CHAPTER X. THE Companies evidencing before the Commission were the Grocers', GROCERS' COMPANY. On the 21st of February, 1883, the following gentlemen attended Deputation as a deputation from the Grocers' Company : The Master, Mr. J. T. Miller. Second Warden, Mr. J. A. Kingdon. Members of Court, Mr. W. T. Steinmitz and Mr. J. H. Warner. LORD DERBY, the Chairman, addressing the Master, said:-I understand that you have come prepared to lay before the Commission a statement of various points to which you wish to call their attention? The MASTER: That is so, my Lord. We have already sent in, as we think, a complete return to your questions, but we have understood that the Commissioners wish to acquire a general knowledge of the leading facts connected with the Company, and this statement has been drawn up for their convenience. LORD DERBY: And I understood that you proposed to read it? LORD DERBY: We shall be very glad to hear it. A. The Grocers' Company have already, under protest, replied promptly and fully to the inquiries of the City of London Livery Companies' Commission, and in responding to the invitation addressed to them to offer statements and oral evidence, they are anxious to give the Commission all the information and assistance in their power. At the same time the Company respectfully submit that this action on their part shall not be considered as an admission in any sense of any special jurisdiction of the Crown over the Livery Companies, or of the right of the Crown, without the authority of Parliament, to institute an inquiry into what has been judicially declared to be private property. In 1833 the Company declined to appear before the Royal Commission appointed to inquire into the Municipal Corporations of England and Wales. They could not, as they thought, appear without admitting themselves to be a municipal corporation, and the Companies were advised that they were not municipal corporations by the most eminent counsel. Moreover, the Royal Commission in that case purported to 1 Among others, Sir W. Follett, Sir J. Scarlett, and Chief Baron Pollock. The following was the opinion of Chief Baron Pollock, then a leading member of the bar: "I am of opinion that the authority purporting to be given (to the Commission), of calling for all charters and papers, is not legal: nor am I aware that the Crown can from Grocers' Company. Deputation give power to call for papers, to compel the attendance of witnesses, from Grocers' and to administer an oath; and it was believed that such powers were Company. illegal and unconstitutional. No such powers are conferred on the present Commission. The Grocers' Company hold the second place among the twelve great Companies of the City of London. The Commissioners are aware that the senior Company, the Mercers', have declined to avail themselves of the opportunity of offering oral evidence; and it is proposed, with the leave of the Commission and of the Mercers' Company, which has been obtained for the purpose, to read the letter addressed by that Company to the Commission on this subject: "Mercers' Hall, E.C., "14th December, 1882. "SIR,-In reply to your communication of the 10th ultimo, I am desired by the Mercers' Company to thank her Majesty's Commissioners for their courtesy in supplying the Company with copies of the statements. made to them. "The inaccuracy of many of these is, no doubt, mainly attributable to an imperfect acquaintance on the part of their authors with the early history of the City Guilds. So far as regards the Mercers' Company this defect is remedied by the series of facts which the Company had the honour to lay before her Majesty's Commissioners in the first fifteen pages of Return A, Part 1, of their answers. "The facts there set forth have been collected and arranged at the expense of a great deal of labour, in the desire entertained by the Company to furnish all the information that can be gathered on the subject. They extend (as the Commissioners will have remarked) over a period of more than 700 years, and it would scarcely be possible, the Company believe, to throw additional light on the matter. But if the Commissioners would have the goodness to point out any particular with regard to which they feel a doubt, the Company will give their best endeavours to remove any ambiguity. "In the statement prefixed to the returns of the Company to the questions of the Commissioners, the views entertained by the Company with regard to the tenure on which they hold their property were distinctly stated. Those views remain unchanged; and the Company are glad to find that they have incidentally received an unqualified confirmation in the oral testimony of a legal authority of the highest rank before the Commissioners. As regards the mode in which the Company's income is expended, the Company trust that the same sense of the duties attaching to the possession of property which has hitherto guided them in the administration of their own, will continue to do so; and they venture to think that in this respect they have no reason to fear a comparison with the most confer upon the Commissioners any means of compelling the attendance of witnesses or the production of papers. I think the Grocers' Company is not a Municipal Corporation; it has nothing to do directly with the government or protection of any city, town, or place; and I think the influence of its proceedings upon the election of either the magistrates or the members of the City of London does not make it a Municipal Corporation. "I think the Grocers' Company are not bound to comply with any of the requisitions, or to answer any of