Several were the Statute 43 Elizabeth, c. 4, as to charitable uses. there specified; but he could not say this was such a one as any of those. The preamble had received a very wide construction; but it was difficult to help feeling that such a gift as that to the Dominican Convent in this case was not only not within the words of the Act, but probably, and without reference to the faith professed, one of the last gifts which the Legislature which passed that Act would have thought of including in it. The Dominican Convent was a mere voluntary association of women, uniting for the purpose of working out the salvation of their own souls by religious exercises and self-denial. That was in no sense, or in spirit, a charitable purpose within the statute. There were no decided cases which compelled him to hold that it was; and unless there were, he would not do so. A gift of an annuity to a man so long as he spent his life like a hermit, or such like, was not a charitable purpose. Then, was that bequest void on the ground of perpetuity? He thought not. The convent was analogous to a club; and he had seen many gifts to agricultural and other clubs and societies in the country, though he did not then recollect any gift to a London club. Mr. Morgan. There was the gift of the pictures to the Garrick Club. The Vice-Chancellor continued-Truly; and here the bequest was to the superior of the convent for the time being; by whom the money would be put into the common fund, or chest of the institution, subject to no trust, the property of the society, and alienable; and to be dealt with by them, whenever and in whatever way they might think fit. It would be far too great a stretch of the ordinary rule against perpetuities, as understood and applied by this court, to hold that it extended to and embraced the institution in question. The result, therefore, of the whole case would be, that the bequest to the Sisters at Selley Oak would be decided to be a valid charitable bequest, good as to the pure, but bad as to the impure, or mixed personalty (so much of it as savoured of realty); and that the bequest to the Dominican Convent was altogether a good one. Here, it would appear, that the Vice-Chancellor regards the Sisters of Saint Paul (who are nuns engaged in the active duties of charity) in the same light as, and not to be distinguished in any respect from, the numerous charitable associations established in London, such as the Scripture Readers, Home Missionaries, or Anglican Sisters of Mercy; and he decides that the bequest to them is a valid charitable bequest, good as to the pure or unmixed personal property, but bad as to the mixed personalty (so much of it as savoured of real property). On the other hand, he regards the Dominican nuns of Carisbrooke as a mere voluntary association, uniting not for charitable purposes within the meaning of the statute 43 Elizabeth, c. 4, but for the purpose of working out the salvation of their own souls by religious exercises and self-denial ; and he considers them analogous to a London club. He therefore decides that the bequest to them, not being a charitable bequest, is altogether valid, both as to personal and real property. If, in this case, the bequest were made to religious communities of men of the Roman Catholic Church, instead of to the Sisters of St. Paul, and the Dominican Nuns of Carisbrooke, it would have been invalid, both as to personal and real property, owing to the penal clauses of the Emancipation Act, which, as we have seen, are levelled against all religious communities of men of the Roman Catholic Church, but leave untouched all religious communities of any other denomination. As regards the prohibition of Roman Catholic religious orders of men in these countries, the law is exceptional, and consequently tyrannical. Moreover, it is impotent. Why retain a law on the statute book that cannot be enforced? Rendering invalid all gifts and bequests to Roman Catholic religious communities of men, and these exclusively, the law is unjust; and, being unjust, is evaded. Its evasion entails inconvenience, and necessarily diminishes the general respect for the laws of the country. Let us hope, that, in the enlightened spirit of our modern jurisprudence, the law bearing on these matters will be amended, as is plainly suggested by the evidence contained in the able and valuable report of the Select Committee. As there may be exaggerated ideas about the wealth of the nuns of the United Kingdom, it is well to state, that, generally speaking, they are poor struggling communities; and this for the following reasons. First, their income, as we shall 1 presently see, is in itself small; secondly, small as it is, it is encroached on by their numerous poor clients; and thirdly, they are, nearly all, more or less, in debt for the building and furnishing of their charitable institutions. When a lady who has entered a convent, takes the vows, and so becomes a professed nun, she is required to bring in with her a dower of about 600l., yielding, at five per cent. interest, 301. a year, which is deemed sufficient