per ann. at this day to maintain the Master Vsher and certain poor people in Chelmesford and Moulsham and appointed that the Rents Issues and Profits of their lands should be imployed for their maintenance and not otherwise and appointed the Lord Peter and the Heirs males of his body Sir Tho. Mildmay and the Heirs males of his body Sir Jo. Tirril and the Heirs males of his body and Sir Humfrey Mildmay and the Heirs mals of his body should be Governors of the said Free-School and Lands and that none under the degree of a Knight should be one of the Governors the Governors make Leases of the Lands at under values for Fines and small Rents according as they were at the first Foundation The Commissioners Decree the Government and Ordering of the Lands to others by reason of their breach of Trust Sir Henry Mildmay of Moulsham neer Chelmsford being the chief man that received the Rents let the Leases and defrauded the Trust the rest of the Governors Heirs being within age or beyond the Seas put in Exception to the Decree First that the Corporation had speciall Visitors appointed and so within the Proviso of the Statute Secondly for that the Decree is against the Founders intent who would have none under the degree of Knight to be a Governor to which was answered That when the Visitors break the Trust they may be questioned by Decree of the Commissioners as is the Case of the School of Morpeth and other Cases before cited Thirdly that the generall intent was of Edw. 6. that the Profits of the Lands should be solely converted for the use of the School and poor and that the Visitors and their Heirs should make no profit of it and that of being a Knight was but for the Honour of the Family appointed Governors and they all being persons of great Possessions and living neer Chelmsford But the Lords Commissioners reversed the Decree by reason of the Proviso in the Statute and ordered that a Bill be exhibited against the now Visitors and Governors and that upon proof of their breach of Trust a course should be taken for relief of the School and Poor according to the intent of the Founder The Case where a Tenant in Capite Devised all his Lands to a charitable Vse TH. seised in Fee of the Mannor of L. held in Socage and of 54 acres of Marshland held in Capite deviseth all the Socage-lands to C. Hospitall in L. paying 1000 l after the death of A. the wife of T. H. as she in her life time should appoint the same to be payd Part of the Socage-lands Devised to the Hospitall is by Commission of the Court of Wards set out to N. H. the Heir for his third part A. H. dies and the Hospitall pays the 1000 l The Commissioners for charitable uses have Decreed to the Hospitall all the Socage lands Devised to the use of the poor This being the substance of the Case the questions hereupon arising upon the Appeal were Whether the Devise to the charitable uses be good and whether the Commissioners had power to decree the whole Socage lands devised or but two parts only It was agreed that by the Statutes of 32 and 34 Henry 8. the Devise is voyd for a third part But it was insisted upon that although the Devise be voyd for a third part by those Statutes yet this is such a limitation and appointment within the Statute of 43. Eliz. as doth well enable the Commissioners for charitable uses to Decree the whole First That it hath been generally held that the Statute of 43. Eliz. for charitable Uses doth supply all the defects of assurances where the Donor is of a capacity to dispose and hath such an Estate as is any ways disposeable by him And upon this ground it hath been held That if a Copyholder doth dispose of Copyhold lands to a charitable use without a Surrender or if Tenants in tayl do convey land to a charitable use without a Fine or if a reversion be granted without Attornment or Inrolment and divers other the like cases yet these defects are supplied by the Statute of 43. Eliz. because the Donor had a disposing power of the Estate and this is a good limitation and appointment within this Statute But it is true if an Infant Lunatick or any other person who hath not capacity to dispose an Estate shall grant to a charitable use this defect is not supplied by this Statute and this difference is resolved in Collisons Case 15. Jacob in the Lord Hobarts Reports folio 136. Secondly the words of the Statute of 43. Eliz. are very considerable in this Case for although the Statute doth give power to the Lord Chancellor or Lord Keeper upon complaint to them made to adnull diminish alter or enlarge any Decree made by the Commissioners for charitable uses yet the same is with this limitation so far as may stand with Equity and good conscience according to the true intent and meaning of the Donor and Founder thereof Whereby it doth appear that in all Gifts Appointments Limitations and Assignments within that Statute speciall regard is to be had to the intent of the Donor and this power of adnulling diminishing