tarians; and that the charity funds had been by them and still were applied to and for the benefit of Unitarians, and in support of Unitarianism, and to the prejudice of the great body of orthodox Dissenters. And in particular, that four exhibitions were then sent to Manchester College, a wellknown Unitarian establishment; and an allowance of 80l. a year made to the defendant, the Rev. Charles Wellbeloved, a Unitarian preacher; and that Unitarians were admitted into the hospital or alms-house, and that the trusts were not duly performed, no allowances being made to the poor widows of godly preachers, as a distinct class, and no allowance being made for promoting the preaching of Christ's holy gospel in poor places.

"And the Information prayed a declaration that Unitarians are not fit objects of these Charities. And that the exhibitions to Manchester College, and the allowance to the Rev. Charles Wellbeloved, might be discontinued ; and that Dame Sarah Hewley's rules for admission to the hospital might be observed. And that Dissenters who would have been within the protection of the Act of Toleration of the 1st of William and Mary, and not subject to the penalties of the Act against blasphemy, 9 and 10 William III., at the foundation of the Charities, might alone be admitted to the benefit of these Charities."

This case had been before the Charity Commissioners, who by their Report, 26 June, 1826, expressed an opinion that the question whether Unitarians could properly be admitted to receive the benefit of those Charities ought to be submitted to the consideration of a Court of Equity..

To this Information the defendants filed their answers in December 1830, declining to make any discovery as to their religious belief, to which answers the relators took objections for insufficiency. Further answers were then filed, to which objections were also taken by the relators on the same grounds, and allowed. And the final answers of the defendants were not obtained till April 1832.

A large body of evidence was entered into by the relators, who

examined several very eminent dissenting ministers: no evidence was adduced on the part of the defend

ants.

The cause was heard by the ViceChancellor in Michaelmas Term, 1833, who expressed an opinion that no persons who denied the doctrine of our Saviour's divine person, and the doctrine of original sin, were entitled to participate in Lady Hewley's Charities, and decreed according to the prayer of the Information. That ministers or preachers of what is commonly called Unitarian belief and doctrine, and their widows, and members of their congregations, and that persons of what is commonly called Unitarian belief and doctrine, were not fit objects of, and were not entitled to partake of the Charities of Dame Sarah Hewley in the pleadings of this cause mentioned, and removed the trustees, but allowed them their costs.

Against this decree the defendants appealed, and the appeal was partly heard by Lord Brougham, previously to his giving up the seals, assisted by Mr. Baron Parke, and Mr. Justice Littledale; and it was afterwards heard by Lord Lyndhurst, assisted by Mr. Baron Alderson, and Mr. Justice Patteson; and judgment was given by these three learned judges in Gray's Inn Hall, on Friday, the 5th of February last.

MR. BARON ALDERSON addressed LORD LYNDHURST as follows:

MY LORD,-My brother Patteson and myself having fully considered this case, in which your Lordship has desired to have our assistance, and having entirely concurred in our view of it, it becomes my duty to deliver our joint opinion, together with the reasons by which we think it may be supported.

This question arises on the construction of certain deeds of endowment executed by Lady Hewley, dated January 12 and 13, 1704, by which she conveyed considerable estates in the county of York, to trustees, upon trust after her death, to pay and dispose of such sums of money yearly, or otherwise, to such and so many poor and godly preachers for the time being, of Christ's holy gospel, and to such

poor and godly widows for the time being, of poor and godly preachers, for the time being, of Christ's holy gospel, at such time and times, and for so long time or times, and according to such distribution as the said trustees and managers for the time being, or any four or more of them, should think fit, and to employ and dispose of such sums of money, and in such manner, for the encouraging and promoting of the preaching of Christ's holy gospel in such poor places as the said trustees and managers for the time being, or any four or more of them should think fit; and also to employ and dispose of such sums of money, yearly or other wise, as and for exhibitions for such or so long time or times for or towards educating of such young men designed for the ministry of Christ's holy gospel, never exceeding five such young men at one and the same time, as the said trustees and managers for the time being, or any four or more of them, should approve and think fit; and she also gave all the surplus and remainder of the aforesaid clear and residuary rents, issues, and profits of the premises, after the death of the said Dame Sarah Hewley, during all the continuance of the said trust estates, upon trust, that the said trustees, and the survivors and survivor of them, his and their assigns, and the heirs, executors, and administrators of such survivor, should from time to time employ and dispose of the same in and for the relieving such godly persons in distress, being fit objects of the said Lady Hewley's, and the trustees' and managers' charity, as the said trustees and managers for the time being, or any four of them, should think fit.

