RICHARD AMER. LAW BOOKSCLLCK. L/NCOINS [Ntt CATC CA«EV STUCCT. L. ONOON J leg; WATEF AGRICULTURA ,.i the Proca i .1 and m UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES SCHOOL OF LAW LIBRARY COUNTRY BAN // '// f, / , London Banl rf. ' . ~ y ^//r/WA?^/3. ERAL ITED s, and a Summary Second Edition, iist Class Monthly as interest. Is. t>d. tics and complete liis invaluable book, Joint Stock Banks pf Costs, Fees and mgement Act, 1887, lur Judge Chalmers with Rules, Forms, jjv, and E. Hough. Bills of Exchange, His Honour Judge (upwards. A Hand- of Middlesbrough, r > ;ant's Clerk. With of England, (II.) Miscellaneous Notes By R. W. Buexie, •CORPORATIONS JTS, 1888. Being Notes and Appen- .Miimii. BV ' J t l l m.n ann iiTin.vc-rT-.. rafKLEE, r»j:i3.', liarristers-at-Law. MINAL LA 1 d COUNTY COUN ACT, 1882; a 'I dices, &c. s.V.mn In cloth, 21s. COUNTY COUNCILLOR'S VADE MECUM.- A Handbook for County Councillors and Aldermen. |.\ Mi m:-, Stephen and Hcbaci K. Miller, LL.B., Authors of "The County Council Com- Crown 8vo. In cloth, 'Js. 6d. COUNTY COUNCILS, MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS AND LOCAL AUTHORITIES COMPANION AND DIARY. complete work of reference in connection with County and Borough Administration extant. Compiled and edited by Sir J. R. Somers Vine, C.M.G., F.R.G.S., F.S.S. Editions, with Diary three days to a page. No. 1, bound in cloth, lettered, 10s. 6d. No. 2, bound in crimson Morocco, gill edges, &c, and Subscriber's name lettered on cover, 15s. COUNTY COURTS ACT, 1888:— Queen's Printers' Copy, with an introduction indicating the leading alterations made by the Act, a Comprehensive Index, £e.. &c, and the County Courts Admiralty Jurisdiction Acta, 1868 and 1869, with a separate Index, by R. T. Hunter, Chief Clerk County ConrJr, Stockton-on-Tees. Second Edition. In boards, cloth backs, 5s. The same maybe had With tLo Ail Interleaved fot Notes. In boards, (is. 21 \ 27, GREAT WINCHESTER STREET; 85 & S6. LONDON WALL; 49, PARLIAMENT STREET: and FINSBTJ.RY FACTORIES. WATER LOW $ SONS LIMITED, LAW PUBLISHERS LIST OF PUBLICATIONS-continued. COUNTY COURT RULES, 1889, with an Index to the Pages, Orders, Pules, Forms, and Fees, an Alphabetical List of Forms (referring to page, order, and rule), and Table showing the Fees and Costs on any given sum. By R. T. Hunter, Chief Clerk, County Court, Stockton-on-Tees. In boards, 7s., or in roan, 10s. 6d. The same Index in separate form, in boards, 3s. 6d. COSTS IN THE COUNTY COURT under the County Court Acts, 1S88, and Rules of 1889 and 1892, with the Sections and Rules relating thereto and Precedents. By R. T. Hunter, Chief Clerk, County Couit, Stockton-on-Tees. Price, Gs. DEBTORS AND CREDITORS.— A Guide to the Proceedings for Recovery of Debt by Action in the County Courts or in 1he High Court, and the Administration of Insolvent Estates, showing the position of Debtors and Creditors under the various proceedings. By Ernest Saville, of the Bankruptcy Department, Board of Trade. In cloth, 3s. (id. DEEDS OF ARRANGEMENT ACT, 1887, AND THE BANKRUPTCY (DISCHARGE AND CLOSURE ACT), 1887, with Rules, Forms, and Scales of Fees prescribed thereunder ; also with Notes and Index. By His Honour Judge Chalmers and B. Hough, Inspector in Bankruptcy, Board of Trade. In cloth, 3s. I'd. DUE DATE TABLES FOR ACCEPTING BILLS OF EXCHANGE. Compiled by Henry Bell and John Montgomery, Jr. These Tables are most useful to Bankers, Merchants, Manufacturers, and others, are perpetually serviceable, and suffer no alteration from year to year. In cloth, 7s. lid. DUTIES OF EXECUTORS. By F. VV. Dendy, Solicitor and Notary. Sixth Edition. Revised in accordance with the Finance Act, 1894. Post free, Is. 8d. ELECTORAL BOUNDARIES OF THE UNITED KINGDOM, being Schedules 5, 6 and 7 of the Parliamentary Elections (Redistribution) Act, 1885. With Index. In boards, 2s. 6d. » ENGLISH MUNICIPAL CODE; or, the .MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS (Consolidation) ACT, 1882, with Stntutes and Cases, from 1882 to 1888, Notes, Comments, References, Statistical Appendix and Voluminous Index, by Sir J. R. Somems Vine, C.M.G., F.R.G.S., F.S.S. Third Edition. In cloth, 7s. 6d. ENGLISH MUNICIPAL INSTITUTIONS : THEIR GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT STATISTI- CALLY ILLUSTRATED.—" A most useful and valuable work."— Vide Public Pies. By Sir J. R. Somers Vine, CMC, F.R.G.S., F.S.S. Royal 8vo, cloth, 10s. 6d. FORM OF BILLS OF SALE UNDER THE BILLS OF SALE ACT (1878) AMENDMENT 'ACT, 1882. By Stanley Buckmaster, M.A., of the inner Temple, Barristev-at-Law. In cloth, 2s. 6d. FRANCHISE ACTS, 1884-5, being the Representation of the People Act, 1884; Registration Act, 1885; Parliamentary Elections (Redistribution) Act, 1885, and Medical Relief Disqualification Removal Act, 18S5, with Introduction and Notes. By Miles Walker Mattinson, Barrister-at-Law. In boards, 2s. lid. GENERAL RAILWAY ACTS, 1830— 1884.— A Collection of the Public General Acts for the Regulation of Railways, including the Companies, Lands, and Railways Clauses Consolidation Acts. Fourteenth I'dition, as amended to close of the Session, 1884. By Jas. Bigg, Esq. In cloth, 21s. GUIDE TO THE LAW AND PRACTICE OF PETTY SESSIONS, with the Summary Jurisdiction Act. 1879. By Edward T. Ayers, Solicitor and late Assistant Clerk to Justices, Great Yarmouth. In cloth, os. GUIDE TO THE LAW OF DISTRESS FOR RENT. A handbook for Landlords, Land Agents, Certified Bailiffs, and others. By R. T. Hunter, Chief Clerk, County Court, Stockton-on-Tees. Seventh Edition. In cloth, 3s. 6d. net. GUIDE TO THE PREPARATION OF BILLS OF COSTS (PRIDMORE'S), containing Practical Directions for Taxing Costs, and complete Precedents of Bills of Costs in all the Divisions, in con- formity with the present Practice. Ninth Edition. By Chas. W. Scott, one of the Principal Clerks in the Chancery Taxing Office, Royal Courts of Justice. In cloth, 25s. HI NDB00K OF THE LAW RELATING TO THE MANAGEMENT OF PARLIAMENTARY, "OUNTY COUNCIL AND MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS. A statement of the Law relating to the machinery of Elections. Second Edition. By H. Stephen, Barrister-at-Law. In cloth, Is. HANDBOOK TO THE ESTATE DUTY, comprising the Finance Acts, 1894 and 1896, with a comment thereon, an Appendix of Forms, Duties, &c, and an Index, by Alfred W. Soward, of the Legacy and Succession Duty Office, Somerset House. Second Edition. In cloth, 5s. net. HANDBOOK TO THE SMALL HOLDINGS ACT, 1892, AND THE STATUTORY PROVISIONS INCORPORATED THEREIN. By Horace E. Miller, LL.B., Barristsr-at rl,aw. In cloth, 2s. 6d. HANDBOOK TO THE STAMP DUTIES, containing the text of the Stamp Act, 1891, and a complete Alphabetical Table of all Documents liable to Stamp Duty. By H. S. Bond, Esq., of the Solicitors' Department, Inland Revenue, Somerset House. Ninth Edition. Post free, 2s. HIRE-PURCHASE SYSTEM.— An Epitome of the Law relating to all matters connected with Hire- Purchase Agreements, and having special reference to the decision of the House of Lords in " Helby v. Matthews." By William H. Russell. Solicitor, Cheltenham. In cloth, 2s. lid.net. 25. 26 & 27, GREAT WINCHESTER STREET; 85 & 86, LONDON WALL • 49, PARLIAMENT STREET; and FINSBURY FACTORIES. y &/70. ^&^r-z^L*& 5. )■ 6. 8. >) 9. i) 10. H 11. 12. 13 )) 14. >! 15. •• 1(3. 11 17. 11 18. 1) 19. ., 20. <1 21. 11 22. 1> 23. 11 24. >> 25 26 ally become Tenant irnmgs minis uld pay 27. Rateable Hereditament Xet Annual Value Where occupier cannot leg Beneficial Occupation Valuable Occupation Exclusive Occupation Existing Value Buildings with Machinery Statutory Prohibition against F Property rateable in communibu Parochial Principle Rent a Hypothetical Tenant wo Non-Parochial Earnings Owner — Occupier Promoters of Undertakings under Lands 01 Act Yearly Tenancy — Rateable Vain Lease — Rateable Value Weekly Tenancy — Rateable Va Occupier for Short Term . Deductions — Rates and Taxes Deductions — Renewal Where Tenant contracts to do 1 Deductions — Sewer Kate . Deductions — Water Rate . Deductions — Tenant's Income-Tax Deductions — Landlord's Property-Tax and Land Tax liability of Outgoing and Incoming Occupier for Rates .... •pans 1-89 3 4 8 10 13 20 32 36 42 44 47 48 52 53 58 61 63 64 66 66 67 70 70 71 71 71 72 CONTENTS. TITLE I.— {continued). Article 28. Exemptions from Rating . Crown Property Prisons Post Office . Fortifications Royal Academy Museum Royal Bridge Reformatory and Industrial Schools County Buildings . Police .... ( 'ourts of Justice . County Council Premises Personal Property Turnpike Tolls ( 'liurches and Chapels . Literary, Art, and Scientific Societies Lighthouses Volunteer Storehouses . Sunday and Bagged Schools Ambassadors and Attaches Easements Unoccupied Property Allotments, Orchards, Agricultural Lan Canals under Local Acts Property exempted by mistake TITLE II.— Rating of Railways and Tramways Article 29. Bent payable by tenant from year to year 30. What gross receipts include 31. Toll paid to another Company . 32. Receipts from trade upon another Com] Lines ...... 33. Free Running Powers 34. Railway assessed irrespective of 1: derived from Occupation 35. Parochial Principle .... 36. Contributive Value .... 37. Interest on Capital and Tenant's Profits 38. Things essential to Railway 39. Deductions for Renewals . 40. Loss on Branch Line 41. Goodwill, Parliamentary Expenses, and Land lord's Income-Tax 42. Where Railway Company lets part of it Premises 43. Bent paid for use of Station 44. Deductions for Stations . PAGE 72-89 , 72 74 75 76 76 76 76 77 77 77 78 79 80 80 81 81 85 86 87 87 87 87 87 88 90- mv s nefit 133 90 94 97 98 99 102 103 108 115 117 119 122 123 124 124 127 CONTENTS. TITLE II (continued). Article 45. Stations — how assessed . ,, 46. Hate on Prospective Value of Occupation. 47. Proof of Receipts or Profits 48. Rating of Tramways . . . . ,, 49. Tramways rated on Parochial Principle TITLE III.