altering or enlarging Decrees made by the Commissioners for charitable uses is appropriated solely to the Lord Choncellor or Lord Keeper and not to any other and to proceed therein according to Equity and good conscience Thirdly the Case of G. L. Hillar 13. Jac. reported by the Lord Hobart fol. 136. doth resolve the point in question Where the Case being that G. L. being seised in Fee of lands in Cardigan 1571. in August 25. Eliz. Devised the same land to A. his wife for life and after to J. his daughter for life and after these lives ended to the principall Fellows and Schollars of Jesus Colledge in Oxford and their successors to find a Schollar of his Blood from time to time and dyed the lives ended B. L. the Heir of G. L. being the Kings VVard entred and upon a Case made hereof in the Court of Wards and by order of that Court brought to the Lord Hobard then Chief Justice of the Common Pleas and the Lord Chief Baron Tanfield to be resolved of by them who agreed and so certified that the Devise was void in Law because the Statute of Wills did not allow Devises to Corporations in Mortmain yet they held it cleerly within the relief of the Statute of charitable Uses of 43. Eliz. under the words limited and appointed and so it was Decreed that the Colledge should enjoy it against the Ward and his Heirs The Case of Collison 15. Jac. Reported likewise by the Lord Hobard fol. 136. Resolved the point in question where the Case being That Collison 15. Hen. 8. Devised a House in Etham in Kent to L. his Wife for life and after her death made J. K. and others Feoffees as he called them in the said House to keep it in reparations
purposes But they may Decree Lands held in Capite or in Socage to a Corporation already incorporate to be Trustees to perform a Charitable use and it shall be no Mortmain Also they may Decree Lands given to charitable uses to sundry persons and their Heirs to the said uses and enable them to demise the same Lands for the best profit of the said Charitable use and that when such a number of them dye the survivers shall make a Conveyance to settle the said lands in themselves that survive and others to make up and continue the number by them appointed 6. If lands that lye in the body of a County be given to a Corporation to maintain charitable uses the Commissioners of the Country may make orders to reform the breaches of Trusts and misimployment of such lands by the Corporation Trin. 9. Caroli East-greensteds Case THese points were resolved by the Lord Coventry 1. That whereas Robert Earl of Dorset had granted a Rent charge of 330 l per ann. out of divers his Mannors and Lands in London and several Counties for maintenance of an Almshouse in East-greensted erected by himself First That if a Rent be granted out of Lands in several Counties for maintenance of charitable uses in one County The Commissioners in that County where the charitable use is to be performed may make a Decree to charge the lands in other Counties to pay an equal contribution of charge in payment of the said Rent and there needs not several Inquisitions in each County for that the Rent is an entire grant by the Deed or Will 2. If the devisees of a Rent-charge or the grantees thereof to a charitable use do purchase part of the lands out of which the rent is issuing or all the land Although in extremity of Law the Rent-charge is extinguished yet if the Commissioners Decree the Rent to be revived and settle it upon others to maintain the charitable use the Rent is revived by the said Decree 3. If a Rent-charge be granted out of land to a charitable use and the land is afterwards sold for valuable consideration of money or land to one that had no notice of the Rent yet the Rent remaineth For that the purchase was of another thing that was not given to the charitable use 4. By the Statute the parties interessed are to have notice from the Commissioners of the time and place of their sitting to execute the Commission Yet if the Commissioners make a Decree without giving such notice to the parties interessed it is good And if the parties upon their Appeal do take exception that they had not any notice of the time of the executing of the Commission from the Commissioners That shall not avoid the Decree unless they shew withal in their exception that for lack of such notice they lost the benefit of such an exception to the Commissioners or some of them or of such a challenge to a Juror expressing the cause in certain And if the Lord Keeper adjudge the cause shewen to be a sufficient exception and challenge the Decree or Orders of the Commissioners shall be adnulled and reversed without further examination for the intent of such notice to be given is That the parties interessed may make their lawful challenges to the Commissioners or Jurors as the Statute alloweth them 5. Resolved that the notice which a Purchasor of lands given to charitable uses ought to have ought to be certain and a general