By a second deed, dated in 1707, Lady Hewley, after conveying to the same trustees certain other estates, partly for the support of an almshouse built by her for poor pious widows, and for which she appointed separate trustees; and after giving the residue to the same uses as in the deed of 1704, ordered that the trustees should follow the rules and directions contained in a book of rules signed by herself, and should appoint such persons to the benefit of the almshouse as were qualified according to such

rules; nine of whom were to be poor widows, or unmarried women, upwards of fifty years of age, and one a sober, discreet, and pious poor man, who should be qualified to pray daily with them twice a day, if such a person could be found.

The rules referred to by this second indenture seem to have been carefully drawn up, and are styled by her, "Rules for the due qualification of such poor persons," and are expressly required to be read over by the trustees to each person when appointed. They are as follows: "Rules and orders to be observed about the qualities or qualifications of the poor people to be elected into the said almshouse from time to time." "Let none be elected into the almshouse who have a clear personal estate of above sixty pounds, or a real estate above the annual value of three pounds, above all reprizes, and near relations that are able in estate, and bound by the laws of God and nature to relieve them at home. Let all persons to be elected prove their age to be above fifty-five years, by good testimonials if required; let none be admitted into the hospital that cannot be conveniently separated from their children, who must not be permitted to live with their parents in the hospital, but in cases of infirmity and sickness, when they are bound in duty and charity to minister to their parents' necessities; let none of evil fame or report be admitted into the hospital, but such as are poor and piously disposed, and of the Protestant religion, not given to strong drink nor to gossiping; and such as have lived infamously in their youth, or have been justly blemished with any gross immorality, let them not so much as in old age be elected without good evidence of their repentance and amendment. Let all persons to be chosen bring certificates, according to law, from the parishes or constabularies wherein they lived, that they were legally settled therein, but that if they should forfeit their right to the hospital they shall be received into the parish whence they came. Let every almsbody be one that can repeat by heart the Lord's Prayer, the Creed,

and Ten Commandments, and Mr. Edward Bowles's Catechism. Let all the almspeople, when not disabled by weakness, duly repair to some religious assembly of the Protestant religion, every Lord's-day forenoon and afternoon, and at other opportunities,_to attend the ordinances of God. Let them be ready to attend their almssisters in sickness, and to assist them by turns. Let no almsbody receive any visits on the Lord's-day, except in case of sickness, nor shall they show their room to any on that holy day. Let no almsbody receive any servants into their house to hear the reports out of the families where they are or have been servants. Let none of them be ever abused with strong drink, nor let any behave themselves uncharitably and unquietly with one another, by scolding or evil language; neither let them be busy-bodies, nor tattlers, nor tale-bearers, nor wanderers about from house to house, but keepers at home; nor common swearers, nor cursers, nor liars. Let each keep their own rooms clean, and all bear an equal share in the charge of cleaning all the places of common usage. Let no almsbody be found begging from door to door at home or abroad, or asking alms, yet may they gratefully accept any thing that shall be freely given them by any: and if they shall be found begging, let them be expelled the hospital. None chosen and admitted to be almspeople, shall, after their admission, go abroad selling bread, eggs, cakes, or such like things, except of their own manufacture; and what by their hand labour they can honestly acquire at home they may enjoy. Let every almsbody, morning and evening, in private devotion, commend themselves to God in prayer, and in their prayer remember their foundress, Sarah Lady Hewley, while she lives, and after her death pray for her trustees."

