Letter received by Banks from Sir William Scott, ca 23 November1808 (Series 92.07) - No. 0004

[Page 4]

between the cases of the of the rector & the Bishop or Chapter, is that the Rector has only a Freehold Interest in the possessions of a Rectory;-whereas the intire fee & Inheritance is vested in a Chapter or a Bishop.  It is this distinction, I apprehend, between the nature of the estate of which a rector is seized & that of which a Bishop or Chapter is seized, that creates the difficulty as to the Jurisdiction of the Court of Chancery.  But although no actual Precedent can be cited on this subject there is a Dictum of Lord Hardwick in the case of Knight vs Mosley which appears very applicable; for his Lordship is there reported to say "that an Injunction has been granted even against Bishops to restrain them from selling large quantities of Timber at the instance of the Atty General on the behalf of the Crown the Patron of Bishopricks.  From the expression ascribed to Lord Hardwick, if it be correct, it should seem that he thought the right of Patronage to a Bishoprick, a species of Interest, which gave the Crown a title on which to found its complaint in a Court of Equity to prevent waste.  If this Principle be sound, which seems to have this Dictum of Lord Hardwick for its support, it would I conceive equally sustain an Information on behalf of the Crown in virtue of its Patronage against a Dean & Chapter to restrain them from committing delapidations in a Cathedral Church.  I cannot also but think that there is another ground on which the court of Chancery would be authorized to grant an Information filed at the instance of private relators, in analogy to the Jurisdiction it exercises to prevent abuses of Charities. The Chapter it