notice is not sufficient As if land given to charitable uses be intended to be sold by Act of Parliament and when the Bill is read in the house of Parliament it is there spoken unto and declared that the land is chargeable with a charitable use and recompence is offered otherwise to assure the charitable use then by that land and afterwards the Bill doth not passe and the Land is sold to one of the Members of the House that spake unto the Bill for money Yet this notice in Parliament is not sufficient notice within the intent of the Statute because it was not known to such a Purchasor but as a Parliament man in another capacity 6. If a Purchasor of Land given to charitable uses for consideration of money hath Legal notice of the use and afterwards selleth the Land to another for money who hath no notice of the use This second Purchasor shall hold the Land chargeable with the charitable Use for that the first Purchasor held it so and the second Purchasor coming under his Title must hold it subject to the charges the first Purchasor held it for that he claims under him But if the first Purchasor had no notice of the Use then is the Land discharged of the charitable Use and if he aftewards sell it to another for money that hath notice of the Use yet he shall not hold it subject to the charitable Use for that the Land was discharged thereof upon the first Purchase 7. That if a Rent-charge be granted to a charitale Use out of Lands in severall Counties the Commissioners are to charge this Rent by their Decree upon all the Lands in every County according to an equall distribution having regard to the yearly value of all the Lands chargeable with the Rent and cannot by their Decree charge one or two Mannors with all the Rent and discharge the residue in other Counties or places for that their Decree will then be contrary to the Will of Founders or Donors 16. Martii 4. BEtween the poor of Walthamstow in Essex and upon a Devise of money by one Colby to relieve the poor there these points were resolved First S. took exception upon his appeal in Chancery that he had no notice of the time and place of the Execution of the Commission from the Commissioners whereby he lost the benefit of his challenge to some of the Jurors that were Inhabitants in Walthamstow as being parties interessed and upon proof it appeared that the number of eighteen were sworn upon the Jury whereof three of them were substantiall men of Walthamstow and none of the poor there to take benefit by the Gift and the Lord Keeper disallowed the Exception for that it appeared fifteen others were of the Jury against whom no ception is taken and a Verdict of twelve or more is good although others of the Jury above the number of twelve dissent also the three Inhabitants were no parties interessed in the Gift and may be Jury-men they being none of the poor of the said Parish Secondly if one be authorized by a party subject to the Decree of the Commissioners for a charitable Use as a Counsellor Solicitor or Attorney to solicit and defend his Suits and notice is given to his Attorney Counsellor or Solicitor by the Commissioners of the time and place for execution of the Commission against the person so entertaining him telling and advising him to acquaint the party interessed therewith and giveth him timely notice to acquaint him accordingly and
not also payd to the charitable use that is breach of trust which the Commissioners may reform if no other use of imployment of the revenue be expressed in the Donors Deed Fifthly resolved if Land be given to a Corporation or other particular persons to perform a charitable use and the Donor appoint them Visitors also of the use according to his intent if the said Visitors do break the trust either in detaining part of the revenue misimploying or any other ways defrauding the charitable use this may be restored by Decree of the Commissioners notwithstanding the Statute of 43 Eliz. which disables Commissioners to meddle with Lands given to charitable uses where speciall Visitors are appointed for the intent of the Statute is to disable Commissioners to meddle with such a case where the Land is given to persons in trust to perform a charitable use and the Donor appoint speciall Visitors to see these trustees to perform the use according to his intent if the Trustees defraud the trust the Commissioners cannot meddle but the Visitors are to perform it but where the Visitors are Trustees also there the Commissioners may by their Decree reform the abuse of the charitable use Hynshaw and Pydwers the Mayor of the Corporation of Morpeth in Northumberland 5. Car. KIng Edw. 6. gives Land to the Mayor and Commonalty of Morpeth of the value of 20 l per ann. to maintain a School-master there and appoints them Visitors of the School-master and Schollars that they behave themselves according to his Orders this Land increaseth to 100 l by the year and the Corporation did onely bestow on the School-master