Stannus, of Sheffield, and the Rev. Charles Wicksteed, of Leeds, conducted the services, which were attended by numerous audiences. On the Sunday after, 22nd August, the minister of the chapel, who had been so cheered by the gratifying fact of fourteen young men, as new attenders, taking sittings in the chapel since the opening, appropriately introduced into his eloquent and touching discourse, an allusion to their sacred edifice having “risen from its ruins in a more graceful and commodious form," and concluded in the following words, "It is pleasing to reflect that in this House of Prayer-when we ourselves are gathered to our fathers— our children may still kneel at the altar of our faith, and receive effusions of grace and support and consolation from the God of our worship." CHAPTER XXVIII. THE GREAT LADY HEWLEY CASE. In the old Chapel Accounts occur the following entries :— 1794, May. To half a year's exhibition due, £9. Sept. To half a year's exhibition due, £9. These half-yearly Exhibitions continued to be received by the trustees for a period of years, and were regularly paid over to the minister, e.g., 1793, Nov. 28, By Cash pr. Mr. Warwick, £9. HE REV. JACOB BRETTELL, continued to en Tjoy these exhibitions, though in 1827, and after, the payment is reduced to £8 10s. The final payment was apparently given 20th May, 1830-Lady Hewley's fund, £8 10s.-duly paid over the next day to Mr. Brettell. After that date the minister does not appear to have received anything more from this generous provision of good Lady Hewley. Sir John and Lady Hewley, of the city of York, were possessed of large means, and contributed bountifully to the promotion of Yorkshire Nonconformity, and the support of the Yorkshire Nonconformist ministers. Oliver Heywood received yearly from Lady Hewley the gift of £5. [He also records, Lord Warton £2.] Lady Hewley was the daughter and heiress of Robert Wolrych, Esq., of York; he was a barrister, and had represented his native city in Parliament in the years 1678-1681. In the vestry of St. Saviour Gate (Unitarian) Chapel, York, are two very pleasing portraits of Sir John and his Lady, taken apparently early in their married life, and in the fine characteristic dress of the period. They had also a country residence at Bell Hall, where early and secret Nonconformist worship was conducted. Sir John met with a severe accident from a fall in 1691. His Lady writing to Lady Rokeby, on the sad occasion says, "You may imagine something of my condition. It would be too troublesome to give you the relation of it, the good Lord sanctify it to us both and fit us for the great stroke which cannot be long to us." It is remarkable, that Sir John Hewley's death should occur on "Bartholomew's Day," in1697, in the 78th year of his age, and that his Dame, Lady Hewley, should die on the eve of "Bartholomew's Day," in 1710, both having witnessed with grief and indignation the high-handed ejection of the Presbyterian clergy from the Church of England on "Black Bartholomew's Day," 24th August, 1662. As they had no children, their two sons having died young, it was agreed between them, that her estate should be devoted to pious uses, for which it had been munificently employed during their lives. By a deed, executed in 1692, she conveyed a landed estate to trustees, who were to pay her the proceeds during her life, and, after her death, to appropriate the income, thence arising, to the assistance of small congregations in the Northern counties, and the support of young men training for the ministry, among Protestant Dissenters. The first name among the trustees is that of Sir Thomas Rokeby, the eminent judge, the friend and adviser, not of Lady Hewley only, but of the Nonconformists of the North of England generally. Lady Rokeby and Lady Hewley were personal friends, and corresponded, both adhering to strict Puritanical principles. This noble foundation mentioned, the subsequent fate of which will be recorded, was not the only memorial of Lady Hewley's charity. She founded a Hospital for poor women at York, and left a sum of money for the education of poor children in her native county. Towards the building (in 1693) of the old chapel at York, still retaining its original formation, that of a Greek cross, she was a liberal contributor. THE LITIGATION CONCERNING LADY HEWLEY'S BEQUEST. The subsequent history of this fund may be related from part of the speech delivered by Lord Chancellor Lyndhurst, in the House of Lords, 3rd May, 1844, on the Dissenters' Chapels Bill. At that time litigation had gone on for fourteen years, with respect to the Hewley's Trust Case. The Lord Chancellor said : 66 'Now mark, my Lords, out of what this Bill originates. The circumstances I am about to detail, with respect to a very important case, will satisfy you to demonstration as to the necessity of this measure. I mean the case of Lady Hewley's charity. Give me leave to say, my