claring the vacancy, if they had any regard for the interests of the Charity, would have advertised a meeting for the election of a Master. But after all, I suppose, to keep your brother and his friends quiet, Jolliffe said he was very sorry; and further said he and his brother would do any thing for Mr. Trimming-credat Judeus!--and then told him, he should have an annuity of 201 Very generous indeed, had it been out of his own property! How can it be paid from the moneys of Churcher's College; because it will be a misapplication of the funds of the Charity?

"These Trustees have, I think, acted very improperly; and ought to answer for it, at least they ought to reconsider their order; and in common justice, to hear your brother's defence, and the testimony of others. I am ready to affirm on oath, that your brother, is well qualified, and as Master of Churcher's College, has done his duty most faithfully and most conscientiously for eighteen years.

"You may, if you please, communicate the substance of this letter to your friends, and show it to Mr. Clement and Sir Thomas Miller, gentlemen I greatly respect.

"Your brother could not write-great in sufferings, he is all submission.-Did they come from Him that cannot err, I agree to submission; but when they arise from the cruelty, the injustice, and oppression of man, I think otherwise.-I am, &c. &c."

Mr. Trimming's letter had no effect-the Trustees had obtained their object, and were inexorable, knowing that neither Mr. Trimming, nor any other person in Petersfield, would be bold enough to interfere with their proceedings; and that, there was no probability of an application being made to the Court of King's Bench, for a mandamus to restore Mr. Trimming to his situation in the school.

A few months after, the following letters were addressed, by Mr. Hylton Jolliffe, to Mr. Trimming, and, subsequently, he was served with an order to deliver the papers of the College to Mr. Dusautoy.

« SIR,

"30th May, 1815.

"A meeting of the Trustees will be held on or about the 19th June, when your letter will be laid before them.

(Signed) "H. JOLLIFFE."

"MR. TRIMMING,

"The Trustees will hold a meeting to-morrow, at half-past nine o'clock, and you are expected to attend with your books. (Signed) "HYLTON JOLLIFFE."

The following is a copy of the order above alluded to:

19th June, 1815.

"To MR. TRIMMING. "We the undersigned Trustees do direct and order, that you deliver all papers, books, keys, and all other things, with fixtures, appertaining to Churcher's College, to Mr. Dusautoy, now appointed Master of the Charity.

(Signed)

"HYLTON JOLLIFFE. "W. J. JOLLIFFE.

"C. E. Twyford.

"S. TWYFORD."

This correspondence with Mr. Trimming establishes beyond the possibility of a doubt

First. The negligent and improvident manner, in which the Charity was managed by Mr. William Jolliffe and Mr. Hylton Jolliffe.

---

Secondly. That the other Trustees, negligent of their duty, committed the whole care of the College to their control and disposal-and

Thirdly. That there was no justifiable grounds for the discharge of Mr. Trimming, and the appointment

of Mr. Dusautoy.

Though the only charge which could be adduced against Mr. Trimming, at the time of his dismissal, was that he had let the College to lodgers, others have since been made, and this, which was thought, at that time, to be "the head and front of his offending," is become a secondary charge; for it is not mentioned in the first answer of the Trustees to the present suit in Chancery; but in one of the answers to the amended information, it is believed to be "one among other reasons"* for which he was dismissed. The charge against him in the first answer is—

"That many complaints were made in the year 1814, by the pa rents of the children at the said school, of the negligence and inattention of the said William Trimming, and they (the Trustees) finding on investigation that the said William Trimming had been negligent in his duties as schoolmaster, by giving the boys more holidays than it was fit and proper, and according to the usage of the said school for them to have, and in particular by neglecting their religious education, appointed in the month of January, 1815, the Defendant George Dusautoy schoolmaster in the room of the said William Trimming. And all these Defendants say, they admit, that there was not any vacancy publicly declared as in the said Information in that behalf stated; but they say, that a meeting of the said Trustees was regularly called for the purpose of electing a master, in the stead of the said William Trimming; and that the said meeting was not publicly announced, nor was it necessary it should be so, for they say, that the circumstances of the case were notorious in the said borough of Petersfield +."

However "notorious it might have been in 1814, none of the parents are to be found who made any such complaints; and such a charge against Mr. Trimming was never before heard of in Petersfield !-Besides, the moral and religious character of Mr. Trimming are well known to all the inhabitants of the town and neighbourhood; and, particularly, his

uniform attendance at church with the Foundation boys on Gundays, when he was Master of the school, unless prevented by indisposition. Therefore, the charge, made against him, by the Trustees, of neglecting the religious education of the boys, is unfounded. Had there been any grounds for such a charge, it is reasonable to suppose, that the Trustees would have supported it by evidence. Indeed, had this been the true reason for the dismissal of Mr. Trimming, they would have been particularly anxious to select for his successor a man, on whose attention, in this respect, they could rely. So far, however, were they, from manifesting this caution, that Mr. Dusautoy, their protegé, is said, rarely, to have visited the church before his appointment, and since he has been Master, to have omitted attending the church, as was the custom of his worthy predecessor, and to have left that duty to a very young man, without incurring the displeasure of the Trustees.

It may, however, be remarked, that, whether Mr. Dusautoy the present Master, is frequent in his attendance at church or not, he has the credit of being a frequent attendant on the Jury of the Court Leet of Mr. Hylton Jolliffe, the Patron of the Borough; and of participating in the feasts, which are always given by him, to the Jury, on those occasions.