the inquiries, that have been sent to them by the Commissioners. "And I am of opinion that the Commissioners have no power of commitment or of proceeding by attachment. "Temple, 16th November, 1883." "FRED. POLLOCK. liberal among the wealthy gentry and nobility of the realm. But, con- Deputation sidering this point to be one affecting themselves only, they decline to from Grocers' notice either the censure or the commendation which may have been Company. expressed by others in reference to it. "While gratefully acknowledging, therefore, the courtesy of her Majesty's Commissioners in offering to receive statements and to hear evidence on behalf of the Company,' I am desired to say that any action thereupon on the part of the Company appears to them superfluous, and that they are unwilling to encroach further on the time of the Commissioners. “I am, sir, "(Signed) "H. D. Warr, Esq., "2, Victoria Street, Westminster, S.W." To the views expressed generally in this letter the Grocers' Company adhere. The statement of the law made before the Commission by the highest legal authority in the kingdom is supported by the judicial declaration of Lord Langdale, M.R., and is consistent with the uniform practice of the Company." 1 The Grocers' Company also concur in the opinion of the Mercers' Ans. 1680Company, that the inaccuracy of many of the statements made before the 1686, 1695. Commission is mainly attributable to an imperfect acquaintance on the part of the witnesses with the early history, and, it may be added, the present management of the City Guilds. The Court of the Grocers' Company feel that, after furnishing complete returns, they might safely have left these misstatements to the judgment of the Commissioners; but the investigation must have thrown much additional labour on the Commission, and the object of the present statement is to present the case of the Grocers' Company in as concise a form as the subject will admit, without too much detail or legal technicality, and with references to various erroneous views which have been put forward either in books or in the oral evidence given before the Commission. As the Commission began their oral evidence by examining members and officials of the Charity Commission, it is proposed to take, first, the subject of the Company's charities; secondly, to deal with the origin and history and constitution of the Company; and, lastly, with its present administration and the application of its income. PART I.-THE CHARITIES OF THE COMPANY. By the Company's charities are meant the sums of money which the Company is legally bound to apply for charitable purposes, and of which a return is made every year to the Charity Commissioners. 1 See the case of the Attorney-General v. the Grocers' Company, reported in the sixth volume of Mr. Beavan's "Reports," p. 526. The Master of the Rolls says (p. 550), speaking of the surplus revenue under Sir Wm. Laxton's devise :-"This revenue, according to the construction which it appears to me ought to be put on "this codicil, belongs as private property to the Company." The same observation would apply to other estates devised to the Company in terms similar in effect to those used by Sir Wm. Laxton, and still more strongly to estates devised to the Company absolutely without any condition, trust, or charge, or purchased, as in the case of the site of the hall and garden, by free subscription among the members of the fraternity. 2 The Company's records show that from the middle of the 16th century to the present time they have from time to time sold and made a title to lands and other property, part of their corporate estate, as being absolute owners and without the intervention of the Court of Chancery. Probably the earliest recorded instance is in the year 1531; the latest, the sale of the Company's Irish estate in 1876. Deputation from Grocers' Company. In the case of the Grocers' Company, these charities bear a very small proportion to the corporate income. They are set out in detail in the returns (pages 19, 20), and consist of two classes: (1) a number of small payments charged on property of the Company for the benefit of various parishes, hospitals, colleges, and similar objects. These amount altogether to 3157. a year, and are simply paid over by the Company to the authorities legally entitled to receive them, and the Company are not responsible for the application; (2) charities under the management of the Company itself. A considerable part of these have been appropriated by a Middle Class School Scheme. Those which remain amount to 4331. a year,' and a capital sum of about 47001.2 The Commission may, perhaps, think it right to consider how far these charities are safe in the hands of the Company. On this subject important evidence was given by Mr. Hare, in his report to the Charity Commissioners in 1863, after an inquiry into the condition and circumstances of the charities under the management of the Grocers' Company. following is an extract from the report: The "The Grocers' Company decline to exhibit any statement of their property not specifically charged by the respective founders of the charities. It has not been an uncommon circumstance in the case of the other City Companies that charitable funds given them are not found at present set apart in any definite form of investment, whilst the Company generally admit their liability and pay the interest or dividends from their general property. There can be no doubt that in the case of these ancient, wealthy, and liberal bodies the funds are practically secure. In illustration of Mr. Hare's opinion, it may be mentioned