the 20 l per ann. accordding to the value at the time of the first Gift A commission is granted to reform this breach of trust and the Corporation upon summons refused to appear before the Commissioners for that they are appointed Visitors and the Proviso of the Statute doth exempt in such cases the power of the Commissioners the Commissioners certifie this to the Lord Keeper and that the Visitors were the persons trusted and did break the trust and Serjeant Thomas Crew moving the Lord Keeper upon this Certificate the 22 of May 5 Car. the Lord Keeper declared his opinion to be that the Commissioners might proceed in the execution of their Commission for the Visitors being Trustees and Parties breaking the Trusts are not within the intent of the Proviso and if it should be otherwise construed this breach of Trust would escape unpunished unlesse in Chancery or in Parliament which were a tedious and chargeable Suit for poor persons And the Lord Keeper said That the not bestowing of the increased value of the Land given was a breach of trust in the Corporation if no other use be expressed in the Letters Patents Also it was then said If Land be given to maintain a charitable use for relief of poor and also that the School-master or poor shall pray for the Donors soul that the charitable use shall be said the principall intent of the Donor and the praying for his soul but an accessary and therefore the charitable use shall support and preserve the Land The Case of the Inhabitants of Woodford in Essex against Parkhurst Hill 14. SIr Henry Leigh did purchase Copyhold lands in Woodford in the name of two of his younger sons and their Heirs they being within age and by his Will Deviseth to Sir William Martin and other Parishioners of Woodford and their Heirs a Rent-charge of 40 s per annum out of this Copyhold land for relief of the poor there and dyes Sir William Martin purchaseth this land and enjoyes it for many years and then sells the land unto Packhurst and his Heirs Parkhurst hath notice of the Charitable use between the Surrender and his admittance the Commissioners Decree Parkhurst to pay all the arrerages since Sir Henry Leighs death and upon his appeal the Lord Keeper resoved these points First that the Rent is well Devised although Sir Henry had nothing in the land in strictness of Law for that the Estate in Law was in the children yet Sir Henry making the Purchase and enjoying the land as owner and receiving the Profits of it he shall be said in Equity to have power to dispose to a Charitable use Also it being objected that there wanted a Surrender to enable him to Devise the Lord keeper said yet the Devise was good enough and shall be said a good gift limitation and appointment within the Statute in favour of Charitable uses Secondly resolved that the Rent although it was extinct in Law by Sir William Martin purchased yet by the Commissioners Decree it is revived Thirdly Resolved the Rent is not extinct by this Purchase although he had no notice of the same for that the Purchase is of another thing then was given to the Charitable use Fourthly Resoved that the Rent is a charge which goes with the Land in whose hands soever it comes and a Distress may be taken for the arrerages upon the ter-tenant for the time it was arrear in others hands and the owners remedy to have contribution against all others that enjoyed the Land before him is by Suit in Chancery and here Parkhurst by the Decree had contribution against all others that enjoyed the Land charged and suffered arrerages to accrew in their time Lastly Resolved that the notice of the Rent given to Parkhurst after the Surrender and agreement for the Purchaser and before his admittance was a sufficient notice within the Statute if notice in this case had been requisite for that Parkhurst was no compleat and absolute Purchasor before admittance so of notice given to a Purchasor of a Charitable use chargeable upon the Land mean between his agreement and sealing of the Writings before the perfecting of the settling of the Estate in him by Attornment Livery or Inrolment of the Deed of Conveyance Hennington Hastings in Com. Warr 6. Jacob ONe Humfrey Davis erected an Almshouse in Hennington Hastings for eight poor men and being Seised of lands in Tennington Monton and â—urbery then let for 10 l Rent per annum doth devise the rents of his said lands for maintenance of the said poor in the said Almshouse and dyes his heir paies the Ten pound yearely for maintenance of the poor at the Almshouse and at the end of the term doth Demise the land at 40 l per annum The Commissioners doth Decree the whole land for maintenance of the Charitable use and the arrerages of the improved Rent taken by the Heir from the time of the expiration of the old Lease until the Decree and that the new Lease shall be void and surrendred and upon the Heirs appeal in Chancery and acceptions taken to the Decree the Lord Keeper referred the Case to the Judges principally whether if one Devise the Rents of his Land to a Charitable use if by this Devise the Land passed and they certified their opinions that by Devise of the Rents of the
