We have been requested to publish the following reply to the Protest against "p-peal in the case Race Club Cricket Club and Recreation Fund Trustees Shanghai, 14th July, 1874, To Joux Dexr, Esq., and others.
Guytuewny,—Your letter dated the Ist instant was handed to us on the 8th i several days after we had filed an applica tion to appeal from the decision of Sir Hornby in the case of the Stewards of the Race Olub the Cricket (lub," and on the eve of the day appointed by the Court to hear the motion. The object of your letter is to protest against such an appeal.
You remind us that the terms on which the trust was first constituted (on April 1st, 1861), were that "the land in question is to be held for purposes of general recrea-"tion and amusement, and shall never be "diverted from such purposes except by "the unanimous consent of the sharé- "holders."
"The land in question" was the old Cricket ground, which by a deed executed on the 20th of November, 1861, was vested in Trustees, and it appears from an en-Gorsement on this deed, dated April 14th, 1863, that by the desire of the shareholders n sale was then effected. The endorsement is as follows "Under the authority and in due exeeution of the Trust herein granted, wey "the undersigned, have this day sold and transferred the ground or land trusted to "us, at the request of the shareholders, as "by letter hereunto attached by the Con-
"sular seal, said lands to be replaced by "others by subsequent endorsement here-
The authority under which the Trustees acted in selling the old Cricket ground appears in a circular, from which the following are extracts "Tt being found difficult to, accomplish "the sale of this property, owing to the "absence of some shareholders, and the "opinion being universal that its sale is "very desirable in order to obtain means "to purchase a new piece in a more suitable locality, the shareholders are invited "to join in the following disposition of "their interest.
"The Committee, on their part, pledge "themselves to make sale of the property at ones, and apply the proceeds, less the "amount thus returned to the shareholders, for the purchase of a new and "larger recreation ground, and for other "public. purposes, should the amount "exceed the cost of the new ground."
This document was either signed, or afterwards ratified, by all the shareholders, and we regard itas a new declaration of the Trust. Tt proves clearly that no particular piece of land was intended to be preserved, in perpetuity a8 a Recreation round, but that whenever it became very desirable" (as the above quoted Circular expresses it) the land then held might be sold, Furthermore, the Trust was extended from the mere management of a Recreation Ground, to "other public purposes."
The tenor of these documents, together with the remarks of the Judge in 1870, when the Trust was legally constituted by the Supreme Court, have convinced us that our duties as Trustees are not limited to administering the Fund for the benefit of the present public of Shanghai, but that we are equally bound to guard the interests of the future public. What has already happened may happen again, and we have no right to assume that. the time may not come when it will be to the advantage of all concerned to sell the land in the interior of the Race Course, fo sell it, or build upon it, as long as the present Race Course continues to be a means of recreation to a largo and respectable portion of the community, would be, in our opinion, a grave infraction of our Trust, But we would beg you remark that the present result of the recent litigation is to place this public property at the mercy of whoever may own the land now forming the Race Course. The Race Course can be sold at any time, to any person, and for any purpose, without reference to the Trustees of the Recreation Fund. The owners of the Race Course, on the other hand, can now prevent the sale of the interior for building purposes, or they can demand a heavy sum for their permission, even though they be disposing of their own property at the same time, or, refusing this permission, they can them: selves sell, together with the Course, as a very valuable appurtenance, the obligation which this judgment has fixed upon the land of the Recreation Fund.
We do not say that such a result is probable; but it is a contingency against which' we, as guardians of a public trust, feel bound to seek protection. We consider that a large proportion of the value of property entrusted to us has, by the late judgment, been improperly ' transferred from the general public to a private association, whosenumbersand interests depend on the varying support which their special amusement receives from the community.
You state that you are "satisfied " with this judgment. We have believed it to be our duty to consider only whether it is right or wrong, and feeling it to be wrong, we think it necessary to appeal against it.
Furthermore, it cannot have escaped your notice that, during the progress of the suit, the Chief Judge expressed his regret that hehad entered upon the case weighted with certain material information, which he had acquired while a Steward of the Race Club, and which eventually influenced his judgment. Believing as we do, that his rdship Inboured under a misapprehension of the early history of the Recreation Fund, we have another and a strong motive for obtaining a review of his decision by a higher tribunal.
Should our appeal be successful, not only will the trust property be restored toits just value, but the Fund will probably also recover the heavy sum it has now to pay for the costs of the suit. Should, on the other hand, the judgment be affirmed, the final decision will command the confidence and respect of all, In neither case, however, will the public be put to any cost, as we have personally undertaken to bear all the expenses of the appeal. We have ao often expressed our intention to this effect, publicly and privately, that we are at some loss to understand how you could have urged, as a principal objection to the appeal, that you were "unwilling to seo further public funds wasted in vexatious litigation, If this litigation be vexatious we are not to blame. We have acted throughout on the defensive, and even after the commencement of the suit, we endeavoured to stop further proceedings. Several letters, addressed by us with this object to the Committee of the Race Club, were tendered as evidence in Court, but being technically objected to by the Counsel for the Race Club, their publication was prevented.
We may take this opportunity of stating most emphatically that we have never had, and that we have not now, any wish or intention to obstruct the view of the Race Course. Admitting, as we have always dono, that, in the interests of a largo portion of the publi the interior of the Hace Course should remain in such a state that the exterior ring should be available for we assert that the Trustees have ntly and honorably acted on this understanding. We can only regret that we have been forced into resisting the acknowledgment, as a legal right, of what we have been, and atill are, ready to yield in courtesy.
Having full knowledge of the facts, and after anxious and careful deliberation, we have been unanimous as to the duty cast upon us. The performance of thi duty has been arduous and irksome in the extreme, and has entailed upon each of us personal sacrifice and annoyances.
Not the least of these has been to find that our conduct has been called in question by a large and influential body of our fellow residents, but. we regret that we seo no reason for changing our views, and we rest in hope that the course of action on which we have decided may in time be justified.
Wo remain, Gentlemen, Your obedient servants, (Signed) Jour G. Purvow, Chairman, M, Council. W. Keswick, F. B. Fomes, Francis A. Groom, Trustees, Shanghai Recreation Fund,
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.