what were the accounts which the Commissioners from time to time were to call upon these parties to render, leaving them to enter into the details hereafter. This was the outline of the measure. There were a great number of smaller clauses, which it would be idle and useless to detail at any time, still less when there was so thin an attendance of their Lordships. There was, however, one matter of a more substantial nature. Under the Act of 1853, it was provided that the Commissioners should not, for two years after the passing of the Act, or from the end of the present Session of Parliament, interfere with Roman Catholic charities; it was now necessary to deal with that subject, which was not without difficulties. At first he had thought it better to deal with it in a separate Bill, but, upon consideration, he was inclined to make it a part of this measure. There was a difficulty in dealing with the subject, and the difficulty arose in this way. For a century and a half, charities for the benefit of Roman Catholics—for instance, for schools and for the maintenance of priests—had existed, though at the time they were constituted they were illegal; and in one sense they were, therefore, not constituted at all. In order to preserve the property appropriated to the support of these charities, a conveyance was made of it to secret trustees, who applied it to 1468 the purposes intended by the founders of the charities. These charities had existed illegally, for, as he had stated, a century and a half to the present time. With regard to a large portion of these charities—those which referred to the maintenance of Roman Catholic places of worship—if they had been constituted since the passing of the Roman Catholic Relief Act, they would have been perfectly legal. He therefore saw not the least difficulty in dealing with them, any more than with property connected with Dissenters' chapels; the trust for which had also been constituted at a time when those purposes were illegal, Parliament had dealt with them by enacting, that if the chapels had been used for the purpose stated for twenty-five years no inquiry should take place; and that as the purpose had become legal, the trusts should continue. He saw no difficulty in dealing with the Roman Catholic chapels in the same manner; that was to say, that the trusts relating to anything now lawful, instead of being administered secretly, should be permitted to be exercised openly. But it could not be concealed that many of those secret trusts for Roman Catholic charities were now illegal, and came within the definition of what used to be called "superstitious uses," and which certainly could not be constituted at the present time. He had consulted with Roman Catholics, in order to ascertain what were their sentiments on the subject; and he thought that among rational Roman Catholics there would be no objection to the mode of dealing he proposed. There was no doubt that where the trust was made up of purposes partly legal and partly illegal, the whole of it would be dealt with, and that portion of it which was illegal would be considered as though an information had been filed by the Attorney General; but with regard to those Roman Catholic charities which were wholly illegal, he proposed to exempt them from the operation of the powers of the Commissioners, in order not to allow them to be interfered with, except by the Attorney General. These additional clauses he proposed to print and submit to the consideration of the House before he asked their Lordships to go into Committee on the Bill.

§ LORD ST. LEONARDS
said, the Bill was important, as it altered an Act which had been very carefully considered in Select Committee, and he thought that it should undergo a similar ordeal. He was 1469 not disposed to resist the Bill; on the contrary, he was inclined to think that in a great degree it was proper; but it required full consideration, especially the religious portion of it, which was one of great difficulty. It was now proposed to create a third paid Commissioner. Care must be taken lest a Board constituted in ease of the subject did not become so cumbrous and costly that it would be a relief to remit the suitors to the Court of Chancery, from which this Act had taken them. He should move that the Bill be referred to a Select Committee.

§ EARL GRANVILLE
was glad to hear that the noble and learned Lord did not object to the second reading of the Bill, and could assure him that there would be no objection to the course proposed of referring the Bill to a Select Committee.