Now it is contended on behalf of the relators to the present suit, that this Charity is to be confined to Protestant Dissenters, entertaining a belief in the divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, in the atonement, and in the doctrine of original sin; in fact, those who are commonly called Orthodox

Dissenters, in order to distinguish them from others who entertain different opinions as to these important matters, and who are called, in common parlance (though undoubtedly by no very accurate description in that respect) Unitarian Dissenters. In more correct language, perhaps, they should be called-believers in the Unity of the Godhead, without any distinction of persons therein; for we presume that those who differ with them in this respect equally believe in the Unity of the Godhead, although they think (and that from what they consider plain texts of Scripture) that such mysterious unity is not inconsistent with the equally mysterious distinction of persons therein.

If this question at all depended on any investigation of the comparative truth and excellence of these doctrines, or upon a critical examination of texts of Scripture (the only test to be applied by Protestants in such inquiries) we should feel that this was not a proper tribunal, and that we were not sufficient for these things. But this case really turns upon a mere question of fact. If the Unitarian doctrines are consistent with the intention of Lady Hewley, the decision of the Vice-Chancellor is erroneous; if they are inconsistent with it, the declaration he has made seems to us correct.

The Vice-Chancellor's declaration, in substance, is that no persons who deny the divinity of our Saviour's person, and who deny the doctrine of original sin, as it is generally understood, are entitled to participate in Lady Hewley's Charity.

There is no doubt as to the principles which are to govern our opinion; they are fully laid down and explained in the Attorney-General v. Pearson and others, 3 Merivale, 400, and may be thus shortly expressed:-The will of the founder is to be observed.

Then how is the will of the founder to be ascertained? If it be expressed clearly in the deed or instrument of foundation there can be no diffi. culty.

If expressed in doubtful or general words, recourse must be had to extrinsic circumstances, such as the known opinions of the founder, the

existing state of the law, the contemporaneous usage, or the like.

Upon these principles, then, we proceed to consider this case. We may begin by laying the Church of England out of the question; for, although Lord Eldon says that a bequest for the worship of God would, primá facie, be one to the Established Religion, yet it is quite clear, from all the documents in this case, that this foundation was in favour of some class or classes of persons dissenting from the Church.

This point has not been disputed; but then this question arises-Who are the Dissenters whom Lady Hewley intended to benefit?

The provision is fourfold; first, in favour of poor and godly preachers, for the time being, of Christ's holy gospel; secondly, of poor and godly widows, for the time being, of poor and godly preachers, for the time being, of Christ's holy gospel; thirdly, for the distribution of sums of money to encourage and promote the preaching, in poor places, of Christ's holy gospel, and for the education of young men designed for the ministry of Christ's holy gospel; and, lastly, for the relief of such godly persons in distress as were fit objects of her charity.

It is clear from this, that this pious lady had directly in view the encouragement of the preaching of the gospel by Protestant Dissenters, and that in three ways:

First, by provision to preachers and to their widows; secondly, by direct gifts of money for building places of worship, or endowing them where built in places not otherwise able to support a minister; thirdly, for the education of youth to the same godly purpose.

These three objects have plainly in view the propagation of some doctrines which she deemed to be of importance to the souls of men; and her fourth object was in complete accordance with the three others, being in truth the relief of the professors of the same doctrines, in case, from their narrow circumstances or unforeseen calamities, they should be reduced to pecuniary distress, What then were the

doctrines in question? Prima facie, these would surely be the doctrines which she herself conscientiously entertained, and there is no reasonable doubt what these doctrines must have been. But she has more particularly described in her second deed, and in the rules she herself framed, one class, viz. the poor pious widows whom she deemed to be fit objects of her bounty, in the almshouse which she had built.

They must be persons piously disposed, and of the Protestant religion; they must be able to repeat, by heart, the Lord's Prayer, the Creed, the Ten Commandments, and Mr. Edward Bowles's Catechism, and they must weekly attend (unless sick) some place of Protestant worship.

To what class or classes of persons does this description extend?