upon Appeal the Decree was confirmed for although it be a voyd Devise by the common Law yet it is a good limitation and appointment of Land to a charitable use and it shall bind the Heir but not the Lord for his Fine This Devise was made unto the Devisors Son and Heir and his Heir upon condition that he and his Heirs should imploy the profits of the Land for the relief of Stow Market in Suffolk and after the Devisor died without a Surrender to the use of his Will In 6 Jac. the Heir having sold the Land to one Flick for valuable consideration of money sues out a Commission upon the Statute of charitable Vses by fraud and covin between him and Flick to discharge this Land of the charitable use upon which Commission it was proved before the Commissioners that Flick had any notice of this charitable use but it was proved that the Heir that sold the Land had Assets both in Law and Equity to give allowance out of his Estate to maintain this charitable use whereupon the Commissioners Decreed that the Son and Heir should grant out of his own Land the summ of five Marks and to maintain this charitable use it being then proved that the Land Devised for the charitable Use was of no great value and they further Decree that Flick should hold his Land discharged of the charitable use And this Decree being certified into the Chancery and prosecuted by the Heir and Flick with intent to discharge the Land Devised of the charitable use the Lord Keeper confirmed it Afterwards the Parishoners of Stow Market having notice of this fraud and that the Land Devised was worth 7 l 10 s per ann. they in 14. Jac. sue out another Commission upon the said Statute and before the Commissioners it was proved that Flick had notice of this charitable use before he bought the Land Secondly it was proved that the first Commission was sued out by fraud and combination between the Heir and Flick on purpose to discharge the Land Devised of this charitable use Thirdly it was proved that the Land Devised was worth 7 l 10 s per an. And fourthly that the Heir had not payd the 5 Marks Decreed by the former Commission to be payd upon all which proofs the latter Commissioners Decree Flicks Land for maintenance of the charitable use appointed and the Jury having found the former Commission to be prosecuted by fraud and combination as aforesaid they Decree that Flick shall pay the full value of his Land by the year to the charitable use from the time of his Purchase And lastly they Decree that the Heir that ought to have paid the 5 Marks per ann. for divers years and hath not paid it at any time should pay the arrerages and then his Land to be discharged from further payment of it This latter Decree being certified in the Chancery Flick took exception that the second Commission issued out illegally there having been a former Commission and Decree to discharge the Land of the charitable use which was confirmed by Decree of this Court which ought to be finall and is not to be reversed but in Parliament according to Andrew Hynstors Case before and if a Commission upon a Commission should issue out upon this Statute such multiplicity of Suits would arise as that it would prove inconvenient and multiplicity of Suits is not allowed in Law But the Lord Keeper did confirm the second Decree because of the fraud and combination between the Heir and Flick in suing out the first Commission which was found by the Jury and proved before the L. Keeper and therefore he now reversed the first Decree and confirmed this for that by the Law Fraus dolus nemini patrociniam debet but if a Decree be legally made without fraud by the Commissioners for charitable uses and upon Appeal this is confirmed in the Chancery and where a Decree is made by Commissioners for charitable uses and this Decree confirmed in Chancery if the Decree be not performed accordingly now no Commission need be sued out for upon an Affidavit made of a breach of the Decree an Attachment and other Proces of course is to issue out to compell the parties concerned to perform the Decree yet if a second Commission do issue out it is not illegall if nothing be decreed against the first Decree and upon this second Commission they are to decree by form of the first Decree if they find a breach Barnard Hides Case TRinity 4 Car. Barnard Hides Case against the Parishoners of Gillingham Darford and Sutton in Kent Katherine Banne grants by Deed a Rentseek out of 208 acres of Land for relief of the poor in those Parishes and limits this to commence after her death and gives seisin of this in her life the Rent is behind for thirty six years Hide Purchaseth the Land having notice of the charitable use and in the Grant there was a nomine poenae of 50 s if the Rent be not paid by her Heirs within