by which they requested them to apply to Parliament, for an act to vary the conduct of the Charity, in some respects, from the original design and intention of the Founder, and particularly, to relieve the boys on the Foundation, from the necessity of going to sea. This petition, it seems, was manufactured by an able electioneering tactician and lawyer, Mr. Thomas Peace, and was presented by him*, as he said, at the special entreaty of the inhabitants of the Borough, to the Trustees at their public meeting; for in those days the Trustees had not discontinued their PUBLIC MEETINGS, for the investigation of the affairs of this institution! Up to this period, the College had been conducted, according to the will of the Founder; and no real cause had been found for departing from his injunctions. Two pretexts, indeed, were furnished by the adviser of the petitioners -that the funds of the College were inadequate to the board of the pupils, and that the inhabitants were unwilling to bind their sons, to adopt the naval service. Had any investigation taken place, the Legislature would have perceived that both were groundless. A reference to the accounts of the Charity would have shown, that its funds were then adequate to the board, clothing, and education of the children within the College, and to the payment of the allowances secured to them, after they had quitted it; and a view of the population of Petersfield, at that time, must have made apparent the futility of the apprehension, that it would not furnish twelve children, whose friends would embrace the opportunity of providing for them, on condition, that they should chuse an eligible service, under circumstances of peculiar advantage. At that time, the town had not fallen into its present state of decay, which it owes to those who have managed its affairs. It was then the residence of several families of respectability; but it has now so much declined, that at the census in 1822, its totalt population, including persons of both sexes and all ages, was only one thousand four hundred and fortysix. Those who visit it now would scarcely guess that, in the * Post, p. 220. There is an error in the last population returns, of the divisions of the parish of Buriton, in which Petersfield is situate. This parish consists of four tythings, namely, Mapledurham, alias, Buriton, Weston, Nursted, and Sheet, and the borough of Petersfield; and are all within the limits of the Manor of Mapledurham, in which the usual courts are annually heldexcept that Petersfield is a reputed manor of itself, under the modern designation of "the Manor of the Borough of Petersfield.”—The fact is, reign of King James the First*, one thousand men, besides women and children, were employed in a woollen manufactory there, exclusive of all its other inhabitants. We do not, however, despair of its revival under better auspices. Mr. John Jolliffe having prevailed on his Co-Trustees to concur in an application to Parliament, they, on the 25th of January, 1744, presented a petition+ to the House of Commons, for leave to bring in a bill, to enable the Trustees, to deviate from the design of the Founder, alleging "that, as Petersfield is not a sea-port, few of the inhabitants are inclined or consenting to have their children instructed in mathematics and navigation only; and in case the said children were so taught and educated, their parents are not able, or if they were, the yearly revenue of the said Charitable Fund cannot be applied to place them out apprentices on board East India Ships, in regard the Captains or Masters thereof refuse to take any such apprentices, so that, although the said Charitable donation was intended for the benefit of the said town and borough of Petersfield, yet as the petitioners, the Trustees, have found by experience, that some of the rules and articles prescribed by the will of the Donor, relating to the said Charity, are impracticable, and cannot be, literally, observed and executed, they are apprehensive, that the said that the Borough was formerly held in fee, under the Lords of the Manor of Mapledurham, by the Mayor and Burgesses of Petersfield, at a feefarm rent, but which was usurped by Mr. Hanbury, in the time of Queen Elizabeth, after he had obtained a grant from her, in fee, of Mapledurham, &c. The inhabitants of Buriton, Weston, and Nursted, are rated to the parish-church, and to the poor of Buriton, which includes the poor of these three tythings. The church, which is very ancient, is situated in the village of Buriton; but the inhabitants of the tything of Sheet maintain their own poor, and are rated to the church at Petersfield, which is a chapel of ease, to the mother-church at Buriton, the Rector of which, appoints the curate of Petersfield, and receives the great and small tythes of that borough. Petersfield maintains its own poor and church, but does not contribute to the church-rate of Buriton. It is situated, nearly, in the centre of these four tythings, which, in former days, constituted part of the borough of Petersfield, as appears, by several of the inquisitions, which were taken after the deaths of the Lords of the Manor of Mapledurham, which formed part of the Honour of Gloucester, from the time of King William the Norman, until the attainder of the Duke of Buckingham, in the reign of King Henry the Eighth, when this, and other manors, &c., belonging to His Grace, became forfeited to the Crown. It has been held, that Petersfield is not a parish, and an order of removal was once quashed on that ground. * See Martin's Index to the Exchequer Records, p. 141.-Mic. T. 8 Jac. Ro. 334-dec. tang. maner.