In the first place, it is expressly confined to Protestant Dissenters. In the second place, it seems clearly not confined to one class of Protestant Dissenters alone, because the widows are only required to attend some place of such Protestant worship. But in the third place, it seems also as clearly intended to include these persons alone, who, though in many respects differing in opinion, yet agreed in some points, which probably Lady Hewley thought fundamental; and we know from history, that if that was her opinion, she was by no means singular in it. What then were these fundamental points? We think they must be taken to be those doctrines which are to be found in the Lord's Prayer, the Creed, the Ten Commandments, and Bowles's Catechisın.

It has been argued that the only qualification required is the being able to repeat those by heart. But we cannot think so meanly of Lady Hewley's understanding as to adopt that argument. We think she meant that they should accept these and the doctrines therein contained as a rule of faith; and that they should have them by heart in order that they might be the more deeply impressed with them, precisely in the same way and for the same purpose as the godfathers in the baptismal service of the Church of England are required to cause the child to learn to say (which

means, to say by heart) the Creed, the Lord's Prayer, and the Ten Commandments, and to be further instructed in the Church Catechism; and as in the rubric the children are required to be brought for confirmation to the Bishop as soon as they can do this, and have attained a fit age. No one ever dreamt that these provisions were intended to try their memory, and not to prove their faith.

Then what are the doctrines to be found in these documents?

We may lay aside the Lord's Prayer and the Ten Commandments, as being matters about which all Protestants are we believe agreed. At any rate, all the parties to this suit understand and assent to them in the same sense; perhaps this may not be the case as to the Apostles' Creed, which, though certainly general in its language, has been usually confined as a creed to churches which did not doubt the divinity of our Saviour Jesus Christ. It is, as we have seen, one of the tests necessary for baptism and confirmation in the Church of England, and certainly is, in that Church, by its Catechism, explained in a Trinitarian sense, as plainly appears if we consult the Prayer Book. For the child there answers that he understands by it, 1st, A belief in God the Father, the Creator of all things; 2dly, in God the Son, the Redeemer of all mankind; and 3dly, in God the Holy Ghost, the Sanctifier of all the elect people of God.

Indeed it is not improbable that Mr. Baxter also took the same view of the doctrines contained in the Apostles' Creed; for when on one remarkable occasion he proposed that subscription to the Creed, the Lord's Prayer, and the Ten Commandments, should be alone sufficient as a test for Church Communion, it was objected that these might be subscribed by a Papist or Socinian; and he thought that, he says, so much the better; but adds, "But if they were afraid of communion with Papists and Socinians, it should not be by making a new test or rule of faith which they will not subscribe to, but by calling them to account whenever in preaching or writing they contradict or abuse

the truth to which they have subscribed." It would seem therefore that he thought that the preaching or writing some of the Papist or Socinian doctrines would be acting in a manner contrary to the truth of these articles, if they subscribed them. He must, we think, have referred to the second commandment as to the Papists, and to this Creed as to the Socinians; for there does not appear to be any thing else in his proposed test to which this observation could at all even plausibly apply.

And this view of the Apostles' Creed confirms and is confirmed by the last document Mr. Edward Bowles's Catechism. Now, in the first place, it is stated by all the witnesses, amongst whom are to be found some very distinguished divines of various persuasions, and who all agree in this, that this Catechism is essentially Trinitarian, and that it can be assented to properly by those alone who admit original sin and the atonement made for it, and acknowledge the proper divinity of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. This would be quite sufficient, for there is no evidence on the other side, and we are to decide on the evidence.

But on reading this Catechism ourselves with that attention it requires, and considering it, we cannot doubt that if we were required to form an opinion on it we should decide that the witnesses have taken a correct view of Mr. Bowles's book. It does appear to us clear that those are the doctrines fairly to be deduced from it, particularly by comparing it with the passages of Scripture quoted in its margin.

We would rather, however, put this part of the case on the general tenor of the whole Catechism, and the uncontradicted evidence, than on our own view as to particular passages in it, lest we should fall into an error on some controverted question of criticism or theology, which are always delicate and dangerous subjects for unprofessional divines to handle.

Upon the whole then, we think that in the description which by her own rules Lady Hewley has given of the widows who were to be inmates of