il the Courts should decide otherwise. His solicitors
based their claim, on his behalf, on the plea that a college had not yet
been erected, that no steps had been taken towards its erection, that
there was no intention to proceed with its establishment, and that it
was now too late to comply with the conditions of the will with
reference to time. With respect to the endowment fund, they claimed that
they were not obliged to pay it until a college had been actually
erected as provided in the will. As a result of these claims, a suit was
at once instituted in the Courts by the Royal Institution for the
purpose of obtaining possession of the estate, and on October 3rd, 1820,
the Board passed a resolution authorising their attorney, Mr. Sewell, to
secure the aid of Mr. Stuart as counsel in the case. Mr. Sewell
subsequently had the assistance of Mr. Ogden, Mr. Vallieres de St. Real,
Mr. Griffin, and Mr. Cochrane.

The Board soon realised that if their suit was to be carried to a
successful conclusion they must have funds to meet necessary expenses.
They applied to the Governor-General for financial assistance, and as a
result a sum of L200 was advanced to them as a loan, from the proceeds
of the Jesuits' Estates. They realised, too, that it was necessary at
once to give the College some semblance of organisation. Their
solicitors advised the securing of a Charter without delay, and on
February 7th, 1821, the Secretary of the Board wrote to Mr. Sewell,
stating that "application for a Charter will be made to His Majesty's
Government without loss of time, but it is the unanimous opinion of the
Board that the case should proceed." The Charter [here included as
appendix B] received the sanction of the Crown on March 31st, 1821, and
formed the basis of the court plea of the Royal Institution. Two years
later the Board decided to secure a teaching staff, and by 1824 they had
appointed a Principal, who was to be also Honorary Professor of
Divinity, and four Professors. The latter held merely _pro forma_
appointments, and were intended to fulfil a technical legal requirement;
none of them ever lectured in the University, and when the College was
actually opened five years later those who still remained willingly
resigned to leave the Governors free to fill all Professorships as they
desired. But the fact of their appointment doubtless helped the Board in
the suit then pending.

It is needless here to outline in detail the litigatio