774
« on: Monday 08 March 10 21:10 GMT (UK) »
Hi netti,
For about six years I have been researching the history of Spring Hill College, which existed in Birmingham from 1828 until 1886, when it moved to Oxford to become Mansfield College.
Some three or four years ago I discovered that its finances took a battering round about 1838 to 1842 and that this was somehow connected to a coaching in, the Nelson Hotel, in Birmingham's Bull Ring. Some time later I found an 1847 Times report of a Chancery case, Glover v East, which told me little more than that the argument was about the college's finances. In the meantime I had discovered an 1842 mortgage deed under which the college's financial backers granted a mortgage against the inn.
I was determined to find out more so I wrote to the High Court, asking for sight of the records of the case but was told that they would have been destroyed about siix years after the case was concluded. Thinking that was the end of the matter, I shelved that line of research and delved into other areas. Just before Christmas I was discussing my research with a professional historian and mentioned my ftuitless search for the court records and the response I had received from the court. "Maybe, maybe not." was her only reply.
On Christmas Eve I received a CD from her containing over 150 digital photographs of the original parchments in the case. It took me over a month of spare time to transcribe all the documents and a couple more weeks to understand them. The 1842 document seems to have been fraudulent. In 1827 the college's treasurer had bought the inn at a bankruptcy sale, apparently on instruction from a dodgy bank which saw it as an investment. Before the deal could be completed the bank went bust, leaving the treasurer out of pocket to the tune of £13,100. He then fiddled the college trust documrntd to make it sppear that the trust had bought the inn. This worked for a while but by late 1841 the trust began asking awkward questions about where its money had gone, so he hastily arranged a 'sale' to the inn's tenant manager, on mortgage from the trust. The whole case revolved around the trust trying to get its money back.
The only problem I am left with is that although I know what happened to the money after 1854 (it was returned to the trust) I am stilll not sure exactly why, because judgments are held separately from case documents and I am planning a trip to Kew in the near future to try to determine exactly what the court decided. Even the return of the money was not straightforward. The figures being demanded vary from one set of documents to another and the final amount raised depends upon the outcome of an 1855 auction for which, as yet, I have found no records or newspaper reports. That the tenant landlord's daughters ended up with the inn after his death may even mean that it never took place.
Every question I manage to answer raises another three.
Keith
To be honest, I have absolutely no idea where the professional found the case papers. I'm just very grateful that she did.