As a further proof, if any were wanting, of the estimation in which Mr. Trimming is held, he opened a school on his own account, in the immediate vicinity of Petersfield, after his dismissal from the College, which he still continues, and has under his tuition a number of children, the sons of respectable tradesmen and others in the town and neighbourhood.

The following extracts from the answers of Mr. Hylton Jolliffe and the other Trustees, will show the arguments by which they are driven to support this part of their case.

Extract from the answer of all the Trustees to the original information*.

"And these Defendants say, they admit, that William Trimming, in the said information, by mistake, called John Trimming, did succeed the said Robert Steele, in the month of January, one thousand seven hundred and ninety-seven; and that the said William Trimming was displaced by the Defendants, Hylton Jolliffe, Samuel Twyford, Charles Edward Twyford, and William John Jolliffe, in the month of January, one thousand eight hundred and fifteen, being a major part of the said Trustees: but these last named Defendants say, and the other Defendants believe the same

Post, p. 55.

to be true, that many complaints were made in the year one thousand eight hundred and fourteen, by the parents of the children at the said school, of the negligence and inattention of the said William Trimming; and they, finding, on investigation, that the said William Trimming had been negligent in his duties as schoolmaster, by giving the boys more holidays than it was fit and proper, and according to the usage of the said school for them to have, and in particular by neglecting their religious education, appointed in the month of January one thousand eight hundred and fifteen, the Defendant, George Dusautoy, schoolmaster, in the room of the said William Trimming, And all these Defendants say they admit, there was not any vacancy publicly declared, as in the said information in that behalf stated; but they say, that a meeting of the said Trustees was regularly called for the purpose of electing a master in the stead of the said William Trimming, that the said meeting was not publicly announced, nor was it necessary it should be so, for they say, that the circumstances of the case were notorious in the said Borough of Petersfield. And these Defendants, to the best of their knowledge, information, and belief, say, that the said Defendant, George Dusautoy, was not actually standing at or near the door, when the order was made for his appointment, as in the said information in that behalf stated. And these Defendants say, they deny, that the said appointment of the now, and removal of the former master, was preconcerted between these Defendants and the said Defendant George Dusautoy, or any of them, but admit, that they did request him, the said George Dusautoy, when he was so appointed to succeed the said William Trimming, as in the said information in that behalf stated, to allow the said William Trimming twenty pounds per annum. And these Defendants say, they were induced so to do principally in consequence of the indigent circumstances of the said William Trimming."

Extract from the answer of the Defendant, Thomas Samuel Jolliffe, to the amended information, sworn the 15th August, 1820.

"This Defendant saith he believes it to be true that William Trimming did, during the time he was master of the said college, take in lodgers, and that was one among other reasons why he was dismissed from the said office of master of the said college. And this Defendant saith, he believes that the said William Jolliffe and his Wife did occasionally, for a very short time, lodge in the said college, in the life time of the said William Jolliffe, and the said Defendant Hylton Jolliffe, did, about twelve years since, for a short time reside there.'

Having thus, for reasons best known to themselves,— dismissed the late Master in 1815, the Trustees, by way of recompence, ordered the present Master to pay him twenty pounds a year. No doubt this individual, whose income had been thus reduced, by the arbitrary conduct of the Trustees, was a proper object of their liberality, but he was made so entirely by themselves. If Mr. Trimming was innocent, and therefore, deserving of this bounty, he ought not to have been deprived of his situation. If guilty, and, therefore, meriting

dismissal, the money of the Charity ought not to have been wasted upon him, and taken from the present Master.

The words of the order of dismissal, signed the 13th of February, 1815, before inserted, are "that taking into consideration Mr. Trimming's long services, the Trustees allowed him to retire upon a pension of 20l. per year," as if it were his own voluntary act; and this is the purport of the entry in the College book, as will be seen in the first schedule to the Trustees' answer*; but now another cause is assigned, namely the indigent circumstances" of Mr. Trimming, than which nothing can be more incorrect, for he possesses some property, and is far above want. Though the 201. a year is given to him by a positive order of the Trustees, as has been before shown, the Defendant George Dusautoy, the present Master of the school, alleges in his answer

"That he considers himself under no obligation to account with the said Trustees of the said Charity, for the sum received by him in respect of his salary, and that he considers the said payment as gratuitous on his part and that he may at any time refuse to pay the same he admits the last named Defendants, the Trustees, did request him to make such allowance to the said William Trimmings, in consequence of his indigent circumstances and long services, which he assented to on that account alone"+.

It is hardly necessary to say, that in consequence of this system of negligence, general inattention, and misconduct, of the Trustees of this Charity, it is no longer the institution contemplated and intended by the Founder. The boys on the foundation have been at different times much neglected; they have been forced to give way for the boarders and private pupils of the Master, who have occupied the whole of the College, and upon whose account alone considerable sums have been laid out, in buildings and repairs, and for taxes and other outgoings; and many boys not belonging to the town have been admitted into the school. So far from being a credit and a pride to the town of Petersfield, this institution, which, under other management, might have been nursed into an establishment of the first order of its kind, is now nothing more than an ordinary day school, as regards the Foundation boys; though the income of the College is more than adequate to board, lodge, clothe, educate, and appren