for her food, clothing, and all other requisites. A comfortably clad, well fed Englishman, seeing a Sister of Mercy or other nun, in plain and humble garb, here visiting the sick in mud and rain, here teaching in a poor school, here educating orphans, here again discharging hospital duties, will readily understand, that, in order to perform the heavy work devolving on her, she must be so clothed as to be well protected against the weather in our damp climate, and that she also must have a sufficiency of plain nutritious food; but he will find it hard to realize, that, for all this, she requires, in the year, only as much as he probably spends on cigars, or his wife pays for a single dress! And yet, small as this pittance is, it is sufficient for her humble wants; and in most cases it is shared with the famishing poor. In a nuns' poor school of 200 or 300 girls, at least onefourth of the children, in many districts, come to school fasting. These the Sisters endeavour to supply with bread. To some very ragged children they give clothing. Again, the little orphan they are asked to receive in a specially urgent case, and the sick poor they visit, are, in the same way, pensioners on their slender means. In some convents, of old establishment and these are the exception-demands of this kind are more extensively met than in houses of recent institution. For in the former there is, in the lapse of years, some accumulation of funds. Thus, when a nun dies, her dower belongs to the community of which she was a member. In this way, the resources This is the general rule. There are a few congregations, the members of which are supported by small stipends received for nursing the sick and other services rendered. of the convent are gradually increased. But the nuns do not live one whit the less plainly on this account. The entire increase goes to the poor, the sick, the ignorant, the widow and the orphan. It sometimes happens, that a convent thus circumstanced will take in, as a choir nun, a lady of great piety or ability, who has no dower, or whose dower is short of the requisite amount. But such cases are rare; and thus the increased income is mainly devoted to the hospital, orphanage, poor school, or other charitable institution attached to the convent, or the relief of the sick poor in their own homes. Mr. Newdegate and some of his friends would charge such sums with succession duties, thus docking the few pence received by the sick poor clients of a particular house in the year, or perchance reducing the numbers in a particular female orphanage from one hundred and forty to one hundred and thirty-nine. The gain resulting, from such a measure, to the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the British taxpayer would not amount in one hundred years to a penny in the pound on the sum occasionally lost to the nation, through an error in the construction of an iron-clad. But let us not be unjust to the honourable gentlemen. Their action is not prompted by regard for the pocket of the British taxpayer. It is suggested and perseveringly maintained by an unrelenting hostility to convents—a hostility for which they are sorely puzzled to produce one intelligible reason. Happily, the British House of Commons is not of their opinion on the subject; and so we may safely leave them the unenviable monopoly of the lines of the Roman satirist : : Non amo te, Sabidi; nec possum dicere quare. 1 Martial's lines have been well rendered as follows: I do not love you, Doctor Fell, 393 CHAPTER XXIX. BRITISH PRIMARY EDUCATION OF THE PAST. As almost every convent in the United Kingdom has an elementary school attached to it, and as some convents have two or three such schools, and as, moreover, some of the best of our training schools of mistresses are those conducted by nuns,' the question of Primary Education-a question just now of paramount interest—is peculiarly apposite to our subject. Until about forty years ago, England was one of the most backward countries in Europe, in the important matter of popular education. By an Act of Henry VIII., it was ordered that a school should be established in every parish in England and Wales; but, in too many instances, the letter, and not the spirit, of this Act was observed. Moreover, in the course of years, with the increase of population, the supply prescribed by the Parish Schools Act was quite insufficient, as several parishes required many schools, and all, more than one. It might have been expected that the enactment of Henry would have been supplemented by judicious legislation in the same direction by his successors. But such was not the case. Large bequests and endowments were made, from time to time, for educational purposes, estimated to amount in the aggregate to 500,000l. per annum.2 A great many parish schools were established, and maintained for the gratuitous education of the poor, and a number of grammar schools were founded, chiefly frequented by the middle classes. Several of the endowed schools, originally designed for 1 See Chapter XXXII. 2 The estimate of Lord Brougham and others. |