-Rating of Canals Article . F >0. How Canals are rated ,, 51. Canal rateable at Value of Adjacen ,, 52. Parochial Principle . ., 53. Profits of Lock 54. Compensation payable under Act of tion ..... ")"). Exemption from Kates . t Land XI p u.i. 130 130 131 131 133 134-144 134 135 140 142 Incorpora- TITLE IV— The Rating of Gas, Electric Light and Water Companies 14. ; Article 56. Gas, Electric Light, and Water Companies rateable ...... „ 57. Rateable Value ..... „ 58. Apportionment of Rateable Value — Parochial Principle ...... ,, 59. Works in excess of actual requirements . ,, 60. Non-Parochial Earnings . ,, 61. Statutory Restriction to Earnings . ,, 62. Things attached to Freehold, or essential to working of Company .... TITLE V— Rating of Docks and Harbours Article (33. Annual value of Docks .... ,, 1)4. Rating of Docks ..... ,, 65. Harbour Dues — when rateable . ., 66. Statutory Prohibition against Earnings „ 67. Parochial Principle ..... „ 68. Deduction for Floating Capital . 69. Premises used in connection with Docks . ,, 71). Machinery attached to Docks 71. Where Dock Company lets part of its Property TITLE VI.— Rating of Moorings, Floating Piers, Ferries, Navigable Rivers and Bridges . . 180-192 Article 72. Moorings — when rateable .... 180 „ 73. Floating Piers, Barges, or Dock rateable . 182 „ 74. Pier beyond low water-mark .... 185 „ 75. Rating of Ferries 186 ., 76. Navigable Rivers 188 77. Rating of Bridges 189 ,, 78. Apportionment of Rateable Value of Bridge . 191 143 144 -161 145 147 149 156 157 159 159 179 162 163 168 171 172 176 177 178 178 Xll CONTENTS. TITLE VII— Rating of Mines, Quarries, Pits, and Cemeteries 193-211 Article 7'. 1 . .Mines. Quarries, Pits, etc., rateable 80. Rating of Tin, Lead, and Copper Mines ., 81. Coal Mine rateable at Improved Value . ,. 82. Royalty to be taken into account as part of ' Rent . . . . ,. 83. Royalty payable " in kind " . 84. Mine in more than one Parish ;, 85. Coprolites ...... 86. Ratine,' of Cemeteries .... 193 196 199 201 204 207 208 209 TITLE VIII.— Eating of Woods, Plantations, Saleable Under- wood, Sporting Eights and Advertising Stations 212-222 Article 87. Land used for Wood, Plantation, or Saleable Underwood rateable .... 212 88. Right of Sporting rateable .... 217 89. Rating of Fishery — Deduction for rate imposed under Local Act . . . 220 90. Rating of Advertising Stations ... 222 TITLE IX— Rating of Tithe Eent-charge . . . 223-231 Article 91. Tithe Rent-charge — how rateable . . . 223 92. Rent tenant from year to year would pay for Tithe Rent-charge 227 ., 93. Xo Deduction for Voluntary allowance to Minister out of Tithe Rent-charge . . 228 ,, 94. No Deduction for Curate's Salary . . . 229 95. Deductions not allowed . . . . . 230 TITLE X - Procedure on Appeal Against a Rate 232-278 Section I. — Outside the Metropolis . . 232-257 Article 96. Objection to Valuation List .... 232 97. Service of Notice 236 ,, 98. Assessment Committer — Right of Audience . 236 „ 99. Evidence before Assessment Committee . . 236 100. Objection to alterations in Valuation List . 237 „ 101. Appeal to Special Sessions .... 238 102. Notice of Appeal to Special Sessions . . 241 103. Assessment Committee as respondents ._ . 244 ,, 104. Special Sessions — Right of Audience . . 245 ,, 105. Special Sessions — Power of Justices . . 245 106. Appeal to Quarter Sessions from Special Sessions ....... 246 „ 107. Appeal to Quarter Sessions from Assessment Committee . . . . . . 246 PA G K CONTENT,?. TITLE X.— {continued). Article 108. Notice of Appeal to Quarter Sessions . . 247 109. Case stated for opinion of Queen's Bench after Notice of Appeal to Quarter Sessions . 24».» ,, 110. Arbitration after Notice of Appeal to Quarter Sessions ....... 250 ,, 111. Arbitration by order of Quarter Sessions . 252 112. Quarter Sessions— Right of Audience . . 253 ., 113. Power of Quarter Sessions to amend defect in Notice of Appeal ..... 253 ,, 114. Powers of Quarter Sessions .... 254 „ 115. Quarter Sessions may state case for opinion of High Court 256 Section II.— In the IfetropoUs. Article 116. Quinquennial Assessment .... 257 ., 117. Notice of alteration in Gross or Rateable Value 25s 118. Person aggrieved by Clerical Error . . . 251) „ 119. Objection to Valuation List .... 259 „ 120. Notice of Objection— to whom given . . 260 121. Assessment Committee— Right of Audience . 261 122. Assessment Committee— Evidence . . . 261 123. Objections to alterations in Valuation List . 262 124. Objections to Supplemental List . . . 262 „ 125. Objections to Provisional List . . . 263 ,-, 126. Appeal to Special Sessions .... 264 „ 127. Form of Notice of Appeal to Special Sessions . 265 128. Appellant to Special Sessions must enter into Recognizance ...... 266 „ 129. Respondents to an Appeal to Special Sessions. 267 „ 130. Special Sessions— Right of Audience . . 267 „ 131. Powers of Justices at Special Sessions— Costs . 267 132. Appeal to Quarter Sessions from Assessment Committee and Special Sessions . . 268 133. On whom Notice of Appeal to Quarter Sessions must be seiwed . . . . . 270 134. Appellant to Quarter Sessions must enter into Recognizances ...... 272 „ 135. Appeals to Quarter Sessions to be entered by Petition ...... 273 „ 136. Case to be stated by Appellant and Respondent 274 „ 137. Case stated by consent after Notice of Appeal 275 „ 138. Quarter Sessions— Right of Audience . . 275 „ 139. Quarter Sessions— Power of Justices to compel production of Evidence .... 276 „ 140. Powers of Justices at Quarter Sessions— Costs 277 „ 141. Appeal from Quarter Sessions by Special Case . 277 xiv CONTENTS. PAGE ( )i(lcrs Regulating the Proceeding's on Appeals under the Valuation (.Metropolis) Act, 1869 ....... 279-281 Scheme for Regulating the Holding of Courts of Quarter Sessions for the County of London 282-283 APPENDIX— A. The Statutes {Vide Tahle of Statutes, p. xxxiii) B. Specimen Valuations ..... I. Valuation of a Railway II. Valuation of portion of Metropolitan Railway III. Valuation of a Dock Company IV. Valuation (in outline) of a Dock Company V. Valuation of a Gas Company VI. Valuation of an Electric Light Company VII. Valuation of an Electric Light Company VIII. Valuation of a Water Company . 286-490 493-507 493 496 4 ( .is 499 501 503 505 506 TABLE OF CASES. 42,43 73 145 23 213 Allan v. Overseers of Liverpool, L.R. 9 Q.B. 180 ; 43 L.J.M.C. 69 : 30 L.T. 93 ; 22 W.R. 330 22, 23 Allrhurch v. Hendon Union, (1891) 2 Q.B. 436 ; 61 L.J.M.C. 27 ; 65 L.T. 450 . 6 Allen (Elizabeth), In re, (1894) 2 Q.B. 924; 63 L.J.M.C. 267; 43 W.R. 141; .59 J.P. 229; 10 K. 514 332,389 Allison v. Monkwearmouth, 4 E. & B. 13 ; 23 L.J.M.C. 177 ; 18 Jur. 1075 50, 51 Altrincham Union Assessment Committee '•. Cheshire Lines, 15 Q.B.D. 597 50 J.P. 85 Amherst v. Somers, 2 T.R. 372 Atkins r. Davies, Cald. 315 Attorney General v. Sefton, 11 H.L.C. 257 ; 34 L.J. Ex. 98 ; 12 L.T. 242 Aubrey r. Fisher, 10 East 446 B Badger v. South Yorkshire Railway and Dun Navigation Company, 1 E. & E. 347; 28 L.J.M.C. 118; 7 W.R. 130 29 Batcheldor v. Hodges, 4 A. & E. 592 293,294 Bedford (Duke of) v. Emmett, 3 B. & A. 366 26 Bedford (Duke of) v. Overseers of St. Paul, Covent Garden, 51 L.J.M.C. 41 ; 45 L.T. 616; 30 W.R. 411 ; 46 J.P. 581 25,26 Bell v. Crane, L.R. 8 Q.B. 481 ; 42 L.J.M.C. 122 ; 29 L.T. 207 ; 21 W.R. 911 . 87, 385 Bell v. Postlethwaite, 5 E. & B. 695; 25 L.J. Q.B. 63 .... 251,350 Bennett v. Edwards, 7 B. & C. 586 and 8 B. & C. 702 293 Birmingham Canal Navigation Co. v. Birmingham, 19 L.T. 311 127, 128, 129, 135 Birmingham Overseers v. Shaw, 10 Q.B. 868 ; 18 L.J.M.C. 89 ; 13 Jur. 357 . 81, 82 Bishopwearmouth v. Earl of Durham, vide Reg. v. Durham. Blackpool Pier Co. v. Fylde Union, 46 L.J.M.C. 189 ; 36 L.T. 251 . . . 185 Blazer Fire Lighter Co., In re, (1895) 1 Ch. 402 ; 64 L.J. Ch. 161 ; 71 L.T. 665 ; 43 W.R. 364 ; 13 R. 52 7 Blythe Harbour Commissioners v. Tynemouth Union, (1894) 2 Q.B. 675; 63 L.J.M.C. 274 ; 71 L.T. 34 ; 59 J.P. 4 ; 9 P. 618 . . . . 168, 170 Brecon Market v. St. Mary, Brecon, 36 L.T. 109 26 Bristol (Governor of Poor of) v. Mayor of Bristol, 18 Q.B.D. 549 ; 56 L.J. Q.B. 320 ; 56 L.T. 641 60 Bristol (Overseers) v. Wait, 1 A. & E. 264 235 Bristol (Governor of Poor of) v. Wait, 5 A. & E. 1 ; 5 L.J.M.C. 113 . . 15, 75, 87 Bruce v. Willis, 11 A. & E. 463 ; 9 L.J.M.C. 43 28, 188 Burland v. Kingston-upon-Hull, 3 B. & S. 271 ; 32 L.J.Q.B. 17 ; 7 L.T. 316 ; 11 W.R. 33; 9 Jur. N.S. 275 240 Burnley r. Methley, 1 E. & E. 789; 28 L.J.M.C. 152 293 Burton-on-Trent Corporation v. Churchwardens of Egginton, 24 Q.B.D. 197 ; 59 L.J.M.C. 1 ; 62 L.T. 412 8, 14, 17 Bute v. Grindall, 1 T.R. 388 74 TABLE OF CASES. Chaloner v. Bolckow. 3 App. Cas. 933 : 47 L.J.C.P. 562 : 39 L.T. 134 : 26 W.R. 541 198, 445 Chanter v. Glubb. 9 B. & C. 479 226 Chappell v. St. Botolph. (1892) 1 Q.B. 561 . B5 L.T. 581; 40 W.R. 192: 56J.P. 310 222,448 Chatfield v. Ruston. 3 B. & C. 863 226 Chidley r. West Ham, 32 L.T. 486 ; 39 J.P. 310 40.41 Chorlton-npon-Medlock r. Chorlton Union. 51 L.J.Q.B. 158 : 47 L.T. 96 . . 44 Clarendon (] - s's, Westminster, 10 C.B. S06 ; 20 L.J.M.C. 213 ; 15 Jur. 492 82, 250, 349 Clark v. Cnckfield, 21 L. J.Q.B. 349 Clark r. Fisherton-Angar, 6 Q.B.D. 139: 50 L.J.M.C. 33: 29 W.R. 334 45 J.P. 358 Clark r. Woods. 2 Ex. 395 : 17 L.J.M.C. 189 gg . Hands. 44 Ch. D. 503 : 59 L.J. Ch. 477 : 62 L.T. 502 : 38 W.R 433 Clive v. For, 39 J.P. 774 Coltness h < >.v. Black, 6 App. Cas. 315; 51 L.J.Q.B. 626; 46 L.T. 145 29 W.R. 717: 46 J.P. 20 iber v. Berkshire J.L. 9 App. Cas. 61 : 53 L.J.M.C. 239: 50 L.T. 405 Cory v. Bristow, 2 App. Cas. 262 : 46 L.J.M.C. 273 : 36 L.T. 595 : V W.R 3*3 Cory v. Greenwich. L.R. 7 C.P. 499 : 41 L.J.M.C. 142 : 27 L.T. 150 . Sawle, 2 Q..B. 862 ; 11 L.J.M.C. 62 s . Alsop. L.R. 6 C.P. 315 : 40 L.J.C.P. 53 : 23 L.T. 589 ; 19 W.E. 131 319 30,49 291 51 35 194 79 24, 180 182 205 393 Daniel r. Grade. 6 Q.B. 145 : 13 L.J.Q.B. 309 : 8 Jur. 708 ... 203 De la Beche r. St. Jam* s's, W< stminster, 4 E. & B. 385: 24 L.J.M.C. 74 : 1 Jur. N 3. 375 76 Dent r. Commondale J.P. 519 7 Devonshire Duke of) r. Barrow Hematite Steel Co., 2 Q.B.D. 286 : 4^> L.J.Q.B. 435 : 36 L.T. 355 : 25 W.R. 469 198, 445 Dewsburvand Heckmondwike Waterworks Board r. Penist>>ne Union. 