fourteen days after it was due by the Grant and it was found that Hide had held the Land seven years upon a Commission for charitable uses the Commissioners Decree that Hide shall pay all the arrerages for thirty six years and also the arrerages of the nomine poenae for seven years being the time he had enjoyed the Land and Decree that the Grantor shall distrain for the Rent for ever after And the Commissioners Decree being returned in Chancery the Lord Keeper referred it to the Judges who resolved these points First that Hide should pay all the arrerages for thirty six years for that the Land is chargeable with the Rent in whose hands soever it cometh Secondly that the seisin given by the Grantor in her life is good although the Rent did not commence or was in esse at the time of the seisin given Thirdly if Land or Rent be given to a charitable use and misimployed a Purchasor which hath notice of the Gift shall not be further charged then during his own time but where the Rent is concealed a Purchasor shall answer for all the time of the concealment for the Land is a Debtor transit cum onere Fourthly if a Rent be granted out of Land to a charitable use and one buys the Land for a valuable consideration of money having no notice of the charitable Use and Rent yet the Rent remains because it is collaterall to the Land and another thing and the notice required by the Statute is to be given as well of the Land as of the charitable use Fifthly resolved that the Purchasor shall not pay the arrerages of the nomine poenae because it was a personall charge upon the Heir who ought to have paid the Rent and it doth not charge the Land Sixthly when the Heir or others charged to pay a charitable use do break the trust the Commissioners may transfer the trust unto others as to the Churchwardens or
other Parishoners of the Parish where the charitable use is to be distributed Lastly it was resolved that if a Rent seek be granted to a charitable use the Commissioners by their Decree cannot make this a Rent-charge by adding a clause of distresse unlesse it be for that this alters the nature of the Rent in the creation of it and is against the mind of the Donor Mich. 14. Car. Plate and the Masters and Fellows of St. Johns Colledge in Cambridge PLate being seised of Copyhold Land in tayl in Highgate in Midlesex surrenders this in Court to the use of his Will and suffers a Recovery in the Court of the Mannor in which no Judgement is given against the Vouchee and after Deviseth by his Will this Copyhold Land and all his Free-hold Land to his wife for life the remainder to the Master and Fellows of St. Johns Colledge in Cambridge for maintenance of the Schollars there the Heir of Plate enters upon the wife to avoid the Devise and the Master and Fellows prefer a Bill in Chancery to preserve their interest and to have the Devise to them confirmed The Lord Keeper Littleton resolves that if no Judgement be given against the Vouchee to have in value in case of a common recovery to cut off an Estate tayl that it is a voyd recovery and will not cut off an Estate tayl and as to the wife to whom the Land was Devised for life the Heir had liberty given by Law to evict them but as to the Colledge and the remainder limited to them the Lord Keeper did declare that the Devise is good to them by the Statute 43 Elizabeth touching Gifts Limitations and appointments of Lands to charitable uses for there is gift and limitation of the Land to a charitable use which shall not be avoided for want of circumstance of Law to make it good and also the Lord Keeper said that although the Colledge was incorporated by another name then the Devise was to them and therefore might not be capable of it yet the Devise is good to them by the said Statute also if the Heir avoyd the Estate tayl against the Wife at Law yet the remainder to the Colledge shall stand good and be a remainder without a particular Estate which by rules of Law cannot be but these defects in cases of charitable uses are made good by that Statute by a benigne and favourable interpretation thereupon for maintenance of Charity as it is in other cases upon Statutes for Piety and Charity 13 Jacobi Jesus Colledge Case in Court of Wards referred to the Judges DOctor Floyd seised of Lands in Capite Deviseth them to Jesus Colledge in Oxford and their Successors to find a Fellow there which should be of his blood and alliance and it was referred to the Judges Whether this Devise be good or no and they resolved and certified that by the Common Law and Statute of Wills the Devise was void for these Statutes enabled persons to Devise their Lands excepting to Corporations for that is Mortmain also none can Devise all their Capite Lands to any but must leave a third part to descend but they certified and resolved that although it be voyd by the Common Law yet the Statute of 43. Eliz. for charitable Vses doth make this good as a limitation and an appointment and that it