§ House in Committee (according to Order.)
§ In answer to Earl GRANVILLE.
THE ARCHBISHOP OF YORKsaid, he believed that by law public companies were not competent to vote any portion of their funds to purposes other than those for which they were incorporated, except by a unanimous vote of their members, and that they could not, therefore, vote any money on account of education or worship.
THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, the law as stated by the most rev. Prelate was correct. It was competent to any company to divert the corporate funds to other than corporate purposes. Nothing, in fact, was more common than applications to the Court of Chancery praying for in junctions to restrain companies from apply- 719 ing their funds to other than corporate objects. Such a Bill as that introduced by the most rev. Prelate, therefore, was necessary to effect the required alteration in the state of the law.
§ Amendments made; The principal of which were that the appropriation of money and land should be made by the votes of three-fourths, instead of three-fifths, of the shareholders, and the land to be appropriated in perpetuity was limited to one acre.
§ The Report thereof to he received on Monday next; and Bill to be printed as amended (No. 121).