17 Q.B.D. : .T.M.C. 121 : 54 L.T. 592 : 34 W.R 622 : 50 J.P. 644 . . 159 Dodds r. South Shields A ment Committee. 1895) 2 Q.B. 133 : 64 L.J.Q.L. 508 : 72 L.T. 645 ; 43 W.R. 532 : 59 J.P. 452 : 14 R. 422 . 30. 49, 52 Doneaster Union v. Manchester. Sheffield and Lincolnshire Railway Company. (1895) A.C. 133 (note): 71 L.T. 585: 6 R. 280 29,188 Durham County Council >: Chester-le-Street. (1891) 1 Q.B. 330 : 60 L.J.M.C. 9 ; 63 L.T. 461 77 Early's Case. Sir Anthony. 2 Bulstrode 354 47 East and West India Dock Company <•. Poplar, vide Reg. >\ Poplar. East Dean f. Everett. 30 L.J.M.C. 117 : 7 Jur. N.S. 124 . . . . 290, 301 :n Counties Railway Company. //< re, 5 E. i: B. 974: 25 L.J.M.G 49: 2 Jur. N.S. 161 317 East London Railway Company '•. Whitechureh. L.R. 7 H.L. 81 : 43 L.J.M.i . 159; 30 L.T. 412 : 22 W.R. 665 58,59 TABLE OF CASES. xvil PAGE Edwards v. Rusholme, L.R. 4 Q..B. 554 ; 38 L.J.M.C. 153 72 Electric Telegraph Oo. v. Salford, 11 Ex. 181: 24 L.J.M.C. 146; 1 Jut. X.S. 733 • 24 Blstone v. Rose, L.R. 4 Q.B. 4 ; 9 B. & S. 509 : 38 L.J.Q.B. 6 : 19 L.T. 280 : 17 W.R. 52 239 Esdaille v. City of London Onion, 19 Q.B.D. 431: 56 L.J.M.C. 149: 57 L.T. 749 226 Evans. Ex parte, 9 Q.B. 279 : 15 L.J.Q.B. 335 253 Eyre v. Smallpage, 2 Burr. 1059 74 Eyton v. Mold. 6 Q.B.D. 13 : 50 L.J.M.C. 39 : 43 L.T. 472 : 29 W.R. 122 : 45J.P. 54 215,216,219,441 Farmer r. London and North-Western Railway Co.. 20 Q.B.D. 788 : 59 L.T. 542 : 36 W.R. 590 61 Fitzhardinge (Lord) v. Pritchett, L.R. 2 Q.B. 135 : 8 B. & S. 216 : 36 L.J.M.C. 49 ; 15 L.T. 502 : 15 W.R. 640 213 Fletton, ex part,. 2 E. & E. 712 : 29 L.J.M.C. 205 : 8 W.R. 432 : 6 Jur. X.S. 822 352 Fox v. Davies. 6 C.B. 1 1 ; 18 L.J.C.P. 48 293,317 Freeman v. Read, 9 C.B.X.S. 301 ; 30 L.J.M.C. 123 : 9 W.R. 141 ; 7 Jur. x.s. 546 255, 344 Frend v. Tolleshunt Knights, 1 E. & E. 753 : 28 L.J.M.C. 169 . . . . 229 Fulhani Union v. Wells, 20 Q.B.D. 749: 57 L.J.M.C. 112; 59 L.T. 103: 36 W.R. 858 ; 52 J.P. 663 263, 422 Gambier v. Lydford (Overseers of Poor of), 3 E. & B. 346 ; 23 L.J.M.C. 69 . 74 Gay v. Mathews, 4 B. & S. 425 : 33 L.J.M.C. 14 : 8 L.T. 674 : 11 W.R. 922 : 9 Jur. N.S. 716 236,255,344 Gifford. Fox & Co. v. Chard Union, 63 L.T. 249 42, 119 Grand Junction Canal Company v. Heniel Hempstead, L.R. 6 Q.B. 173 : 40 L.J.M.C. 25 : 24 L.T. 228 : 19 W.R. 443 137 Grand Junction Canal Company v. King's Langley, L.R. 6 Q.B. 173 : 40 L.J.M.C. 25 ; 24 L.T. 22S ; 19 W.R. 443 137 Grant v. Oxford Local Board. L.R. 4 Q.B. 9 : 38 L.J.M.C. 39 : 19 L.T. 378 : 17 W.R. 76 183 Great Eastern Railway Co. v. Haughley, L.R. 1 Q.B. 666 ; 35 L.J.M.C. 229 : 7 B. & S. 624 ; 14 L.T. 458 ; 14 W.R. 779 ; 12 Jur X.S. 596 . . 93, 111, 121 Great Western Railway Co. v. Badgworth, L.R. 2 Q.B. 251 : 36 L.J.M.C. 33 ; 15 W.R. 579 101 Great Western Railway Co. v. Denehworth, 25 J.P. 342 88 Great Western Railway Co. v. Melksham Union, 34 J.P. 692 ... . 119 Greenwich r. Metropolitan Board of Works, vide Reg. v. Metropolitan Board of Works. Greig v. University of Edinburgh, L.R. 1 H.L. Sc. App. 348 . . . . 16, 77 Guest v. East Dean. L.R. 7 Q.B. 334 : 41 L.J.M.C. 129 : 26 L.T. 422 : 20 W.R. 332 195 xviii TABLE OF CASES. H PAGE Hackett v. Andrews, 16 C.B.N.S. 38 ; 33 L.J.M.C. 137 ; 9 L.T. 769 : 12 W.E. 433 227 Hackney Case, vide Reg. v. Goodchild. Hare v. Putney, 7 Q.B.D. '223 ; 5o' L.J.M.C. 81 ; 45 L.T. 337 ; 29 W.R. 721 ; 46 J.P. loo 72, 191, 392 Harter p. Salford (Overseers), 6 B. & S. 591 : 34 L.J.M.C. 206 : 13 W.R. 861 : 11 Jur. N.S. 1036 33 Hawker v. Meld, 20 L.J.M.C. 41 ; 1 L.M. & P. 606 352 Hay ward v. Brinkworth, 10 L.T. 608 48 Hieks v. Dunstable, 48 J.P. 326 31 Hilton v. Bowe's, L.R. 1 Q.B. 359 ; 35 L.J.M.C. 137 ; 13 L.T. 512 ; 14 W.R. 365 220 Hobson r. Gorringe, (1897) lCh. 182 40 Hodgson v. Carlisle Local Board, 8 E. & B. 116 78 Holborn Union v. Chertsey Union, 15 Q.B.D. 76 ; 54 L.J.M.C. 137; 53 L.T. 656; 33 W.R. 698 ; 50 J.P. 36 250,349 Holborn Union v. St. Leonard's, Shoreditch, 28 L.T. 106 ; 21 W.R. 541 . . 87 Holland v. Hodgson, L.R. 7 C.P. 328; 41 L.J.C.P. 146; 26 L.T. 709; 20 W.R. 990 40 Holywell Union Assessment Committee v. Halkyn District Mines Co., (1895) A.C. 117 ; 64 L.J.M.C. 113 ; 71 L.T. 818 ; 59 J.P. 566 ; 11 R. 98 . . 23, 28 Hoyle v. Oldham Union, (1894) 2 Q.B. 372 ; 63 L.J.M.C. 178 ; 70 L.T. 741 ; 58 J.P. 669 ; 9 R. 207 . . . . . ; . . . . 33 I Inland Revenue Commissioners v. Forrest, 15 App. Cas. 334 ; 63 L.T. 36 ; 39 W.R. 33 ; 54 J.P. 772 82 Inruan v. Kirkdale, vide Allan v. Overseers of Liverpool. J Jones v. Mersev Docks and Harbour Board, vide Mersey Docks Cases. K Keighley Local Board v. Keighley Churchwardens, 29 J. P. 71 . . . . 80 Kenrick v. Guilsfield, L.R. 5 C.P.D. 41 ; 49 L.J.M.C. 27 ; 41 L.T. 624 ; 28 W.R. 372 218, 442 Kittow v. Liskeard Union, L.R. 10 Q.B. 7 ; 44 L.J.M.C. 23 ; 31 L.T. 601 ; 23 W.R. 72 195 Laing v. Bishopwearrnouth, 3 Q.B.D. 299 ; 47 L.J.M.C. 41 ; 37 L.T. 781 ; 26 W.R. 351 41, 42, 119 Lamplugh v. Norton, 22 Q.B.D. 452 ; 58 L.J.Q.B. 279 ; 37 W.R. 422 ; 53 J.P. 389 225 Lamprell v. Billericay Union, 3 Ex. 283 ; 18 L.J. Ex. 282 .... 319 TABLE OF CASES. xix PAGB Lancashire J J. v. Cheetham, L.R. 3 Q.B. 14 ; 8 B. & S. 548 ; 37 L.J.M.C. 12 ; 16W.E. 124 79 Lancashire JJ. v. Stretford, E. B. & E. 225 ; 27 L.J.M.C. 209 ; 4 Jur. 3ST.S. 1274 77 Lancashire Telephone Company v. Manchester Overseers, 14 Q.B.D. 267 ; 54 L.J.M.C. 63 ; 52 L.T. 793 ; 33 W.R. 203 ; 49 J.P. 724 . 24 Lancaster Commissioners v. Barrow-in-Furness, (1897) 1 Q.B. 166 ; 66 L.J.Q.B. 90 ; 75 L.T. 358 ; 61 J.P. 21 •. . 86 Lawrence v. Tolleshunt Knights, 2 B. & S. 533 ; 31 L.J.M.C. 148 ; 10 W.R. 620 228 Lead Smelting Co. r. Richardson, 3 Burr. 1341 193 Lear v. Botting, 44 L.T. 58 ; 45 J.P. 240 345 Leicester Corporation v. Beaumont Leys Churchwardens, 63 L.J.M.C. 176 ; 70 L.T. 659 ; 10 R. 401 19 Leicester Waterworks Co. v. Nuttall, 4 Q.B.D. 18 ; 48 L.J.M.C. 41 ; 39 L.T. 624 ; 27 W.R. 364 251 Leith Harbour Commissioners v. Inspector of Poor, L.R. 1. H.L. 8c. & Div. App. 17 73 Lewis v. Overseers of Swansea, 5 E. & B. 508 ; 25 L.J.M.C. 33 . . ■ . . 169 Limerick v. White, 2 Ir. C.L.R, 630 / 31 Lincoln (Mayor of) v. Holmes Common, L.R. 2 Q.B. 482 ; 8 B. & S. 344 ; 36 L.J.M.C. 73 ; 16 L.T. 739 ; 15 W.R. 786 11, 13 Linmean Society v. St. Anne, Westminster, 3 E. & B. 793 ; 23 L.J.M.C. 148 . 82 Liverpool v. West Derby, 6 E. & B. 704 ; 25 L.J.M.C. 112 . . . . 146 Liverpool Library v. Liverpool (Mayor of), 5 H. & N. 526 ; 29 L.J.M.C. 221 ; 8 W.R. 498 83 Liverpool (Mayor of) v. Wavertree, 2 Ex. D. 55 (note) ; 39 J.P. 101 . . . 42, 159 Liverpool United Gas Light Company v. Everton, L.R. 6 C.P. 414 ; 40 L.J.M.C. 104; 23 L.T. 818 ; 19 W.R. 412 239,377 Llanidloes Union r. Pryce- Jones, ride Reg. v. Montgomery J J. London and North -Western Railway ''. Buckmaster, L.R. 10 Q.B. 70 ; 44 L.J.M.C. 29 ; 31 L.T. 835 ; 23 W.R. 160 ; affirmed L.R. 10 Q.B. 444 ; 44 L.J.M.C. 180; 33 L.T. 329; 24 W.R. 16 21,124,235 London and North-Western Railway v. Cannock, 9 B. & S. 335 ; 9 L.T. 325 . HI London and North-Western Railway v. Harhorne, 34 J.P. 644 .... 121 London and North-Western Railway v. Irthlingborough, 35 L.T. 327 . . 114 London and North-Western Railway v. Wigan Union, 2 Nev. & Mac. Rail. Cas. 240 116, 121, 129, 130 London County Council v. Erith (Sewer Cases) , (1893) A.C. 562 ; 63 L.J.M.C. 9 ; 69 L.T. 725 ; 42 W.R, 330 ; 6 R. 22 8, 11, 13, 16, 17, 19, 34, 35, 54, 86, 88, 164 London County Council r. Lambeth. (1896) 2 Q.B. 25; 65 L.J.M.C. 148; 74 L.T. 605 ; 44 W.R. 621 12, 19 London County Council r. St. George's Union, (1894) A.C. 600; 64 L.J.Q.B. 48; 71 L.T. 409; 59 J.P. 116 ; 6 R. 310 269,408 London (Mayor of) r. Greenwich Union, 48 L.T. 437 ; 47 J.P. 420 . . . 26 London (Mayor of) v. St. Andrew, Holborn, L.R. 2 C.P. 574 ; 36 L.J.C.P. 292 ; 16 L.T. 665 ; 15 W.R, 928 59 London (Mayor of) v. St. Sepulchre, L.R. 7 Q.B. 333 (n) ; 41 L.J.Q.B. 109 («) . 25 London Tramway Company r. Lambeth, 31 L.T. 319 133 Lorrant v. Scadding, 13 Q.B. 687 ; 19 L.J.M.C. 5 323 Lowndes v. Home, 2 Bl. Rep. 1252 226 b2 xx TABLE OF CASES. M PAftE Macartney v. Garbutt, 24 Q.B.D. 368 ; 62 L.T. 656 ; 54. LP. 437 . • 87 Mc< ' umon v. Sinclair, 2 E. & E. 53 ; 28 L.J.M.C. 247 ; 5 Jur. N.S. 1302 . . 186 Machargv. Stoke -up'on-Trent, 48 J.P. 775 78 Magee College Trustees '•. Commissioners of Valuation, 19 W.R. 328 . . 85 Manchester v. Headlam, 21 Q.B.D. 96 ; 57 L.J.M.C. 89 ; 52 J.P. 517 . . 304 Manchester, Sheffield & Lincolnshire Railway Co. and the Trent, Ancholme and Great Grimsby Railway Co. v. Caistor Union, 2 Nev. & Mac. 53 . 96, 116, 119, 121, 129 Manchester, Sheffield and Lincolnshire Railway Co. v. Grimsby — not reported . 129 Manchester, Sheffield and Lincolnshire Railway Co. v. Kingston-upon-Hull, 75 L.T. 127; 60 J.P. 789 ; W.N. (1896), p. 71 184 Marriage, Neave & Co., In re, (1896) 2 Ch. 663 ; 65 L.J. Ch. 839 ; 75 L.T. 169 ; 45 W.R 42 ; 60 J.P. 805 291 Marsh v. Estcourt, 24 Q.B.D. 147 ; 59 L.J.Q.B. 100 ; 38 W.R. 495 ; 54 J.P. 294 390 Martin v. West Derby Assessment Committee, 11 Q.B.D. 145 ; 52 L.J.M.C. 56 ; 31 W.R. 489 ; 47 J.P. 500 77 Mersey Docks Cases, 11 H.L.C. 443 ; 35 L.J.M.C. 1 ; 20 C.B. N.S. 56 ; 12 L.T. 643 ; 13 W.R. 1069 ; 11 Jur. X.S. 746 10, 12, 15, 16, 35, 72, 79, 89, 102, 163, 230, 289, 385 Mersey Docks v. Birkenhead, L.R. 8 Q.B. 445 ; 42 L.J.M.C. 141 ; 29 L.T. 454 ; 21 W.R. 913 47, 177 Mersey Docks v. Cameron, vide Mersey Docks Cases. Mersey Docks v. Liverpool, L.R. 7 Q.B. 643 ; 41 L.J.M.C. 161 ; 26 L.T. 868 ; 20 W.R. 827 47,173,176 Mersey Docks v. Liverpool, L.R. 9 Q.B. 84 ; 43 L.J.M.C. 33 ; 22 W.R. 184 49,70,117,162 Mersey Docks v. Llaneilian (Overseers of), 14 Q.B.D. 770 ; 54 L.J.Q.B. 49 ; 52 L.T. 118 ; 33 W.R. 97; 49 J.P. 164 85,86 Metropolitan Board of Works r. West Ham, L.R. 6 Q.B. 193 ; 40 L.J.M.C. 30 : 23 L.T. 490 ; 19 W.R. 246 15,17,19,34 Middlesex County Council v. St. George's Union, (1897) 1 Q.B. 64 ; 66 L.J.Q.B. 101 ; 75 L.T. 464; 44 W.R. 666 35,79 Midland Railway Company r. Badgworth, 34 L.J.M.C 25; 11 L.T. 303; 13 W.R. 202 ; 11 Jur. N.S. 14 100, 101 Midland Railway Company v. Guardians of Edmonton Union, (1895) A.C. 485; 64 L.J.Q.B. 710; 72 L.T. 811 ; 60 J.P. 68 ; 11 R. 246 . . . 