was good for all the Land But if an Infant or Lunatick who by Law is disabled to make a Will or Devise of his Land do Devise his Land to a charitable use this is voyd and not made good by the Statute for want of a capacity to make a Will by Law The Lord Edward Mountagues Case in the Court of Wards 17. Jac. SIr Walter Mountague seised in Fee of Capite Lands in Hanging Houghton in Northamptonshire conveys two parts of these lands unto uses limited within the Statute of 32. and 34. H. 8 and by his Will deviseth the third part remaining in him for maintenance of a charitable use in Wales and upon a reference unto Hobart and Tanfield they resolved this Devise to be voyd and was not aided by the Statute of 43. Eliz. for charitable uses for in the instant of his death the Lands descended to the Heir and the Devisor having disposed of two parts in his life according to the Statute of Wills he is disabled by the Common Law and those Statutes as owner of the Lands to Devise any part of his third part remaining See Doctor Floyds Case before in Jesus Colledge Case Seymor against the poor of Twyford Trinity 1634. MOney was given to charitable uses and detained a long time as concealed the Commissioners upon the said Statute Decreed the Money to be paid with interest after the rate of 8 l per cent and this Decree was confirmed by the Lord Keeper So in the Case of the Lady Mountague of Ilford and the Inhabitants of Barking in Essex Sir Charles Mountague her Husband gave by his Will 10 l to the poor of Barking and made his Wife Executrix and died she kept the Money above twelve years in her hands and the Commissioners Decreed her to pay 20 l for the detainig this Money for use and principall and the Lord Keeper Coventry confirmed this Decree about 12. The Poor of East Greenstead against Howard 8. 10. REsolved by the Lord Keeper upon Appeal to alter or confirm a Decree made by Commissioners upon the Statute of Charitable Vses the Decree is not perpetuated and not to be altered but by Act of Parliament and is to remain in the Pety Bagg and it is in his power to make a Decree good where it is defective Hungate on the part of the Inhabitants of Sherborn 3. A Debt owing by Statute Bond Judgement or Recognizance which in Law is a thing in action was given for the creation of a School and this was Decreed to be a good appointment within the Statute to maintain a charitable Use Steward against Germyn 41. Eliz. ONe having Lands and Goods appoints by his Will that the same shall be sold to maintain a charitable Use and doth not appoint by whom the sale shall be made the Commissioners do by their Decree appoint that J. S. shall sell these Lands and Goods and Decree his sale to be good and that the money to be raised thereby shall be imployed to maintain the charitable Use according to the Donors Will and this Decree was confirmed by the Lord Keeper upon an Appeal to him Hellams Case 5. Caroli A Devise was made of Lands to the Company of Leather-sellers in London to maintain a charitable Use there upon a Decree by Commissioners to settle the Lands upon the Company an Appeal was and exception taken for that the Company of Leather-sellers was a Corporation and the Statutes of Wills doth except Devises of Land to a Corporation but the Decree was confirmed there being many Presidents in it The Schoole of Rugby in the County of Warwick 2. Caroli ONe seised in
Fee of houses in Grays-Inn Lane London gave these houses to certain persons in Trust to build a School at Rugby in the County of Warwick and upon breach of the Trust a Commission was taken out in Warwickshire to enquire of this Gift and by a Jury there the Gift and breach of Trust was found and a Decree made by the Commissioners in that County to settle the lands according to the Donors Will and upon an Appeal the Decree was reversed for the Inquisition and Decree was not made nor found by Jurors and Commissioners of the County where the Lands given to such uses do lie the words of the Statute be To enquire by the oaths of twelve men or more of the County of such gifts limitations and appointments and of the breaches of Trust of such Lands and Goods c. which is intended to be by Jury and Commissioners of that County where the Lands do lie Kensons Case 41. Eliz. REsolved that a Copyhold may be charged or given to a charitable use Wingfields Case 4. Car. MOney was given for the good of the Church of Dulk and this was resolved to be a good Gift notwithstanding these generall words Goffe cont. Webb 44. Eliz. HVnt seised in Fee of the Rectory of Haynes in the County of Wilts Devised the same to be sold and the Money to be distributed unto twenty of the poor of his kindred and by Egerton and Popham this was adjudged a good Devise notwithstanding it doth not appear that he had any poor kindred Champion contra Smith 3. Jacobi RIdley seised of Copyhold land in Barking in Essex did Devise the same to the Parson and Churchwardens of in Thames-street London