Lords, that that is not a case standing by itself. There are several other cases of the same nature now pending-many more are threatened. Now, what was the nature of that case? In the deed, by which the Charity was founded, there was no express declaration of the doctrines, which she (the foundress) intended to be inculcated in that establishment. There were vague and general terms, I admit; and what was the consequence? An information was filed in the Court of Chancery. It was necessary to enter into evidence of the most complicated, refined, and difficult description-first to ascertain what the religious opinions of the foundress were. The evidence went to show that she was a Presbyterian. Then, there was another body of evidences for the purpose of showing what were the particular religious opinions of the Presbyterians of that day-a vast body of refined evidenceconflicting evidence, historical evidence, testimony of one set of men opposed to the testimony of others. At last the case came on for hearing before the Vice Chancellor of England. He was of opinion that there had been a violation of trust, and the trustees were dismissed. The same case came before Lord Cottenham, and then before me. I had the assistance of two of Her Majesty's judges, and my decision was in affirmation of the decision of the Vice Chancellor. Afterwards, it was argued for fifteen days at your Lordship's bar, and your Lordships confirmed the judgment pronounced in the courts below. The question arose, who were the parties that were entitled ? What were the religious opinions of Lady Hewley? The Presbyterians said, "It applies to us." The Independents said, "It applies to us." There were several claimants; and I believe they are still depending. But I will tell your Lordships one thing, the costs up to this time amount to very nearly £30,000. They are to be paid out of the charity. Why do I state this? There is not a single case coming within the operation of this Bill that would not, by one week of such inquiry, be entirely annihilated by the expenses of litigation. I know that two or three hundred suits are already talked of as likely to be instituted.” His Lordship referred to the legal claims set up by the Independents to obtain possession of all the old Presbyterian, afterwards called Unitarian chapels. The Royal assent was given to "the Dissenters Chapels Bill, on Friday, 19th July, 1844, which retained the Unitarians in possession of all these numerous chapels and schools attached—“ as if the said Acts had been in force respectively at the respective times of founding or using such meetinghouses, schools, and other charitable foundations aforesaid." It was further enacted, regarding particular religious doctrines or opinions, "that the usage for twenty-five years immediately preceding any suit relating to such Meeting-house, shall be taken as conclusive evidence, that such religious doctrines or opinions shall be construed, as if the said Acts had been in force respectively at the respective times of founding, or using such Meeting-house, schools, and other charitable foundations aforesaid." The Unitarians, it will be understood, were in possession of the greater number of the old Presbyterian Meeting-houses and schools and endowments, and this narrative will have indicated, how this came about, in consequence of the "Open Trusts." providing simply for-" The worship and service of Almighty God," and thus favoring changes of the theological belief. The same families, the same names, were associated with the chapels generation after generation, for example, as this narrative shows,-at Rotherham Meeting-house, the Kirks, Favells, Ramsbottoms. Hatfields, Hattersleys, and at Upper Chapel, Sheffield, the Shores, the Hunters, Fishers, Hobsons. When the threatened legal proceedings, to deprive the Unitarians of these old Chapels, were commenced by the orthodox Nonconformists, the principal members of the chapels, including such as those named above, rose up in arms to defend their just and inherited rights. They were prepared to make any sacrifice of money and effort to retain possession of sanctuaries, endeared to them from childhood, and historically associated with their ancestors. But the Unitarian possessors might not have been able of themselves alone to withstand the powerful and hostile attack made upon them; and to the everlasting honor of the Church of England, a large number of its influential members, in both Houses of Parliament, came chivalrously and nobly forward to defend the rightful claims of a denomination, with whose theological doctrines they were not in sympathy. Eloquent and argumentative speeches in favor of the Bill were delivered by Gladstone, Macaulay, Sir Robert Peel, Sheil, Mark Philips, Inglis, and others, in the House of Commons; and in the House of Lords, by Earl Fitzwilliam, Lord Cottenham, Lord Campbell, and especially by the Lord Chancellor, as already |