255,345 Mildmay v. Overseers of Wimbledon, 41 L.J.M.C. 133 ; 27 L.T. 365 . . . 27 Milward v. Caffin, 2 W. Bl. 1330 235 Mitchell r. Fordham, 6 B. k C. 274 226 Mogg v. Overseers of Yatton, 6 Q.B.D. 10 ; 50 L.J.M.C. 17 ; 29 W.R. 74 : 45 J.P. 324 55 Moor v. Smith, 28 L.J.M.C. 126 ; 5 Jur. N.S. 892 255, 344 Morgan v. Crawshay, 5 H.L., E. & I. App. 304 ; 40 L.J.M.C. 202 : 24 L.T. 889 ; 20 W.R. 554 193 N National Arms and Ammunition Co.. In re. 28 Ch. Div. 474 ; 54 L.J. Ch. 673 ; 52 L.T. 237; 33 W.R. 585 7 Newmarket Railway Co. v. St. Andrews-the-Less, 3 E. & B. 94 ; 23 L.J.M.C. 76 ; 18 Jur. 572 108, 111 TABLE OF CASES. xxi PAG I. New Ross Union /. Byrne, 30 L.R. Ir. 160 55 New Shoreham Commissioners v. Lancing, L.E. 5 Q.B. 180 ; 39 L.J.M.C. 121 ; 22 L.T. 434 169, 170 New University < Hub < lase, is Q.B.D. 720 : 50 L.J.Q.B. 4(52 ; .50 L.T. 000 ; 35 W.R. 774 82 Nicholson v. Eolborn Union Assessment Committee, 18 Q.B.D. 161 ; 56 L.J.M.* !. 54; 55 L.T. 775; 35 W.K. 230; 51 J. P. 341 79 Northampton (Mayor of) v. Ward, 2 Str. 1238 ....... 25 North and South Western Junction Railway ( o. v. Brentford, 13 A.C. 592 ; 58 L.J.M.C. 95 ; 60 L.T. 274 251, 350 North Dublin Union v. Scott, l.Ir. C.L.R. 76 31 Norwood Overseers v. Salter, (1892) 2 Q.B. 118 ; 61 L.J.M.C. 193 ; 67 L.T. 376 57, 389 Novello v. Toogood, 1 B. & C. 554 87 Ormerod v. Chadwick, 16 M. & W. 377 ; 16 L.J.M.C. 143 .... 293 Owens College r. Overseers of Chorlton-upon-Medlock, 18 Q.B.D. 403 ; 56 L.J.M C. 20 ; 56 L.T. 373 ; 35 W.R. 236 ; 51 J.P. 356 ... 14, 15 Oxford Poor Rate Case, 8 E. & B. 184 ; 27 L.J.M.C. 33 77, 326 Paine v. Strand Union, 8 Q.B. 326 ; 15 L.J.M.C. 89 318 Paris and New York Telegraph Co. r. Penzance Union, 12 Q.B.D. 552 ; 53 L.J.M.CJ. 189 ; 50 L.T. 790 ; 32 W.R. 859 ; 48 J.P. 693 ... . 24 Parker v. Edwards, 7 B. & C. 594 294 Parkinson v. Potter, 16 Q.B.D. 152 ; 55 L.J.M.C. 153 ; 53 L.T. 818 . . . 87 Paynter v. Reg., vide Reg. v. Paynter. Pearson v. Assessment Committee of Holborn Union, (1893) 1 Q.B. 389 ; 62 L.J.M.C. 77 : 68 L.T. 351 86 . • • 55 26 . . . 42 250 Pembroke '■. Overseers of Wye, 47 J.P. 359 Percy v. Ashford, 34 L.T. 579 Peterborough (Mayor of) v. Stamford Union, 31 W.R. 949 Peterborough v. Thurlby, 8 Q.B.D. 586 .... Peterborough v, Wilsthorpe, 12 Q.B.D. 1 ; 53 L.J.M.C. 33 ; 50 L T. 189 ; 32 W.R. 548 250, 349 Pimlico Tramway Co. v. Greenwich Union Assessment Committee, L. R. 9 Q.B. 0: 43 L.J.M.C. 20; 22 W.R. 87 21,24,131 Portland (Duke of) v. St. Margaret, Westminster, 1 Caldecott's Settlement Cases 3 (note a) 73 Priestley v. Watson, 2 O. & M. 691 240, 305 Purchas v. Churchwardens of Holy Sepulchre, 4 E. & B. 156 ; 24 L.J.M.C. 9 ; 1 Jur. N.S. 304 83 Purser v. Worthing Local Board, is Q.B.D. 818 ; 56 L.J.M.C. 78; 35 W.R. 682 ; 51 J.P. 596 461 Purvis v. Traill, 3 Ex. 344 ; 18 L.J.M.C. 57 83, 326 Putney (Overseers) v. London and South-Western Railway Co., (1891) 1 Q.B. 140 ; 60 L.J.M.C. 438 ; 64 L.T. 280; 39 W.R. 291 ; 55 J.P. 422 . . 61 xx ii TABLE OF CASES. R PAGE 226 Rann *. Picking, Cald. 196 Rawlence r. Hursley Union, 3 Ex. D. 44 ; 47 L.J.M.C. 31 ; 37 L.T. 503 ; 26 W.R. 81 358,378 Rawnsley v. Hutchinson, L.R. 6 Q.B. 305 ; 40 L.J.M.C. 07 ; 23 L.T. 843 ; IS W.R. 436; 35 J.P. 501 256,345 Regent's Canal Co. v. Hendon, 6 E. & 13. 852 ; 8 Jur. N.S. 208 . . . . 139 Regent's Canal Co. v. St. Pancras, 3 Q.B.D. 73 ; 47 L.J.M.C. 37 ; 37 L.T. 637 ; 26 W.R. 281 • • • • 139 Re<* v Abnev Park Cemetery Co., L.R. 8 Q.B. 515 ; 42 L.J.M.C. 124 ; 29 L.T. 174 44, 45, 210 Reg. v. Alnwick (Chamberlains of), 9 A. & E. 444 13 Reg. v. Bangor, 10 Q.B. 91 ; 16 L.J.M.C. 58 318 Reg. v. Baptist Missionary Society, 10 Q.B. 884 ; 18 L.J.M.C. 194 . ... 325 Reo- v. Battle Union, L.R 2 Q.B. 8; SB. k S. 12; 36 L.J.M.C. 1 ; 15 L.T. ' 180 ; 15 W.R. 57 218, 219, 442 Reg. v. Beadle, 7 E. & B. 492 ; 26 L.J.M.C 111 255, 344 Reg. v. Bedford Union, vide Reg. v. London and North- Western Railway Co. Reo- v. Bedminster Union, 1 Q.B.D. 503; 45 L.J.M.C. 117; 34 L.T. 795 ; ° 40 J.P. 743 • 238,245,264,376 Reg. v. Berwick-on-Tweed Assessment Committee, 16 Q.B.D. 493 ; 55 L.J.M.C. ° 84; 54 L.T. 431; 50 J.P. 71 166,167 Reg. v. Biggleswade Union, 21 L.T. 494; 18 W.R. 293 . . . 233,239,377 Reg. v. Bilston, L.R. 1 Q.B. 18 ; 6 B. & S. 908 ; 35 L.J.M.C. 73 ; 13 L.T. 327 ; ° 14 W.R. 83 ; 12 Jur. N.S. 139 71 Reg. v. Blackfriars Bridge Co., 9 A. & E. 828 191 Reg. v. Blenkinsop, (1892) 1 Q.B. 43 ; 61 L.J.M.C. 45 ; 66 L.T. 187 ; 40 W.R. 272 301 Reg. v. Bolinghroke, (1893) 2 Q.B. 347 : 62 L.J.M.C. 180; 69 L.T. 717 ; 42 W.R. 128; 5 R. 536; 58 J.P. 118 241,379 Reg. v. Bradford Library, 1 E. & E. 88 ; 28 L.J.M.C. 73 82 Reg. v. Bradshaw, 2 E. & E. 836 ; 29 L.J.M.C. 176 ; 8 W.R. 435 ; 6 Jur. N.S. 629 304 Reg. v. Brandt, 16 Q.B. 462 ; 20 L.J.M.C. 119 ; 15 Jur. 223 . . . . 83, 326 Reg. v. Bristol Dock Co., 1 Q.B. 535 ; 10 L.J.M.C. 105 . . . 165, 166 Reg. v. Cambridge Gas Co., 8 A. & E. 73 ; 7 L.J.M.C. 50 . 67, 145, 149, 151, 152 Reg. v. Cambridgeshire JJ., 1 L. M.& P. 47 ; 19 L.J.M.C. 130 ; 4 New Sess. Cas.87 244,308 Reg. v. Capel, 12 A. & E. 382 ; 9 L.J.M.C. 65 ; 4 Jur. 886 8, 224, 225, 316, 323, 324 Reg. v. Cisswell, L.R. 7 Q.B. 328 ; 41 L.J.M.C. 10S ; 26 L.T. 574 ; 20 W.R. 624 25 Ree;. v. Castle View, Leicester, vide Reg. v. St. Martin's, Leicester. Reg. v. Chorlton Union, L.R. 8 Q.B. 5 ; 42 L.J.M.C. 34 . . . 237, 262, 363 Reg. v. Chorlton-upon-Medlock, 35 L.J.M.C. 56 ; 12 L.T. 581 . . . 238, 262 Reg. v. Chorlton-upon-Medlock, 1 Q.B.D. 62 ; 45 L.J.M.C. 33 ; 33 L.T. 526 ; 24 W.R. 110 379 Reg. v. Christopherson, 16 Q.B.D. 7 ; 55 L.J.M.C. 1 ; 53 L.T. 804 . . . 226 Reg. v. Civil Engineers (Institution of), 5 Q.B.D. 48 ; 49 L.J.M.C. 34 ; 42 L.T. 145; 28 W.R. 253; 44 J.P. 265 84,326 Reg. v. Clark, 5 Q.B. 887 ; 13 L.J.M.C. 91 ; 8 Jur. 489 254 Reg. v. Cockburn, 16 Q.B. 480; 21 L.J.M.C. 53 84 Reg. v. Cooper, vide Reg. v. Hull JJ. Reg. v. Coventry Canal Co., 1 E. & E. 572 ; 28 L.J.M.C. 102 ; 5 Jur. N.S. 862 . 143 TABLE OF CASES. v \ c. i: Beg. v. Cumberland JJ., 58 L.T. 491 ; 52 J.P. 502 ....... 240 Reg. o. Cumberlege, 2 Q.B.D. 366^ 46 L.J.M.C. 214 ; 36 L.T. 700 . . 379, 400 Reg. v. Curzon, 46 L.T. 159 ; 30 W.R. 621 ; 47 J.P. 37 6 Reg. v. Denbighshire JJ., 9 Q.B. 279 ; i5 L.J.Q.B. 335 253 Reg. v. Denbighshire J.I.. 15 Q.B.D. 451; 54 L.J.M.C. 142; 53 L.T. 389; 33 W.R. 784 235, 376 Reg. v. Derbyshire J J., 25 L.T. 43 ; 19 W.R. 934 .... 234,239,376 Reg. f. Derbyshire JJ., 25 L.T. 161 • 239 Reg. *. Devon, 3 New Sess. Cases 96 236,261,321,360 Reg. v. Dodd, L.R. I Q.B. 16; 35 L.J.M.C.97; 6 B. & S. 903; 12 Jur. N.S. 159 57, 388 Reg. v. Dowlais Iron Co., 10 B. & S. '208 171 Reg. v. Durham (Earl of), 2 E. & E. 230 ; 28 L.J.M.C. 232 ; 5 Jur. N.S. 1306 . 169 Reg. v. Dyott, 9 Q.B.D. 47 ; 51 L.J.M.C. 104 ; 30 W.R. 799 ; 47 J.P. 54 . . 395 Reg. v. Eastern Counties Railway Co., 4 B. & S. 58 ; 32 L.J.M.C. 174 ; 9 Jur. ° N.S. 1339 . . 95,127 22 W.R. 237,262,363 88 134, 236, 261 • 32, 201 Reg. v. Edmonds, L.R, 9 Q.B. 598 ; 43 L.J.M.C. 156 ; 31 L.T. 237 924 ; 38 J.P. 727 • i Reg. v. Ellis and Greenwood, 12 L.J.M.C. 20 ; 7 J.P. 179 . Reg. V. Essex JJ., 46 J.P. 724 Reg. v. Everist, 10 Q.B. 178 : 10 L.J.M.C. 87 ; 11 Jur. 515 Reg. v. Eyre, 6 E. & B. 992 ; 26 L.J.M.C. 14 243, 248, 298, 308 Reg. r. Eyre, 7 E. & B. 609 ; 26.L.J.M.C. 121 243, 248, 298 Reg. v. Fletton, 3 E. & E. 450 ; 30 L.J.M.C. 89 ; 3 L.T. 689 ; 9 W.R. 309 33, 34, 124, 126 Reg. v. Fordham, 11 A. & E. 73 .; 9 L.J.M.C. 3 289,317 Reg. v. Forrest, 8 E. & B. 890 ; 27 L.J.M.C. 96 ; 4 Jur. N.S. 480 . . 182 Reg. v. Fouch, 2 Q.B. 308 ; 11 L.J.M.C. 1 240, 244, 308 Reg. v. Fuller, 8 E. & B. 365 (») 75 Reg. p. Gainsborough, L.R. 7 Q.B. 64 ; 41 L.J.M.C. 1 ; 20 W.R. 250 . . 70, 221 Reg. r.Gaskell, 16 Q.B. 472; 21 L.J.M.C. 29; 15 Jur. 1156 . . . -83,326 Reg. v. General Assessment Sessions, 17 Q.B.D. 394 ; 35 W.R. 12 ; 50 J.P. 724 409 Reg. v. Glamorganshire Canal Co., 3 E. & E. 186 ; 29 L.J.M.C. 238 : 6 Jur. x.s. 1146 136, 138 Reg. v. Godolphin (Lord), 13 L.J.M.C. 57 317 Reg. v. Goodchild, E. B. & E. 1 ; 27 L.J.M.C. 233 ; 22 J.P. 144 ; 4 Jur. N.S. 1050 70, 71, 124, 227, 228, 229, 230 Reg. v. Grand Junction Canal Co., 7 W.R. 597 . • • 32,95,136 137,138 Reg. v. Grand Junction Railway Co., 4 Q.B. 18 ; 13 L.J.M.C. 94 ; 8 Jur. 508 80, 90, 98, 123, 151 Reg. v. Great Western Railway Co., 6 Q.B- 179 ; 15 L.J.M.C. 80 ; 10 Jur. 134 71, 91, 115, 116, 120, 122, 123 Reg. v. Great Western Railway Co., 15 Q.B. 1085 ; 21 L.J.M.* !. 84 ; 16 Jur. 217 92, 93, 105, 111, 121, 143 Reg. v. Great Western Railway Co., L.R. 4 Q.B. 323; 10 B. & S. 318; 38 L.J.M.C. 89 ; 20 L.T. 481 ; 17 W.R. 670 ; 33 J.P. 598 . 234, 376 Reg. r. Great Yarmouth JJ., 8 Q.B.D. 525 ; 51 L.J.M.C. 39 : 30 W.R. 460 . 240 Reg. v. Groves, 2 E. ,v- E. 793 ; 29 L.J.M.C. 179 ; 8 W.R. 434 ; 24 J.P. 341 ; 6 Jur. N.S. 1014 230 Reg. v. Guest, 7 A. & E. 951 ; 7 L.J.M.C. 38 36 Reg. v. Hall Dare, 5 B. & S. 785 ; 34 L.J.M.C. 17 ; 11 Jur. N.S. 59 . . . 70 Reg. v. Halstead, 32 J.P. 118 38, 119 Reg. r. Hammersmith Bridge Co., 15 Q.B 369 ; 18 L.J.M.C. 85 ; 13 Jur. 190 . 191 xxiv TABLE OF CASES. PAGE Reg. v. Hammond, 4 New Sess. Cases 316 233 Reg. v. Hampshire JJ., 32 L.J.M.C. 46 ; 11 W.R. 122 : 8 Jur. N.S. 1212 . 255, 344 Reg v. Hampshire JJ., 33 L.J.M.C. 104 ; 9 L.T. 730 ; 12 W.R. 441 ; 28 J.P. 151 254,256,345 Reg. v. Harrogate (Commissioners), 15 Q.B. 1012 ; 20 L.J.M.C. 25 ; 15 Jur. 422 80 Reg. 0. Haslam, 17 Q.B. 220; 15 Jur. 972 37 Reg. v. Hawkins, vide Reg. v. Good-child. Reg. v. Headlam, vide Manchester v. Headlam. Reg. v. HeUier, 21 L.J.M.C. 3 • 352 Reg. v. Hull Dock Co., 18 Q.B. 325 ; 21 L.J.M.C. 153 ; 16 Jur. 543 173, 174, 176 Reg. v. Hull J J., 4 E. & B. 29 ; 23 L.J.M.C. 183 80 Reg. v. Huntley, 3 E. & B. 172 ; 23 L.J.M.C. 106 ; 18 Jur. 745 255, 299, 344, 352 Reg. v. Hursthourne Tarrant, E. B. & E. 246 ; 27 L.J.M.C. 214 . . . 318 Reg. v. Hyde, 21 L.J.M.C. 94 352 Reg. v. Ingall, 2 Q.B.D. 199 ; 46 L.J.M.C. 113 ; 35 L.T. 552 ; 25 W.R. 57 . 415 Reg. v. Jones, 8 Q.B. 719; 15 L.J.M.C. 129; 10 Jur. 613 . . . . 