to the end that they and four honest men of that Parish should sell this land and imploy the Money for the poor and charitable uses in that Parish And upon an Appeal made it was objected that the Devise was void because the Parson and Churchwardens were not a Corporation to take lands out of London nor to sell it for such uses but it was Decreed that the Devise was good and that they had good authority to sell the same Stoddard 20. Jacobi SToddard Devised by parcell a yearly Rent of 10 l per ann. for ever out of his House called The Swan with 100 Marks in the Old Jury London for maintenance of two Schollars in Oxford and Cambridge and willed that one Hugh the Scrivener should put it into Writing which was done accordingly and this being found by Inquisition was Decreed and the Decree confirmed upon an Appeal for although by Law a Rent cannot be created or granted without Deed or Will in writing yet this Nuncupative Will was good to create the Rent to a charitable use by the words of the Statute of limitation or appointment for although it be not a good Gift yet it is a good limitation or appointment Mayor and Burgesses de Reading contra Lane 43. Eliz. A Devise was made to the poor people maintained in the Hospitall of St. Lawrence in Reading for ever Exception was taken that the poor were not capable by that name for that they were no Corporation yet because the Mayor and Burgesses were capable to take Lands in Mortmain and they did govern the Hospitall it was Decreed that the Defendant Lane should assure the Land to the Mayor and Burgesses for the maintenance of the said Hospitall Mayor of Bristoll against Whitton 8. and 9. Caroli A Man Deviseth Mony to a charitable use to be bestowed amongst poor people and the other of his goods to be imployed for such uses as his Feoffees shall think fit Resolved by the Lord Keeper and the Certificate of two Judges that although Bristoll be a Corporation yet the Devise to them is good Fisher against Hill 10. Jacob WHen no use is mentioned or directed in a Deed it shall be Decreed to the use of the poor although the Feoffees be gentlemen living out of the Town and no Inhabitants within the Town Peacock against Thewer Mich. 14. Car. LAnds are given to a charitable use if a Purchasor buys these lands not having notice of the charitable use it shall not bind the Purchasor but if a Rent be given out of lands to a charitable use and a Purchasor purchaseth the lands for money not having notice of the charitable use yet he shall pay the Rent for that he doth not purchase it but the land out of which the Rent issueth but he shall not pay any more arrerages of the Rent then what was encurred during his time of purchase but every occupier and owner must answer the arrerages for his own time See before Purkhursts Case and the Inhabitants of Wood and Barnard Hides Case before 2. Caroli Pennyman against Jennys LAnds were given to Churchwardens of a Parish to a charitable use although the Devise be voyd in Law it was Decreed good in Chancery by the words limited and appointed within the Statute Trin. 15. Car. Pember against the Inhabitants of Knighton MOney was given to maintain a Preaching Minister this is no charitable use named in the Statute yet by the Lord Keeper and two Judges it was Decreed to be good and the use a charitable use within the Equity of that Statute and the Executor was ordered to pay that money to the charitable use for maintenance of it Trin. 15. Car. Peustred cont. Panyer A Deviseth 20 l per ann. to a Preaching Minister and makes his wife Executrix and dyes leaving Lands and Assets in Goods the Executrix refuseth to buy Lands or a Rent of that value the Lord Keeper and two Judges Decree the Executrix to buy Lands to that value and to assure it for the charitable use Trin. 15. Car. Bramble against the poor of Havering A Feme covert maketh a Will and deviseth 30 s per ann. out of some of her own Lands to a charitable use the Heir submits himself to an Award and is bound to perform it the Arbitrators do Award the payment of it yet by Decree the Heir is discharged to pay it and that the Devise was voyd ab initio so of an Infant and other persons disabled in Law to make a Will or to Devise Lands Mayor de Londons Case LAnds were Devised to the Mayor and Chamberlain of London to the use of the Master and Governors of the Hospitall of St. Bartholomew London Resolved that Devise is good although the Corporation be not incorporated by that name but by the name of Mayor and Commonalty for the intent of the Devisor shall be observed and it appears that the Devisor intended to give it to the Corporation of London Also the Will is To maintain an Hospitall which is a charitable use which the Law ought to favour Pauperes de Chelmsford Sir Henry Mildmay Minh 1649. KIng Edward 6. founded a Free-School in Chelmsford and made it a Corporation of Guardians Master and Usher and gave Chantery to them and their successors to the value of 300 l