-Tit. Mapledurham. + Com. Journal, Vol. 24. p. 719. town and borough will, in a great measure, be deprived of the benefit of the said donation, and the charitable intention of the said Donor disappointed and defeated, unless the same be explained, and better adapted to THE CIRCUMSTANCES of the said town and borough, by the aid of an Act of Parliament, and therefore, praying, that leave be given to bring in a bill, for explaining the said Charitable Donation, and rendering the same more effectual and beneficial to the parties, for whom the same was intended by the will of the said Richard Churcher the Donor, in such manner as the House shall think proper and expedient." The bill having being brought in, passed, sub silentio, through the House of Commons; and on being taken to the Upper House + received its sanction, without any reference to the Judges, which in later days has proved so beneficial to the Public. t On the 19th March, 1744, this bill received the Royal Assent. A new æra then commenced, and Mr. John Jolliffe, became possessed of ample means to gratify his supporters in the Borough, by defeating THE MAIN AND PRINCIPAL OBJECT OF THE FOUNDER, by the introduction of children into the College, and afterwards placing them out to LAND trades, or other HOME occupations, and by excluding the Foundation boys from the College, where, since this period, they have never been permitted to reside! The Legislature, it is certain, if there had been any opposition to this bill, would not have allowed it to pass.-In modern times such an attempt would have been scouted, as in the recent case of Dulwich College; and the only excuse, which can be made on this occasion, is from the circumstance, that the bill did not originate in the House of Lords, where all bills of this description should be first brought in. At Petersfield, however, the object of the bill was seen, though no one had the courage to oppose it-every one knew it was designed to increase the patronage of Mr. Jolliffe within the Borough, and foresaw, that from his constant residence, and The Act, which will be found at length, post., p. 4., recites the allegations of the petition, and, in substance, discharges the Trustees from the necessity of providing board for the scholars-gives them the option of educating them for the sea, or for other trades-and substitutes six years of age instead of nine, as the earliest period of admission into the school! The framers of this bill have at least the merit of consistency in their attempts to defeat the intentions of the Founder. + Lords' Journal, Vol. 26.-March, 1744. the property he was endeavouring to accumulate within it, the control and management of this institution would be concentrated in his Family! This expectation was soon realized. After the death of the Right Honorable Bilson Legge, the other persons chosen as Trustees of this College, were the personal friends and immediate connexions, of The Jolliffe Family,—some of them were the Members for the Borough, who had been returned, exclusively, by the interest and influence of Mr. Jolliffe,-whilst some of the other Trustees, were the lawyers* and agents+ of his family. But to render their dominion over the concerns of this Charity more complete, they soon after the death of the late Mr. William Jolliffe, and by the deaths of Mr. Tooker, Mr. Richard Eyles, and Captain Joseph Eyles, had the opportunity of electing other members of their family, and, thus, confining it altogether to themselves! By these means Mr. Hylton Jolliffe has become THE SOLE DIRECTOR of this institution-in illustration of which, it is only necessary to refer to his correspondence with one of its Masters. Before we quit this part of the subject, it may be proper to observe, that, notwithstanding, the alleged inadequacy of the funds of the charity to maintain and give effect to all the objects of the Founder; it will appear by the accounts, lately, given in, on oath, by the present Trustees, that the alleged inadequacy of the college funds, was not the true cause of the exclusion of the boys, from their residence in it, and from their allowance of board and lodging, as intended by the Founder; for Mr. John Jolliffe, Mr. William Jolliffe, and Mr. Hylton Jolliffe, had always large annual cash balances in their hands, as will be hereafter shown, more than sufficient to have covered the charge for the board and lodging of the children, after paying for their clothes-the master's salary-the repairs, and even the taxes, of the College-the apprentice-fees-the clothes of the apprentices, and the premiums or rewards for good behaviour at the termination of their servitude. We must now, however, return to the Trustees of this College, in order that their succession may be distinctly shown, so that no misapprehension can arise, from any * Post, p. 41. John Missing, Esq., and John Joseph Powell, Esq., Barristers. Ibid. Mr. Richard Eyles and Sir Joseph Eyles. remark which it may be necessary to make on them, or its management. In the interval between the time of the Foundation of the College in the year 1729, and the passing of the act on the 19th March 1744, the following gentleman had been chosen Trustees : 1727, Oct. 20. Charles Cole, Esq. of Ditcham, vice the Rev. George Aylmer, clerk, deceased. 1729, May 20. Thomas Bates, Esq. of Alton, vice Lewis Buckle, Esq. deceased. 1730, April 13. John Cowper, Esq. of Ditcham, vice Robert Mitchell, Esq. deceased. 1730, July 2. Richard Hassell, Esq. of Petersfield, vice Norton Powlett, Esq. of Rotherfield. Subsequently to this period, there is not an instance to be found in the College books of any boy, being bound to the sea, or evidence of any endeavour of the Trustees to prevail on the East India Directors to take one of the pupils into their Naval Service. Had any application been made to them, it is most probable, the Court of Directors would have embraced it, in compliment to Mr. Churcher's memory, who is the only private individual connected with the trade to India, who has established any institution, in furtherance of their Naval or Military Service. If a communication had been kept up with the East India Company by the Trustees, the most beneficial consequences might have resulted from it, to the inhabitants of Petersfield. For at this period the Company had not founded any of their large schools, and they might have been induced to have thrown their mantle over this benevolent design of Mr. Churcher, and have taken it under their special care and protection. On the 10th September 1745, Mr. Philip Jones was appointed Master of the College vice Mr. Charles Eades, deceased. Mr. Jones took immediate possession, and continued to reside in the College until his death in 1756. It is strictly due to the memories of these excellent individuals to state, that they were most faithful in the discharge of their * Post, p. 216, &c. |