83,325 Re*, v. Kent JJ., L.R. 6 Q.B. 132 ; 40 L.J.M.C. 76 ; 19 W.R. 205 244, 249, 266, 272, 308 Reg. v. Kent JJ., L.R. 8 Q.B. 305 ; 42 L.J.M.C. 112 ; 21 W.R. 635 ; 37 J.P. 644 342 Reg. v. Kentmere, 17 Q.B. 551; 21 L.J.M.C. 13 ; 16 Jur. 265 .... 33 Reg. v. Kesteven, 3 Q.B. 810 ; 13 L.J.M.C. 78 ; 1 New. Sess. 151 . . 250. 348 Reg. v. Kingston JJ. and Phillips, E. B. & E. 56; 27 L.J.M.C. 199 . . 304 Reg. v. Kingston JJ. and Wedd, E. B. & E. 259 ; 27 L.J.M.C. 201 ; 4 Jur. N.S. 759 240 Reg. v. Kingston-upon-Hull Dock Co., 7 Q.B. 2 ; 14 L.J.M.C. 114 . . . 165 Reg. v. Lamb, vide Reg. v. Goodchild. Reg. v. Lancashire JJ. , vide Lancashire JJ. v. Stretford. Reg. v. Lancashire JJ.,43 L.J.M.C. 116 ; 29 L.T. 403 ; 22 W.R. 648 . . 234 Reg. v. Langriville, 14 Q.B.D. 83 ; 54 L.J.Q.B. 124; 52 L.T. 253; 33 W.R. 213; 49 J.P. 54 238,376 Reg. v. Lapley, 9 B. & S. 568 108 Reg. v. Lee, L.R. 1 Q.B. 241 ; 35 L.J.M.C. 105 ; 7 B. & S. 188 : 13 L.T. 704 ; ^ 14 W.R. 311 ; 12 Jur. N.S. 225 .... 39, 58, 119, 159, 161 Reg. v. Leeds and Liverpool Navigation Co., 7 A. & E. 671 : 7 L.J.M.C. 41 . 135 Reg. v. Leith, 1 E. & B. 121 ; 21 L.J.M.C. 119 . . . ' . . . • 183 Reg. v. Liverpool (Mayor of ), 9 A. & E. 435 • 35 Reg.r. Llantrissant, L.R. 4 Q.B. 354; 38 L.J.M.C. 93; 20 L.T. 364; 17 W.R. 671 112 Reg. v. London and North- Western Railway Co., L.R. 9 Q.B. 134 : 43 L.J.M.C. 81; 29 L.T. 910; 22 W.R. 263 53,111,113 Reg. v. London and North- Western Railway Co., 46 L.J.M.C. 102 . . . 377 Reg. v. London and South- Western Railway Co., 1 Q.B. 558 : 11 L.J.M.C. 93 ; 6 Jur. 686 . . 93, 94, 104, 151 Reg. v. London, Brighton, and South Coast Railway, 15 Q.B. 313 ; 20 L.J.M.C. 124; 15 Jur. 372 48,99,103,107,119,130 Reg. v. London JJ., (1896) 1 Q.B. 659 ; 65 L.J.M.C. 120 : 74 L.T. 523 ; 44 W.R. 485; 60 J.P. 420 253,276,281,427 Reg. v. London JJ. and London County Council [s.c. London County Council p. St. George's Union in House of Lords], 63 L.J.Q.B. 148 ; 69 L.T. 682 ; 58 J.P. 69 ; 9 R. 14 269 Reg. p. London School Board, 17 Q.B.D. 738 : 55 L.J.M.C. 169: 55 L.T. 384; 34 W.R. 583 ; 50 J.P. 419 8, 9, 14, 16, 44 TABLE OF CASES. xxv PASI Reg. v. Long, 1 Q.B. 740 ; 6 Jur. 98 254, 354 Reg. p. Longwood, 13 Q.B. 116; 18 L.J.M.C. 65 146 Reg. v. Longwood, 17 Q.B. 871 ; 21 L.J.M.C.-215 159 Reg p. Lumsdaine, 10 A. & E. 157 ; 8 L.J.M.C. 69 315,324 Reg. /'. McCann, L.R. 3 Q.B. 677 : 37 L.J.M.C. 123 ; 19 L.T. 115 ; 6 W.R. 985 76 Reg. v. Maiden, L.R. 4 Q.B. 326 ; 10 B.&S. 323 ; 38 L.J.M.C. 125 ; 33J.P.645 54,87,365 Reg. ' . Manchester, Smith Junction and Altrincham Railway Co., 15 Q.B. 39.") n | 33 Reg. v. Manchester Overseers, 16 Q.B. 449 ; 20 L.J.M.C. 113 : 15 Jur. 219 . 82, 326 Reg. v. Manchester Overseers, 3 E. ,5c B. 336 ; 23 L.J.M.C. 48 ... 78 Reg. r. Marriott, 12 A. & E. 779 293 Reg. r. Marsham, 50 L.T. 142 ; 32 W.R. 157 264, 415 Keg. v. Marton-cum-Grafton, 10 Q.B. 971 ; 16 L.J.M.C. 159 . . . 250, 348 Reg. v. Metropolitan Board of Works, L.R. 4 Q.B. 15; 9 B. & S. 937; 38 L.J.M.C 24 ; 17 W.R. 1094 17 Reg. v. Metropolitan District Railway Co., L.R. 6 Q.B. 698 ; 40 L.J.M.C. 113 58 Reg. v. Middlesex JJ., vide West London Extension Railway Co. v. Fulham. Reg. p. Middlesex JJ., L.R. 7 Q.B. 653 ; 26 L.T. 902 ; 20 W.R. 774 258, 323, 401 Reg. v. Midland Railway Co., 15 Q.B 313 ; 20 L.J.M.C. 124 ; 15 Jur. 372 . 103, 119 Reg. p. Mile End Old Town, 10 Q.B. 208; 16 L.J.M.C. 184; 11 Jur. 988 123, 146, 148, 149, 150, 153, 156, 192 Reg. v. Montgomery JJ., 50 L.J.M.C. 52 ; 44 L.T. 310 ; 29 W.R. 806 ; 45J.P. 407 245,267,377 Reg. v. Morrish, 32 L.J.M.C. 245 ; 8 L.T. 697 ; 11 W.R. 960 ; 10 Jur. N.S. 71 30 Reg. v. Morrison, 1 E. & B. 150 ; 22 L.J.M.C. 14 36, 117, 183 Reg. r. Mortlock, 7 Q.B. 459 ; 14 L.J.M.C. 153 ; 9 Jur. 621 . . . 255, 344 Reg. p. Musson, 8 E. & B. 900 ; 27 L.J.M.C. 100 186 Reg. p. Narbeth North, 9 A. & E. 815 213 Reg. v. New River Co., 4 Q.B.D. 309 ; 48 L.J.M.C. 123; 40 L.T. 322; 27 W.R. 785 418 Reg. p. North and South Shields Ferry Company, 1 E. & B. 140 ; 22 L.J.M.C. 9 ; 17 Jur. 181 186 Reg. v. North Aylesford Union, 26 L.T. 618 ; 37 J. P. 148 ... . 51 Reg. p. North Staffordshire Railway Co., 3 E. & E. 392 ; 30 L.J.M.C. 68 ; 3 ^ L.T. 554 ; 9 W.R. 235 ; 7 Jur". N.S. 363 . 37, 54, 115, 116, 118, 127, 161 Reg. v. Oldham (Mayor of), L.R. 3 Q.B. 474; 37 L.J.M C. 169 ; 18 L.T. 240 ; 16 W.R. 789 89 Reg. p. Padwick, 8 E. & B. 704 ; 27 L.J.M.C. 113 ; 4 Jur. N.S. 360 . 255, 344 Reg. . Parker, 7 E. & B. 155 ; 26 L.J.M.C. 199 ; 3 Jur. N.S. 771 . 240, 310 Reg. p. Paynter, 7 Q.B. 255 ; 14 L.J.M.C. 179 ; 9 Jur. S77 ; 10 Q.B. 908 ; 16 L.J.M.C. 136 190,293,323 Reg. p. Peek, 20 L.T. 393 255, 344 Reg. p. Phillips, 8 Q.B. 745 ■ 17 L.J.M.C. S3 ; 12 Jur. 431 83, 327 Reg. p. Phillips, 29 L.T. 100 256, 345 Reg. p. Pocock, s Q.B. 729 ; 15 L.J.M.C. 132 ; 1(1 Jur. 662 . 85, 326, 329 Reg. v. Ponsonby, 3 Q.B. 14 ; 11 L.J.M.C. 65 73 Reg. p. Poplar, 13 Q.B.D. 364 ; 53 L.J.M.C. 97 ; 51 L.T. 97 ; 48 J. P. 564 262,419 Reg. v. Postmaster-General, 28 L.T. 337 ; 21 W.R. 459 76 Reg. p. Pratt, L.R. 5 Q.B. 176 ; 39 L.J.M.C. 73 ; 21 L.T. 750 ; 18 W.R. 626 256, 346 Reg. p. Price, 62 L.J.M.C. 71 ; 68 L.T. 171 ; 57 J.P. 294 . . . . 258,401 Reg. p. Regent's Canal Co., ridt Regent's Canal Co. ''. St. Pancras. TABLE OF CASES. Reg. v. Rhymney Railway Co., L.R. 4 Q.B. 276 ; 38 L.J.M.C. 15 198 : 17 W.E.530 Reg. v. Richmond, 6 B. & S. 541 ; 34 L.J.M.C. 186 • 29 J.P. 310 Ree. v. St. Albans, 8 A. & V.. 0:^ ; 8 L.J.M.C. 33 10 B. & S. ■ 34,102 371 246, 321 41 L.J.M.C. 519 29 93, 211 30 L.T. 270 ; 263,422 Reg. v. St. George's Union Assessment Committee, L.R. 7 Q.B. 90 30 ; 25 L.T. 696 ; 20 W.R. 179 Reg. v. St. Giles, Camberwell, 14 Q.B. 571 ; 19 L.J.M.C. 122 ; 14 Ji Reg. v. St. Martin's-in-the-Fields, 3 Q.B. 204 ; 11 L.J.M.C. 112 Reg. r. St. Martin's-in-the-Fields. vide Reg. v. Cockbum. Reg. r. St. Martin's. Leicester, L.R. 2 Q.B. 493 ; 8 B. & S. 536 : 36 L.J.M.C. 99 ; 16 L.T. 625 ; 15 W.R. 1096 77,78 Reg v St. Mary Abbots, Kensington, 12 A. k E. 824 ; 10 L.J.M.C. 25 ; 5 Jur. 170 3 209, 210 Reg. v. St. Marv Abbots, Kensington, (1891) 1 Q.B. 378 ; 60 L.J.M.C. 52 ; 64 " L.T. 240 ; 39 W.K. 278 ; 55 J.P. .502 .... 236, 261, 362, 401 Reg. r. St. Mary. Bermqndaey, 14 Q.B.I). 351 ; 54 L.J.M.C. 68 : 33 W.R. 414 ; 49 J.P. 38 Reg. v. St. Mary, Islington, 19 Q.B.D. 529 ; 56 L.J.Q.B. 597 : 35 W.R, 664; 51 J.P. 789 263,422 32 L.J.M.C. 146 ; 9 Jur. X.S. 1102 . . 97 46 L.J.M.C. 243 ; 37 L.T. 126 ; 25 W.R. 827 5,58,222,289,448 190 244, 267 Savin, 6 Q.B.D. 309 ; 29 W.R. 638 School Boird for London, vide Reg. v. London School Board. Shaw, 12 Q.B. 419 ; 17 L.J.M.C. 137 ; 12 Jur. 651 ... Reg. r. Shee, 4 Q.B 2 ; 12 L.J.M.C. 53 Reg. v. Sheffield Gas Co., 4 B. & S. 135 ; 32 L.J.M.C. 169 ; 9 Jur. X.S. 623 Reg. v. Shepherd, 1 Q.B. 170 ; 10 L.J.M.C. 44 ; 5 Jur. 432 . Reg. v. Sherard (Lord), 33 L.J.M.C. 5 ....'. Reg. >: Sherford, L.R. 2 Q.B. 503 ; 8 B. & 8. 596 ; 36 L.J.M.C. 113 : 16 L.T. ° 663 ; 15 W.R. 1035 103, 229, 230 Reg. r. Skircoat, 2 B. & S. 185 ; 28 L.J.M.C. 224 . . . 299 Reg. v. St. Pancras, 3 B. k S. 810 Reg. v. St. Pancras, 2 Q.B.D. 581 ; Reg. i Reg. i Reg. i Reg. i Rea:. > Salisbury. 8 A. & E. 716 . Salop JJ., 60 J.P. 552 . 250, 349 226 76 147, 156 74 126 Reg. p. Smith, 7 E. k B. 483 ; 26 L.J.M.C. 105 Reg. v. Smith, 3 E. i: E. 383 ; 30 L.J.M.C. 74 . . Reg. v. Smith, oo L.J.M.C. 49 ; 54 L.T. 431 ; 50 J.P. 215 Reg. v. Southampton Dock Co , 14 Q.B. 587 ; 20 L.J.M.C. 155 ; 15 Jur. 268 36, 41, 71, 93, 117, 118, 124, 161, 176, 178, 211, 498 Reg. r. South Eastern Railway Co., 15 Q.B. 313 : 20 L.J.M.C. 124 ; 15 Jur. 372 103, 119 Reg. v. South Staff >rdshire Waterworks Co., 16 Q.B.D. 359: 55 L.J.M.C. 88 ° 54 L.T. 782; 34 W.R. 242; 50 J.P. 20 Reg. ''. Stacey, 14 Q.B. 789 ; 19 L.J.M.C. 177 ; 14 Jur. 549 . Reg. v. Staffordshire, JJ.. 7 E. & B 935 ; 26 L.J.M.C. 179 ; 3 Jur. X.S. 1148 Reg. v. Staffordshire JJ., 6 B. & S. 531 ; 34 L.J.M.C. 142 ; 12 L.T. 380 ; 29 J.P 324 Reg. v. Stapleton, 4 B. & S. 629 ; 33 L.J.M.C. 17 ; 9 L.T. 322 ; 12 W.R. 49 10 Jur. 44 . . . Reg. r. Sterry. 12 A. & E. 84 ; 9 L.J.M.C. 105 Reg. v. Stevens, 12 L.T. 491 Reg. v. Stewart, 8 E. & B. 360 ; 27 L.J.M.C. 81 ; 4 Jur. X.S. 187 Reg. v. Stockton and Darlington Railway Co., 8 L.T. 422 . 75 27 220, 221 67, 157 85,329 344 255 16 16,44 28 75 95 TABLE OF CASES. Reg. v. Street, 18 Q.B. 682 ; 22 LJ.M.C. 29 244 Reg. v. Surrey JJ., 6 Q.B.D. 100 ; SO L.J.M.O. 10 ; 43 L.T. 500 ; 29 W.R, 200 ; " 15 J.P. 93 ' ...... 239 I; v. Sutton Coldfield, LR. 9 Q.B. 18:3; 13 L.J.M.O. 57; 29 L.T. 840; 22 W.R. 324 JJeg. '■ Reg. v. Reg. v Reg. '' Reg. p Reg. f Reg. r Reg. v Re Re • 250,348 Temple, 2 E. & B. 160 ; 22 L.J.M.C. 129 76 Thurlstone, 1 E. & B. 502 ; 28 L.J.M.O. 106 ; 5 Jur. N.S. 820 . . 219 Todd, 12 A. &E. 816; 10.LJ.M.C. 14; 5 Jur. 407 .... 205 Toxteth Park- Local Board, 1 B. &. S. 107; 30 L.J. MX'. 154 ... 87 Trafford, 15 Q.B. 2oo ; 19 L.J.M.C. 199 . 239, 246, 264, 298, 321 p. Vange, 3 Q.B. 242 ; 11 LJ.M.C. 117 ; 6 Jur. 893 .... 34 v. WalKngford Union, 10 A. & E. 259 ; 8 L.J.M.C. 89 ... 87 r. Wall Lynn, 8 A. & E. 379 31 v. Watts, 7 A. & E. 461 ; 7 L.J.M.C. 72 298 v. Wells, L.R. 2 Q.B. 542 ; 8 B. & S. 607 ; 36 L.J.M.O. 109 ; 16 L.T. 790 ; 15 W.R. 1059 62, 63, 64, 68, 70 Reg. r. Westbrook, 10 Q.B. 178 ; 16 L.J.M.C. 87 ; 11 Jur. 515 32, 45, 46, 201, 211 Reg. v. West Derby, L.R. 10 Q.B. 283 ; 44 L.J.M.O. 98 ; 32 L.T. 400 . . 77 Reg. P. West Middlesex Waterworks Co., 1 E. & E. 716 ; 28 L.J.M.C. 135 ; 5 Jur. N.s. 1159 127,147,148,149,152-156 Reg. F. West Riding JJ., vide Reg. v. Yorkshire (West Riding) JJ. Reg. v. Whaddon/L.R. 10 Q.B. 230 : 14 L.J.M.O. 33 ; 32 L.T. 633 ; 23 W.R. 053 208 Keg. /. Williams, 23 L.T. (O.S.) 76 216, 220 Reg. p. Wiltshire, 4 Q.B.D. 326 ; 48 L.J.M.C. 142 ; 40 L.T. 681 . . 234, 376 Reg. r. Wolferstan, (1893) 2 Q.B. 451 ; 69 L.T. 429 ; 32 W.R. 176 ; 58 J.P. 133 293 Reg. f. Woods, E. B. & E. 481 ; 27 L.J.M.C. 289 ; 4 Jur. N.S. 1233 . . 