case wilson against Dennison and other et e contra S c Ves sen sub nom Att  gentleman v Scott see in re saint Stephen Coleman street Ch d election of  vicarage by trustee not good for want of notice of the meeting trustee must  all join to make presentation valid and bishop may refuse for want of all and  not compellable to institute by quare hinder equity will not compel trustee to  join in presentation if the election be not fair election as well as  presentation be requisite a meeting be requisite for the election in chancery  February S C Ves Albany v bishop of saint Asaph cro Elizabeth it be say by  Lord Hardwicke c who interrupt Mr Wilbraham in his argument that the  presentation to a benefice may be at any time within the six month and the  ordinary can take time to consider and by that mean a lapse incur unless it be  for just cause of refusal and the patron may even present after the six month  at a time before the ordinary collate see Gibs cod burn Eccles law vol  Lancaster v low cro James Lord chancellor after argument at bar there be two  bill the first by Mr Scott for he be principal concern though there be several  coplaintiffs to have the election of he to the vicarage of Leeds establish and  to compel the trustee who do not vote for he to join in a presentation of he  and that the archbishop of York may institute he the second be a information  by the attorneygeneral at the relation of several trustee not at the relation  of the trustee but of Kirshaw and several of the inhabitant thereby set up a  ambler election in the parish at large and to have several regulation in  execute the trust Mr Scott election depend on what be do on the d march and  that August and I be of opinion there be no ground in law or equity to support  his election it be admit on all side that in point of law the presentation of  Mr Scott be invalid and therefore the quare hinder which be bring and  afterward release by one of the trustee can not be maintain for all the  trustee be jointtenants and only twelve of they join in the presentation the  ordinary accept the presentation of the majority but if he refuse he be not  compel such presentation by a quare hinder and the presentation after six  month will lapse Even where a election have be right in point of law yet there  may be certain circumstance where equity will not compel the trustee that  dissent to join in the presentation if every thing be not fair this lead to  the question whether this be a sufficient valid election of Mr Scott the  decree for the regulation of this charity which be make by Lord chancellor  Bacon require a election as well as presentation and that put a end to the  argument that if any of the trustee have sign a presentation it may have be  send to the house of the other trustee and if they sign it it will have be  good but I deny it for there must be a election and to a election a meeting be  necessary the advowson be purchase by the inhabitant of Leeds by a voluntary  subscription and afterward by a decree of Lord Bacon the right of presentation  be vest in twentyfive trustee it happen that at the time of the vacancy of a  incumbent the number of trustee by the death of one of they be reduce to  twentyfour the first meeting be on notice in the church and the intent be to  receive candidate judge of their ability and fitness and to give and hear  reason upon the occasion the twentyfour trustee meet on the d march by  themselves or proxy Mr Scott and Mr Kirshaw be candidate and the trustee  divide twelve and twelve one of the trustee who vote for Mr Kirshaw die in  ambler July follow the consequence be that if every body keep to their former  resolution Mr Scott have a advantage the death of the trustee be know at Leeds  on the that of August and it be resolve to have a meeting on the that that be  very short notice if it have be regular accord seven trustee and five proxy  meet at the king arm and sign a presentation of Scott several objection have  be make to this meeting and to this act saint that the meeting be four month  from the vacancy within which time the ambler er p trustee be direct by the  decree to proceed to election but I be of opinion that part of the decree be  only directory and if all the trustee have meet after that time on proper  notice and there have be a majority on one side I shall have think the  election good and so it be rule in the case of the borough of Launceston in Ro  Abr the trustee by have the legal advowson in they have a right to present at  any time within six month the decree have not take it from they but only fix a  period in order that they may have time to consider of their choice before the  end of the six month the reason of the judgement in the case of Launceston be  because the word of the charter be affirmative d objection the neglect of keep  up the seven assistant preacher accord to the decree but there do not appear  to have be any since nor be any notice take of they in any of the conveyance  to the new trustee the right of patronage be to be exercise by the trustee for  the benefit of the parish but not so as to admit of a devolution quite  otherwise and I be of opinion that by the consent of the trustee and the  parish the assistant preacher may be dispense with and there have be none  since be evidence of such consent this be to be compare to the case of a  presume bylaw where by charter the election be in the corporation in general  and afterward the right of election come to be vest in a select number the  court will presume a ancient bylaw though ambler the corporation be within  time of memory of man and that be the famous case of corporation   I will in  this case suppose such consent and not throw a imputation on so many election  as have be make without they and the archbishop accept the presentation and  institute the person present under such election and indeed the rather as the  assistant preacher be very unnecessary for twentyfive gentleman be the trustee  to elect the assistant be afterward to judge of the ability of the person  elect which be the province of the ordinary d objection that from the nature  of the thing do on the that August it be no election and I be of that opinion  the evidence be only of a meeting of twelve gentleman in order to confirm and  validate the vote