that the Grocers' Company are legally bound to expend 3007. a year on the school and almshouses at Oundle. The rest of the income, under Sir W. Laxton's will, about 4000l. a year, belongs to the Company, by Lord Langdale's decision, as their private property. But the Company actually expend upwards of 3000l. a year on the school, and about 300l. a year on the almshouses; and have, within the last eight years, laid out 28,0007. on school buildings, masters' houses, and playgrounds. In the case of Witney School there is no beneficial gift at all to the Company; but the Company gives considerable help from their corporate funds. Thus, in 1877, the Company gave 4331., and in 1878, 8627. In the case of Colwall School the Company is bound to pay 301. a year, and actually expends upwards of 2501. There does not appear to be any beneficial gift. In the case of the University Exhibitions the Company are bound to apply 401. a year out of the income of the property, which now amounts to 6701. The Company actually give 5751. a year, exclusive of exhibitions from Oundle School. They are also maturing a scheme, with the advice of some of the most eminent scientific men of the day, for the endowment of original research in sanitary science. This will increase the expenditure under the head of exhibitions by 750l. a year, besides a quadrennial discovery prize of 10007. It These facts will probably satisfy the Commission that the charities of the Grocers' Company are, as Mr. Hare says, practically secure. might be added that on more than one occasion, when the Company 1 The following is a list of these charities: (a) 3001. a year for a school and almshouses at Oundle in Northampton shire. (b) 637. a year for a school at Witney in Oxfordshire. (c) 30l. a year for a school at Colwall in Herefordshire. (d) 40l. a year for University exhibitions. A capital sum of 46567. 10s., held under Lady Slaney's will for the purchase of denative benefices. contemplated large expenditure on their schools at Oundle or Witney, Deputation they applied to the Endowed Schools' Commissioners for a scheme, and from Grocers' Company. in each case the Commissioners, influenced no doubt by the smallness of the endowment, preferred to leave the school in the management of the Company. All the remaining charities of the Company were redeemed some years ago under the voluntary powers of the Endowed Schools Act, 1869, and the proceeds applied under the authority of a scheme in the building of a large Middle Class School at Hackney Downs. The date of the scheme is the 24th of March, 1873, and it was the first scheme of any importance framed under the voluntary powers of the Endowed Schools Act. The Endowed Schools' Commissioners expressly thanked the Company for setting what the Commissioners termed so good an example. Mr. Hare in his evidence says he does not know of any City Com- Ans. 44. pany having applied for a scheme, and that the City Companies are not likely to apply for schemes. It is singular that he should be ignorant of the first, and certainly one of the most important cases in which the voluntary powers of the Endowed Schools Act were put in force. The reason probably is, that Mr. Hare is an official of the Charity Commission, and that he is not thoroughly acquainted with the proceedings of the Endowed Schools' Commission, to whose functions the Charity Commissioners succeeded in 1875. Mr. Hare's evidence on this point shows how easily witnesses, with the best intentions, may give a wrong impression as to facts. Mr. Longley also seems to have been unaware Ans. 466. of the circumstances; no doubt for the same reason as Mr. Hare. The capital value of the Company's non-educational charities appropriated under the Middle Class School Scheme was 27,000l. To this the Company have added upwards of 50007. out of their corporate funds, and a large and flourishing school has been established at Hackney Downs, the district selected by the Endowed Schools' Commissioners; but the scheme fixes the tuition fees too low, and the Company now makes good the loss on the working of the school, which amounts to about 1500l. a year. Among the non-educational charities of the Company, appropriated by the Middle Class School Scheme, is Lady Middleton's gift of 201. a year for necessitous clergymen's widows. The Company, with a desire to respect and carry out the wishes of the founder, where this can be usefully done, even though the charity has ceased to exist legally, perpetuate the name and wishes of Lady Middleton by now giving between 700l. and 8007. a year for the purposes she contemplated. The recipients of the gift are carefully selected. The old ladies who are successful candidates are invited to the hall, courteously received, and entertained at luncheon. Every effort is made to render the gift as welcome to the recipients as the act of giving is to the master and wardens who distribute the Company's bounty. Connected with the question of the Middle Class School is a subject on which a grave attack has been made upon the Grocers' Company by Mr. Beale in his oral evidence; and the Commissioners could not have a better instance of the worthlessness of some of the charges made against the Companies. The case is this:-Among the charities. appropriated by the Grocers' Company's Middle Class School Scheme, which has the force of an Act of Parliament, was a yearly sum of 91. 28. payable to seven poor members of the Company, and charged upon the lands and houses devised to the Company by Sir Henry Kebyll. As to this Mr. Beale says: "The return of Keble's Charity is 91. 2s. per annum; I turn from Ans. 537. |