47, 323 Reg. v. Woolwich Union, (1891) 2 Q.B. 712 ; 60 L.J. Q.B. 665 ; 68 L.T. 460 ; 1 I W.R. 155 ; ,i-> J.P. 552 408 Reg. f. Worcester JJ., 11 A. & E. 57 ; 9 L.J.M.C. 17 ; 3 Jur. 1050 Reg. v. Yarbprough, 12 A. & E. 416 ; 9 L.J.M.C. 62 Reg. r. Yorkshire (West Riding) JJ., 6 B. & S. 531 ; 34 L.J.M.C. 14 380 ; 29 J.P. 324 ; 12 Jur. N.S. 162 Reg. v. Zoological Society of London, 3 E. & B. 807; 23 L.J.M.C Jar. 786 . . - Reigate Union v. South-Eastern Railway Co., (1894) 1 Q.B. 411 ; 63 L.J.M.C. 65 ; 70 L.T. 353 ; 42 W.R. 585 ; 58 J.P. 264 .. . . . 360 Rex v. Aberavon, 5 East 453 308 Rex f. Aberystwith, 10 East 354 6 Rex f. Adames, 4 B. & Ad. 61 ; 2 L.J.M.C. 90 4, 70, 316 Rex v. Agar, 14 East 256 67,81 Rex r. Aire and Calder Navigation, 2 T.R. 660 134 Rex -. Air ! and ('aider Navigation, 9 B. & 0. 820 188 Rex v. Aire and Calder Navigation, 3 B. & Ad. 139 189 Rex '. Aire and Calder Navigation, 3 B. & Ad. 533 189 Rex p. Alderbury, 1 East 534 193 Rex f. Armstrong, 2 Starkie, 543 ......... 31 Rexr. Attwood, 6 B. & C. 277 34,199 Rex f. Baptiste Mill Co., 1 M. & S. 612 ' 204,206 Rex f. Barnby Dun (Inhabitants),^ A. & E. 551 ...... 88 Rex v. Barnes, 1 B. & Ad. 113 47, 190 Rex f. Barnstaple, 1 Barnardiston 137 ........ 315 Rex f. Bath (Mayor of), 14 East 609 . . . • . . . . . 145, 149 • • 78 317 ; 12 L.T. 251, 345, 350 139; 18 84, 326 xxviii TABLE OF CASES. PAGE Rex /•. Bedworth, 8 East 387 194 Rex v. Bell, 5 M. & S. 221 25 Rex v. Berkshire J J., 1 Bott. 274 308 Rex v. Bilston, 5 B. & C. 851 194, 195 Rex v. Birmingham Gas Co., 1 B. & C. 506 . . . . '. . . 148 Rex v. Birmingham and Staffordshire Gas Light Co., 6 A. & E. 634; 6 L.J.M.C. 92 • ■ 36,37,41,118 Rex v. Boldero, 4 B. & C. 467 226 Hex p. Bradford, 4 M. & S. 317 51 Rex v. Brettell, 3 B. & Ad. 424 193 Rex v. Bridgewater (Trustees of Duke of), 9 B. k C. 68 . . ■ . . 134 Rex v. Brighton Gas Co., 5 B. & 0. 466 145 Rex v. Bromyard, 8 B. & C. 240 .... 239, 249, 266, 272, 306 Rex v. Brooke, 9 B. & C. 915 243, 308 Rex v. Calder and Hebhle Navigation, 1 B. & A. 263 88, 144 Rex r. Camhrideshire JJ., 2 A. & E. 370; 4 L.J.M.C. 8 308 Rex v. Canterbury JJ., 4 Burr. 2290 225 Rex v. Cardington, Cowp. 581 . . . . . . , . . . • 134 Rex v. Catt, 6 T.R. 332 16 Rex v. Chaplin, 1 B. & Ad. 926 46 Rex v. Chelsea Waterworks Co., 5 B. & Ad. 156 24, 74, 145 Rex v. Chelmer and Blackwater Navigation, 2 B. k Ad. 14 ... 136 Rex v. Cheshunt, 2 T.R. 623 245, 300 Rex v. Cheshunt, 1 B. k A. 473 31 Rex v. Churchill, 4 B. & C. 750 11 Rex v. Clear, 4 B. k C. 899 293 Rex r. Coke, 5 B. & C. 797 86 Rex r. Cornwall JJ., 4 Burr. 2102 254 Rex v. Cunningham, 5 East 478 205 Rex v. Dover Road Trustees, 5 A. & E. 092 ; 6 L.J.M.C. 25 ... . 81 Rex v. Durnsford, 2 A. k E. 568 193 Rex v. Edlaston, 1 N. k P. 20 ; 6 L.J.M.C. 36 315 Rex v. Ellis, 1 M. & 8. 652 220 Rex v. Essex JJ., 8 T.R. 583 254,256 Rex v. Essex JJ., 5 M. & S. 513 299 Rex v. Eyre, 12 East 416 190 Rex v. Ferrybridge, 1 B. k C. 375 213 Rex v. Field, 5 T.R. 587 32 Rex v. FoleshiU, 4 N. & M. 360 ; 2 A. & E. 593 207 Rex r. Folly, 1 Bott. 76 293 Rex v. Fowke, 5 B. & C. 814 . . . 86 Rex v. Gardner, Cowp. 79. . . . . . . . . . . 31 Rex >: George, 6 A. k E. 305 ; 6 L.J.M.C. 34 298 Rex v. Gloucestershire JJ., 1 B. k Ad. 1 298 Rex v. Grand Junction Canal, 1 B. & A. 289 136 Rex v. Granville (Lord), 9 B. & C. 188 34, 200 Rex v. Great Farringdon, 9 B. «fc C. 541 293 Rex v. Hertfordshire JJ., 4 B. k Ad. 561 243, 306 Rex r. Hogg, Cald. 266 ; 1 T.R. 721 36 Rex r. Hopkins, 3 Keb. 255 225 Rex !>. Hull Dock Co., 5 M. & S. 394 45 TABLE OF CASES. XXIX Eex v. Hull Dock Co., 3 B. & C. .51(5 Rex p. Hindis, 3 T.R. 497 .... Rex p. Joddrell, 1 B. & Ad. 403 : 9 L.J. (O.S.), 26 Rex r. Joliffe, 2 T.R. 90 Rex p. Jones, 8 East 451 ..... Rex v. Kingswinford, 7 B. & C. 236 . lirx v. Leeds and Liverpool Canal Co., 5 East 325 Rex r. Liverpool, 8 East 455 («) Rex p. Liverpool (Inhabitants of), 7 B. & C. 61 . lux /'. Liverpool Exchange, 1 A. & E. 465 . Rex p. London JJ., 15 East 632 Rex v. Lower Mitton, 9 B. & C. 810 . Rex v. MacDonald, 12 East 324 .... Rex p. Mast, 6 T.R. 154 Rex '. Mathews, Cald. 1 .... Rex r. Mersey and Irwell Navigation, 9 B. & C. 95 Rex v. Milton, 3 B. & A. 112 Rex v. Minchin Hampton, 3 Burr. 1309 Rex r. Minster, 3 M. & S. 276 . Rex r. Mirfield, 10 East 219 Rex v. Monmouthshire Canal Co., 3 A. & E. 619 Hex p. Morgan, 2 A. & E. 618 . Rex v. Newbury, 4 T.R. 475 .... Rex v. Newcomb, 4 T.R, 368 ... Rex p. New River Co., 1 M. & S. 503 Rex p. Nicholson, 12 East 330 .... Rex v. Oxford Canal Co., 4 B. & C. 74 Rex v. Oxford Canal Co., 10 B. & C. 163 . Rex v. Page, 4 T.R. 543 Rex r. Palmer, 1 B. & C. 546 . Rex p. Parrot. 5 T.R. 593 .... Rex v. Pitt, 5 B. & Ad. 565 ... . Bex r. Pomfret (Earl of), 5 M. & S. 139 . Hex v. Portmore (Earl of), 1 B. & C. 551 Rex p. Regent's Canal, 6 B. & C. 720 Rex r. Ringwood, Cowp. 326 .... Rex /'. Rochdale Waterworks Co., 1 M. & S. 634 Rex r. Rochester (Bishop of), 12 East 353 Rex c. St. Agnes, 3 T.R. 480 . Rex r. St. Austell, 5 B. & Aid. 693 . Rex /•. St. Luke's Hospital, 2 Burr. 1053 . Rex p. St. Mary-the-Less, 4 T.R. 477 Rex v. St. Nicholas, Gloucester, 1 T.R. 723 («) . Rex p. St. Peter's the Great, 5 B. & C. 473 Rex v. St Peter's, York, 4 B. & Ad. 342 Rex v. Salters' Load Sluice, 4 T.R. 730 Rex v. Sedgley, 2 B. & Ad. 65 . Rex r. Sheard, 2 B. & C. 856 Rex v. Skingle, 1 Strange, 100 . Rex v, Snowdon, 4 B. J: Ad. 713 ; 2 L.J.M.C. 60 Rex r. Stafford and Worcester Canal, 8 T.R. 340 52, 104, 108 67, 244, 254, 308 74 224, 226 27 134 140, 141, 152 134 145 35 35 298 67, 142, 192 142 34 73 . 28, 188, 189 135,257,308 213 31 203, 211, 214 135 55 244 293 113,114,151, 157 134, 187, 289 • 141, 142 141, 142, 143 134 135 194 45, 207 205 135 136, 144 225 145 205 204, 206 204, 205, 206, 207 16 6 36 136 240, 310 10 193 306, 307 • 34, 226 134 134 xxx TABLE OF CASES. PAGE Rex v. Sudbury, 1 B. & C. 389 11, 13 Rex p. Suffolk JJ., l B. & A. 640 243, 249, 298, 308 Rex p. Sussex JJ., 15 East 206 . . . 239, 243, 248, 266, 272, 297, 308 Rex p. Terrot, 3 East 506 73 Rex p. Tewkesbury, 13 East 155 11, 13 Rex v. Thackwell, 4 B. & C. 62 246,298 Rex v. Thomas, 9 B. & O. 114 28,188 Rex p. Toms, Douglas 401 226 Rex v. Tremayne, 4 B. & Ad. 162 205 Rex p. Trent and Mersey Navigation Co., 4 B. & C. 57 27 Rex p. Tynemouth, 12 East 46 31, 86 Rexr. Warwickshire JJ., 6 L.J.M.C. 113 236,261,321,360 Rex p. Watson, 5 East 480 11 Rex p. Welbank, 4 M. & S. 222 205 Rex r. Wilson, 5 N. & M. 119 226 Rex p. Wiltshire J J., 8 B. & C. 380 299 Rex p. Wistow, 5 A. & E. 250 226 Hex v. Woking, 4 A. & E. 40 ; 5 L.J.M.C. 17 . . . 117,141,143,144,152 Rex v. Woodland, 2 East 164 193 Rex p. York (Mayor of), 6 A. & E. 419 ; 6 L.J.M.C. 121 11, 13 Rhymney Railway Co. p. Price, 16 L.T. 394 235 Roads p. Trumpington, L.R. 6 Q.B. 56; 40 L.J.M.C. 35 ; 23 L.T. 821 27, 29, 206, 208 Roberts v. Aylesbury, 1 E. & B. 423 ; 22 L.J.M.C. 34 ; 17 Jur. 236 ... 25 Rochdale Canal Co. v. Brewster (1894), 2 Q.B. 852; 64 L.J.Q.B. 37; 71 L.T. 243 ; 59 J.P. 132 ; 9 R. 680 22 Rogers v. St. Germans, 35 L.T. 332 218 Rowls v. Cells, Cowp. 451 204, 205, 206 Russell Institution p. St. Giles-in-the-Fields and St. George, Bloomsbury, 3 E. & B. 416 ; 23 L.J.M.C. 65 83 s Sabourin v. Marshall, 3 B. & Ad. 440 235 St. Gabriel, Fenchurrh, p. Williams, 16 Q.B.D. 649 ; 55 L.J.M.C. 14 j 54 L.T. 270 76, 384 St. George's Union v. London County Council, vide London County Council < . Churchwardens of Erith. St. Leonard, Shoreditch, p. London County Council, (1895) 2 Q.B. 104 ; 64 L.J.Q.B. 615 ; 72 L.T. 802 ; 43 W.R. 598 ; 59 J.P. 423 ; 15 R. 516 . . 61 St. Thomas's Eospital p. Stratton, L.R. 7 H.L. 477 : 45 L.J.M.C. 23 ; 23 W.R. 882 16 Sanders /. St. X.ots, 8 Q.B. 810 ; 15 L.J.M.C. 104 319 Savoy Overseers r. Art En ion of London, (1896) A.C. 296 ; 65 L.J.M.C. 161 ; 74 L.T. 497 ; 45 W.R. 34 ; 60 J.P. 660 81,82,326 Scott v. St, Martin's-in-the-Fields, 5 E. & B. 558; 25 L.J.M.C. 42; 1 Jur. N.S. 1207 84, 326 Scriven v. Fawcett, 32 L.J.M.C. 161 229 Sculcoates Union v. Kingston-upon-Hull Docks Co.. (1895) A.C. 136 ; 64 L.J.M.C. 49 ; 71 L.T. 642 ; 43 W.R. 623 ; 59 J.P. 605 ; 11 R. 74 . 10, 19, 43, 47, 159, 171, 172 S( llwood r. Mount, 1 Q.B. 726 ; 6 Jur. 78 254, 345 Sheppard p. Bradford, 16 C.B.X.S. 369 ; 33 L.J.M.C. 183: 10 L.T. 421; 12 W.R. 867 ; 10 Jur. N.S. 799 77 TABLE OF CASES. xxxi I'M. I Showers v. Chelmsford Union Assessment Committee, (1891) 1 Q.B. 339; 60 L.J.M.C. 55 ; 64 L.T. 755 78 Sibbaldr. Roderick, 11 A. & E. 38; 9 L.J.M.C. 76 203 Bkingley r. Surridge, 11 ML & W. 503 ; 12 L.J.M.C. 122 .... 291 Smith r. Birmingham, 22 Q.B.D. 703 ; 58 L.J.M.C. 161 ; 53 J. P. 787 . . 65 Smith r. Lambeth Assessment Committee, 10 Q.B.D. 327 ; 53 L.J.M.C. 1 ; 48 L.T. 57 ; 47 J.P. 244 • ... 30, 124 Smith r. New Forest Union, 61 L.T. 870 55 Smith v. Seghill, L.R. 10 Q.B. 422 ; 44 L.J.M.C. 114 ; 32 L.T. 857 ; 23 W.R. 745 31, 393 Snailbeach Mining Co. v. Forden, 35 L.T. 514 197,208,444 Southampton Gas, Light and Coke Co. v. Southampton Union, 2 Q.B.D. 371 ; 46 LJ.M.C. 238 ; 36 L.T. 548 ; 25 W.R. 671 ; 41 J.P. 645 . 252, 345, 351 Bouth-Eastern Railway Co. v. Dorking, 3 E. & B. 491 ; 23 L.J.M.C. 84 ; 18 j ur . 672 52,53,109,111,113,114 Southport (Mayor of) r. Ormskirk Assessment Committee, (1894) 1 Q.B. L96 ; 63 L.J.Q.B. 250 ; 69 L.T. 852 ; 42 W.R. 153 ; 58 J.P. 212 ; 9 R 46 . 28 Spear v. Bodmin Union, 49 L.J.M.C 69 ....... 27 Spenceley v. Robinson, 3 B. & C. 658 294 Staley r. Castleton, 5 B. & S. 505 ; 33 L.J.M.C. 178 ; 10 Jur. N.S. 1147 . . 33, 39 Stamper r. Sunderland, L.R. 3 C.P. 388; 37 L.J.M.C. 137; 18 L.T. 682; 16 W.R. 1063 • • 6 Stanton r. Powell, 1 Ir. C.L. 182 58 Stevens r. Gourley, 7 C.B. N.S. 99 ; 29 L.J. C.P. 1 ; 1 L.T. 33 ; 6 Jur. N T .S. 147 453 Stratton v. Metropolitan Board of Works, L.R. 10 C.P. 76 ; 44 L.J.M.C. 33 ; 31 L.T. 673 ; 23 W.R. 447 60 Sunderland Overseers v. Sunderland Union, 18 C.B. N.S. 531 ; 34 L.J.M.C. 121 ; 13 L.T. 239 ; 13 W.R. 943 ; 11 Jur. N.S. 688 50, 51 Sutton Harbour Improvement Co. v. Plymouth, 63 L.T. 772 ; 55 J.P. 232 . 179 Swansea Improvement and Tramway Co. r. Swansea, (1892) 1 Q.B. 357; 61 L.J.M.C. 124 ; 66 L.T. 119 ; 40 W.R. 283 ; 56 J.P. 248 . . . . 