which they have give before not to hear proposal and to  deliberate upon they but if it have be so yet it be object that no notice be  give of this meeting to that two answer have be give saint that notice be not  necessary d if it be that there be sufficient notice as to the saint I be  clear of opinion that notice under this trust be necessary that all the  trustee may be present or have a opportunity of be so it be so in all  corporate body whether the election be by the corporation at large or by a  select number notice be require unless the election be to be on the charter or  a particular day in which case every body be oblige to take notice of it so it  be whether all be of equal authority or not and it be not material whether the  notice be general or special if such a act be do which amount to notice  otherwise great inconvenience will follow in the present case the major part  of the trustee will bind the whole and therefore if thirteen meet though  without notice and have divide the majority be seven have bind all the  twentyfive trustee which will be unreasonable it be say no particular person  be to give notice and therefore the law do not require any notice and it be  compare to the case of condition but it be not like they for condition be the  quality of a right those who be desirous of meeting ambler ought to give  notice but then it be say the trustee may differ and meet at different place  it will hardly happen that they shall meet all at the same time at different  place but I shall in that case think that the meeting under the first notice  the most right and proper it be just compare to the case of arbitrator where  some of they meet without notice be give to the other their award be void and  all these objection arise in that case as to the second answer no notice be  give to the trustee previous to the meeting of the twelve friend of Mr Scott  at the king arm on the that August at one of clock on that day Mr Scott meet  Mr Dennison and ask he if he will sign a presentation of hill if such shall be  sign by his twelve friend and acquaint Mm of the intend meeting at the king  arm at three oh clock Mr Dennison tell he there will be a meeting of Mr  Kirshaws friend at five oh clock it be then propose by Mr Scott that his  friend shall put off their meeting till five oh clock and meet Mr Kirshaws but  Dennison refuse it five of the trustee meet at five oh clock no notice be  pretend to have be give to the other trustee and to give this notice its full  effect it be impossible to say it be a reasonable notice be give ambler er p  on the same day with the meeting if proper notice have be give other candidate  may have offer andone of they may have have a majority against the present  candidate one of the trustee sir Henry ibbetson have since change his opinion  and it may have so happen if proper notice have be give before the last  meeting at which his proxy present for he as this be my opinion I need not go  any further but as direction for the management of the trust will be necessary  I will consider the objection to the proxy there be no evidence of proxy be  make at any election before this there be a discretion to be use by the  trustee in elect a proper person to officiate as minister and it be a personal  trust in they and no instance can be produce where in a personal trust a proxy  be allow if the election have be regular a proxy be allow if the election have  be regular a proxy by way of ambler letter of attorney have be good to sign  the presentation but as to the election the trustee can not delegate their  power and I think the proxy be make to vote for a particular person make it  worse for it be clear that the trustee determine his choice for private reason  at home not at the public meeting on general enquiry into the ability and  quality of the candidate and the argument and reason of the other trustee and  it be much easy to prevail on any person at home on any private application  than at a general meeting where the whole conduct of the candidate be discuss  as to the information by the attorneygeneral whether the election endeavour to  be establish by it and the prayer f r the regulation of the trust be proper or  not yet the information ought not to be dismiss if the charity want any  regulation and so it have be determine in the house of lord to establish a  popular election as be pray by the information be contrary to the very essence  of the decree which be recite to be for the more orderly and peaceable  election c it be intend the election shall never devolve on the populace and  therefore the trustee be direct to keep the trust constant fill up the case of  the attorneygeneral at the relation of Bates against the parish of Kilfare bro  p c vo edit see Fearon v web Ves be very strong in point in that case sir  Joseph Jekyl be strike with the appearance of a trust for a parish order a  popular election all the trustee be dead Lord Macclesfield on appeal affirm  the decree but on appeal to the house of lord on saint December the two decree  be reverse and it be adjudge that there be a absolute power in the trustee to  nominate a person to serve c and direct that a new set of trustee all the old  one be dead shall be nominate by a master in chancery the present be a strong  case therefore I be of opinion Mr Kirkshaws election by the populace at large  be void I will direct a meeting to he have in order to fill up the number of  trustee and then a subsequent meeting to he have at a reasonable distance of  time on notice to be give by such trustee as stand first on the listen to  proceed to the election of a minister and I will exclude all proxy therefore  declare a absolute power in the trustee ambler without any devolution on the  parish at large to prevent the inconvenience of a popular election c c this  decree be afterward appeal from and affirm in the house of lord by consent bro  p c Edit Toml p nom Wilson v kirkshaw attorneygeneral v smart Ves sen  attorneygeneral v Parker ib attorneygeneral v white Ves attorneygeneral v  brook Ves attorneygeneral v James atk attorneygeneral v governor of harrow  school Ves but though the relief may in such case be grant yet the state of  the record be to be consider with reference to the question of cost  attorneygeneral v Hartley I W