132 Talargoch Mining Co. v. St. Asaph, L.R. 3 Q.B. 478 ; 9 B. & S. 210 ; 37 L.J.M.C. 149 ; 18 L.T. 711 ; 16 W.R. 860 195 Taylor v. Pendleton Overseers, 19 Q.B.D. 288 ; 56 L.J.M.C. 146 ; 57 L.T. 530 ; 35 W.R. 762 ; 51 J.P. 613 222 Tennant v. Bell, 9 Q.B. 684 ; 16 L.J.M.C. 31 294 Tennant v. Creston, 8 Q.B. 707 ; 15 L.J.M.C. 105 . . . . ■ . ■ 294 Thursby r. Briercliffe and Entwistle, (1895) A.C. 32 ; 46 L.J.M.C. 66 ; 71 L.T. 849 ; 59 J.P. 180 ; 11 R. 38 195 Tunnicliffe e. Birkdale, 20 Q.B.D. 450 ; 56 L.J.M.C. 109 ; 59 L.T. 190 . . 77 Turner v. Cameron, L.R. 5 Q.B. 306 ; 10 B. & S. 931 ; 39 L.J. Q.B. 125 ; 22 L.T. 525 ; 18 W.R. 544 119 Tyne Boiler Works r. Longbenton, 18 Q.B.D. 81 ; 56 L.J.M.C. 8 ; 55 L.T. 825 ; 33 W.R. 110; 51 J.P. 420 41,42,119 Tyne Coal Co. v. Wallsend, 46 L.J.M.C. 185 ; 35 L.T. 854 . . . -34, 194 Tyne Improvement Commissioners v. Chirton, 32 L.J.M C. 192; 6 L.T. 489 . 66, 94 V Van Mining Co. r. Llanidloes, L.R. 1 Ex. I). 310; 45 L.J.M.C. 138; 34 L.T. 642 206, 446 xxxii TABLE OF CASES. W I' vi. i: Walsall '. London and North- Western Railway Co., 1 A.C. 30; 48 L.J.M.C. 65; 39L.T. 453; 13 J.P. 108 250,349 Walsall v. London and North- Western Railway Co., 4 A.C. 467 ; 48 L.J.M.C. 166; 41 L.T. 106 ; 28 W.R. 52 88 Warwick ami Birmingham Canal v. Birmingham, '27 L.T. 487 ... 137 Watkiiis, Ex parte, 5 L.T. (505; 10 W.R. 249 255,344 Watkins v. Milton-next- Graveserid,L.R. 3Q.B.350 ; 37 L.J.M.C. 73 ; 18 L.T. 601; 16 W.R. 1050 • 24,181 Watson, Kipling, and Co., In re, 23 < !h. D. 500 ; 52 L.J. Ch. 473 ; 49 L.T. 115 ; 31 W.R. 574 7 Werhurgh Overseers v. Hutchinson, L.R. 5 Ex. 19; 49 L.J.M.C. 23; 28 w.R. 153 72,392 West Bromwich School Board v. West Bromwich, 13 Q.B.D. 929 ; 53 L.J.M.C. 153; 52 L.T. 164: 32 W.R. 866; 48 J. P. 808 44 West Ham v. Essex JJ. and London County Council, (1896) A.C. 443; 65 L.J.M.C. 231 ; 75 L.T. 1 ; 60 J.P. 756 244, 267, 377 West Ham v. Fourth City Mutual Building Society, (1892) 1 Q.B. 654; 61 L.J.M.C. 128 ; 66 L.T. 350 ; 40 W.R. 446 ; 56 J.P. 438 . . 56, 57, 66, 312 West Ham v. lies, 8 A.C. 386 ; 52 L.J.M.C. 650 ; 49 L.T. 205 ; 31 W.R. 928 ; 47 J.P. 708 57, 312 West Ham v. London County Council, vide London County Council v. Church- wardens of Erith. West Hartlepool Iron Co., In re, 34 L.T. 568 7 West London Extension Railway Co. v. Fulham, L.E. 6 Q.B. 220 ; 40 L.J.M.C. 109; 24 L.T. 131; 19 W.R. 744; 34 J.P. 423 . . . 251,345,350 Westmoreland (Earl of) v. Southwick and Oundle, 36 L.T. 108 . . 214, 441 Wetheredr. Calcutt, 4 M. & Gr. 566; 11 L.J.M.C. 123 293 Wheeler v. Burmington, 8 W.R. 412 : 6 Jur. N.S. 698 246 Wheeler v. Burmington, 1 B. & S. 709 ; 31 L.J.M.C. 57 ; 8 Jur. X.S. 304 . 229 Wheeler v. Metropolitan Board of Works, L.R. 4 Ex. 303; 38 L.J. Ex. 165 ; 20 L.T. 984 59 Whitchurch v. Chapman, 3 B. & Ad. 691 ........ 294 Williams v. Bedminster Union, 30 L.T. 710; 22 W.R. 943 ... 233, 239, 249, 261, 266, 272, 376 Williams v. Jones, 12 East 346 187 Williams v. Llangeinwen, 1 B. & S. 699 ; 31 L J.M.C. 54 229 Worcester Corporation r. Droitwich Union, L.R. 2 Ex. D. 49; 46 L.J.M.C. 241 ; 36 L.T. 186 ; 24 W.R. 336 42, 44, 159 Workington, Ex parte, (1894) 1 Q.B. 416 ; 70 L.T. 143 ; 42 W r .R. 177 ; 58 J.P. 381; 9 R. 135 241,379 Y Yarmouth (Mayor of) v. Groom, H. & C. 102; 32 L.J. Ex. 74 ; 7 L.T. 161 ; 8 Jur. N.S. 677 25 Yeates v. Chorlton-on-Medlock, 48 L.T. 872 ; 47 J.P. 630 ... 30 TABLE OF STATUTES. A STATUTES SET OUT IN APPENDIX. 43 Eliz., c. 2 . 17 Geo. II., c. 3 . 17 Geo. II., c. 38 . 41 Geo. III., c. 23 . 59 Geo. III., c. 12 3 & 4 Will. IV., c. 30 6 & 7 Will IV., c. 96 3 & 4 Vict., c. 89 . 6 & 7 Vict., c. 36 . 12 & 13 Vict., c. 14 12 & 13 Vict., c. 45 25 & 26 Vict., c. 82 25 & 26 Vict., c. 103 27 & 28 Vict., c. 39 43 & 44 Vict., c. 7 . 31 & 32 Vict.,c. 110 32 & 33 Vict., c. 40 32 & 3-i Vict., c. 41 45 & 46 Vict., c. 20 32 k 33 Vict., c. 67 47 Vict., c. 5 37 & 38 Vict., c. 54 52 & 53 Vict., c. 27 53 & 54 Vict., c. 17 54 & 55 Vict., c. 33 59 & 60 Vict., c. 16 Agricultural Rates Order (An Act for the Relief of the Poor) [The Poor Rate Act, 1744) .... (An Act to Amend 43 Eliz., c. 2) . (An Act for the Better Collection of Poor Rate) (An Act to Amend the Laws for the Relief of th Poor, Sturges Bourne's Act) (An Act to Exempt Churches, Chapels, etc., from Poor Rate) ...... (An Act to Regulate Parochial Assessments) (An Act to Exempt Stock-in- Trade from Rates) (An Act to Exempt Scientific and Literary Societies from Rates) ...... (An Act to enable Overseers to Recover Costs of Bis training for Rates) ..... (An Act to Amend the Procedure in Courts of Quarter Sessions) ..... (An Art fur the more Economical Recover;/ of Pooi Rates, etc.) ..... (( Union Assessment Act, 1862) -! ( Union Assessment Art, Amendment Art, 1864) {(Union Assessment Act, 1884) (Telegraph Art, 1868) (An Art to Exempt from Rating Sunday and Rag g Schools) ....... [(The Poor Rate Assessment and Collection Art, 1869) "x(The Poor Rate Assessment and Collection Art, 1869, Amendment Act, 1882) .... ((The Valuation (Metropolis) Jet, 1869) . [(The Valuation (Metropolis) Amendment Act, 1884) (The Rating Act, 1874) (The Advertising Stations Rating Act, 1889) . (Public Health (Rating of Orchards) Act, 1890) (Allotments Rating Exemption Act, 1891) (Agricultural Rates Act, 1896) 1896 PA&E 287 292 295 303 311 314 315 324 325 330 342 353 354 375 382 384 385 387 395 396 438 440 448 451 452 453 462 XXXIV TABLE OF STATUTES. STATUTES REFERRED TO BUT NOT SET OUT IN APPENDIX. 16 Geo. II., C. 18 . 3 Geo. IV., c. 126 . llGeo.IV.&lWill.IV., 3 & 4 Will. IV., c. 90 6 & 7 Will. IV., c. 71 7 Will. IV. & 1 Vict., c. 4 & 5 Vict., c. 48 . .5 k 6 Vict., c. 79 . 7 & 8 Vict., c. 85 . 8 & 9 Vict., c. 18 . 11 & 12 Vict., c. 43 11 & 12 Vict., c. 78 (An Act to empower Justices to act in Parishes in which they are rateable) ..... (An Act to Amend the Laws regulating Turnpike Tolls) c.70 (An Act for the more effectual administration of Justice in England and Wales) . (Lighting and Watching Act, 1833) (Tithe Commutation Act, 1836) 45 (An Act to alter Mode of giving Notices on Sundays) [Repealed] ... ..... (Passenger Duty Act, 1842) (Railway Regulations Act, 1844) .... (Lands Clauses Act, 1845) (Summary Jurisdiction Art, 1848) .... (An Act for the Amendment of Administration of the Criminal Lau-) . . . 250,275,278 13 & 14 Vict., c. 15 & 16 Vict., c. 23 & 24 Vict., c. 26 & 27 Vict., c. •29 & 30 Vict., c. 29 &30 Vict., c. 31 k 32 Vict., c. 32 & 33 Vict., c. 33 & 34 Vict., c, 37 & 38 Vict., c. 38 & 39 Vict., c. 42 & 43 Vict., c. 45 & 46 Vict., c. 47 & 48 Vict., c. 51 & 52 Vict., c. 51 k 52 Vict., c. 52 k 53 Vict., c. 53 Vict., c. 5 . 54 Vict., c. 8 . 55 & 56 Vict., c. 56 & 57 Vict., c. 57 & 58 Vict., c. 57 & 58 Vict., c. xxxm. 81 112 65 117 118 122 62 78 96 55 49 50 43 25 41 49 240 80 248 195,454 223 292 89 92 92 58 344 (Railway Clearing Act, 1850) (County Rates Act, 1852) (Defence of the Realm Act, 1860) . ( Volunteer Act, 1863) (Reformatory Schools Act, 1866) . (Industrial Schools Act, 1866) (Poor Relief Act, 1868) (Debtors Act, 1869) (Tramways Act, 1870) . (Statute Law Revision Act, 1874) . (Public Health Act, 1875) . (Summary Jurisdiction Act, 1879) . (Municipal Corporations Act, 1882) (Summary Jurisdiction Act, 1884) . (Railway and Canal Traffic Act, 1888) (Local Government Act, 1888) 268, 282, 409, (Arbitration Act, 1889) . (Lunacy Act, 1890) (Tithe Act, 1891) .... (Public Libraries Act, 1892) . 132, 96 61 76 86 77 77 185 256 131 80 453, 461 278 61, 89 342 131 410, 445 350 89 224 454 (Local Government Act, 1894) . (Judicature Act, 1894) . (Merchant Shipping Act, 1894) . 233, 248, 289 250, 256, 278, 349 . . . 85 PART I. THE CODE TITLE I. OF EATING GENERALLY. ARTICLE 1— Occupiers of the following heredit- KSment* aments are liable to be rated: Land; Buildings; Mines ; Tithe Rent-charge ; Land used for a Planta- tion or a Wood or for the growth of Saleable Under- woods and not subject to any right of common ; Sporting Rights when severed from the occupation of the land; Advertising Stations. This Article summarises the various properties made rateable by the Statute of Elizabeth (43 Eliz., c. 2) (a), the Eating Act. 1874 (37 & 38 Vict., c. 54) (b), and the Advertising Stations (Eating Act) 1889 (52 & 53 Vict., c. 27) (c). Each of the above will be dealt with separately hereafter. By the Agricultural Eates Act, 1896 (59 & 60 Vict., c. 16) IgSSS!* 1 (<7), "the occupier of agricultural laud in England shall be liable, in the case of every rate to which this Act applies, to pay one-half only of the rate in the pound payable in respect of buildings and other hereditaments." This Act, therefore, relieves occupiers of agricultural land of one-half of the rates for the period of five years from March 31st, 1897. " Agricultural land " is defined by the Act as " land used as arable, meadow, or pasture ground only, cottage gardens exceeding one quarter of an acre, market gardens, nursery grounds, orchards or allotments, but does not include land occupied together with a house as a park, gardens, other than as aforesaid, pleasure-grounds, or any land kept or preserved (a) Appendix, p. 287. (b) Appendix, p. 440. (c) Appendix, p. 448. (rf) Appendix, p. 453. 1a 4 A Code of the. Law of Rating. mainly or exclusively for purposes of sport or recreation, or land used as a racecourse." Provision is made in the Act for separate valuation lists for the value of agricultural land. Rate to be on net annual ARTICLE 2— Every rate for the relief of the value. poor shall be made upon an estimate of the net annual value of the several hereditaments rated thereunto ; that is to say, of the rent at which the same might reasonably be expected to let from year to year, free of all usual tenant's rates and taxes, and tithe commutation rent-charge, if any, and deducting therefrom the probable average annual cost of the repairs, insurance, and other expenses, if any, necessary to maintain them in a state to command such rent. This is enacted by 6 & 7 Will. IV., c. 96, section 1 (e), a statute passed for the purpose " of ^ establishing one uniform mode of rating for the relief of the poor. " The law as laid down in this Act follows to a great extent the decision in Rex v.Adames(f), in which case it was decided that lands are rateable to the relief of the poor in proportion to the net rent which a tenant at rack- rent would pay, he discharging all rates, charges and out-goings. Every kind of property is now rated in accordance with the above rule. i^ntai estunated ^ ie r0ss estimated rental of any property is the rent at which the property might reasonably be expected to let from year to year, the tenant paying tenant's rates, taxes, and tithe rent- charge, if any, and the landlord paying for repairs, insurance, and other expenses necessary for maintaining the property in a state to command such rent (g) . Rateable value. The rateable value is the gross estimated rental less the pro- bable average annual cost of repairs, insurance, and the other expenses necessary for maintaining the property in a state to command such rent. (e) Appendix, p. 315. (/) 4 B. & Ad. 61 ; 2 L.J.M.C. 90. (g) 25 & 26 Vict., c. 103, s. 15, Appendix, p. 359. Of Rating Generally. 5 The definition of "Gross Value " in the Valuation (Metropolis) Gross value. Act, 1869, is slightly differently worded from that of " Gross Estimated Rental." It means " the annual rent which a tenant might reasonably be expected, taking one year with another, to pay for an hereditament, if the tenant undertook to pay all usual tenant's rates and taxes and tithe commutation rent-charge, if any, and if the landlord undertook to bear the cost of the repairs and insurance, and the other expenses, if any, necessary to main- tain the hereditament in a state to command that rent." (//) By 43 Eliz., c. 2, the " occupier " is the person rateable. It J ^£ pier " has, however, always been a matter of difficulty to define what is meant by the word " occupier " within the statute. In Reg. v. St. Panaris Assessment Committee (i), Lush, J., says : "It is not easy to give an accurate and exhaustive definition of the word ' occupier.' Occupation includes possession as its primary element, but it also includes something more. Legal possession does not of itself constitute an occupation. The owner of a vacant house is in possession, and may maintain trespass against any one who invades it, but as long as he leaves it vacant he is not rateable for it as the occupier. If, however, he furnishes it, and keeps it ready for habitation whenever he pleases to go to it, he is an occupier, though he may not reside in it one day a year. On the other hand, a person who, without having any title, takes actual possession of a house or piece of land, whether by leave of the owner or against his will, is the occupier of it. Another element, however, besides actual possession of the land, is necessary to constitute the kind of occupation which the Act contemplates, and that is permanence. An itinerant showman who erects a temporary structure for his performances, may be in exclusive actual possession, and may, with strict grammatical propriety, be said to occupy the ground on which his structure is placed, but it is clear that he is not such an occupier as the statute intends. As the poor-rate is not made day by day or week by week, but for months in advance, it would be absurd to hold that a person, who comes into a parish with the (h) Appendix, p. 398. (i) 2 Q.B.D. 581 ; 4G L.J.M.C. 243 ; 37 L.T. 12G ; 25 W.E. 827. A Code of the Lair of Rating. Owner — when rated instead of occupier. Occupation not divisible. intention to remain there a few days or a week only, incurs a liability to maintain the poor for the next six months. Thus a transient, temporary holding of land is not enough to make the holding rateable. It must be* an occupation which has in it the character of permanence ; a holding as a settlor, not as a wayfarer." For cases where the owner pays the rate instead of the occupier the reader is referred to Article 14, and to the Poor-rate Assessment and Collection Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict., c. 41) (/>). An owner or occupier cannot divide up his occupation. If he occupies one room in his house he is rateable as occupier of the whole. In Rer v. Aberysttcith (I), Lord Ellenborough said : " There is no instance where a man has been permitted to carve out the occupation of his house in the manner now attempted ; locking up one room and then another, but using as much of the house as he found convenient. This would make a new system of occupation by subdivisions." He referred to the old case of Rex v. St. Mwy-the-Less (/n), where it was held that an owner who occupied a part of his house was rateable for the whole. In the case of AUchurch v. Jlendon Union (it), a house not structurally severed was let partly to one tenant, and partly to another, and each had the exclusive use of the part let to him. There was a staircase leading from the front door to the upper rooms, and a joint user of the front garden and the back yard, in which there was a closet. The Court of Appeal held they could not be rated as joint occupiers, but that each was the occupier of a separate tenement capable of being rated, and each should be separately rated. Lord Esher, M.H., said : " I say dis- tinctly this whole matter of structural separation is an exploded phrase, and an exploded doctrine for all purposes whatever." The law as to whether an official of the Court is liable to be rated when in occupation is in a very unsatisfactory state. In Reg. v. Curzon (o), the Court refused a distress warrant against the official liquidator of a company in process of (/.') Appendix, p. 387. (0 10 East. 354. (m) 4 T.R. 477. (n) (1891) 2 Q.B. 436 ; 61 L.J.M.C. 27 ; 65 L.T. 450. Vide also Stamper v. Sunderland, L.R. 3 C.P. 888 ; 37 L.J. M.C.137 ; 18 L.T. 682 ; 16 W.R. 1063. (o) 46 L.T. 159 ; 30 W.R. 521 ; 47 J.P. 37. Of Mating Generally. 7 liquidation. A poor-rate had been made on the premises of the company ; the name of the company appeared in the rate-book, and also the name of the liquidator with the description, " official liquidator." It is difficult to reconcile the foregoing case with Bent v. Commondale Overseers. (_/;) In that the name in the rate-book was that of the liquidator with the description, "liquidator"; and the Court held that the justices were right in issuing a distress warrant against the liquidator who had not appealed against a rate which was good on the face of it. The Court seem to have decided the case on the ground that the overseers gave evidence that the liquidator was " an occupier in the ordinary sense," and that that evidence had not been challenged. In the case of In re West Hartlepool Iron Co. (q), where a liquidator entered into possession of property solely for the purpose of winding-up, the Court held that the liquidator was not bound to pay a rate in full that was assessed before the winding-up, but that the commissioners must prove in the winding-up for such sum as they might be entitled to. In the case of In re Watson, Kipling Sf Co. (r), where the occupation by the liquidator of a company had not been bene- ficial, an application for payment in full of poor-rate and other rates made after the liquidation was refused. Kay, J., said that the case of In re West Hartlepool Iron Co. (s) was directly in point. If a liquidator puts a caretaker into possession of a company's premises until he can dispose of them more advantageously than he would by a forced sale, he must pay in full any rate made after the winding-up. (t) There is a proviso to section 1 of 6 & 7 Will. IV., c. 96, as proviso to 6 &7 Will. IV. c. 96 follows : " Provided that nothing herein contained shall be con- s. i." strued to alter or affect the principles or different relative 0>) 56 J.P. 519. (q) 34 L.T. 568. (/•) 23 Ch. D. 500 ; 52 L.J. Ch. 473 ; 49 L.T. 115 ; 31 W.R. 57-1. (s) Supi'a. (0 In re Blazer Fire Lighter Co. (1895), 1 Ch. 402 ; 64 L.J. Ch. 161 ; 71 L.T. 665 ; 43 W.R. 364 ; 13 R. 52, following In re National Arms and Ammunition Co., 28 Ch. D. 474 ; 54 L.J. Ch. 673 ; 52 L.T. 237 ; 33 W.R. 585. 8 A Code of the Late of Rating. liabilities (if any) according to which different kinds of heredita- ments are now by law rateable." This proviso was introduced to preserve the law with regard to the rating of tithes, (u) It has had no effect since the decision in Reg. v. Capet. (,r) Deductions. The general principle as to deductions stated in this Article applies to all classes of property. Where, however, there is no actual demise, as in the case of railways, canals, etc., many other considerations arise in ascertaining what rent a tenant from year to year would pay. In such cases there are certain deductions to be made, such as tenant's profits, interest on capital, etc. These will be dealt with when the rating of the . various properties is considered hereafter. clnno't ieSln? 1 * ARTICLE 3— Where the occupier of land or become tenant. p rem - ges canno t legally become the tenant of such land or premises, such occupier must nevertheless be taken into account as a possible tenant in deter- mining the rateable value of such land or premises. This was so decided in the important case of London County Council v. Erith (//), where the House of Lords approved and affirmed the decisions in Reg. v. London School Board (z) and Burton-on-Trent Corporation v. Egginton. (a) In giving judg- ment Lord Herschell, L.C., said : " It has never been doubted that the rent which is actually being paid by the occupier does not necessarily indicate what is the rent which a tenant might reasonably be expected to pay, or that an owner who is in occupation, and who may not be willing to let on any terms, is none the less rateable. The tenant described by the statute has always been spoken of by the Court as the ' hypothetical "Hypothetical , -r-r-r, in • • 1 n 1 tenant." tenant. Whether the premises are m the occupation ot the owner or not, the question to be answered is : Supposing they were vacant and to let, what rent might reasonably be expected («) Post p. 224. (.»■) 12 A. & E. 382 ; 9 L.J.M.C. 65. (y) (1893) A.C. 562 ; 63 L.J.M.C. 9 ; 69 L.T. 725 ; 42 W.R. 330 ; 6 R. 22, post p. 13. 0) 17 Q.B.D. 738 ; 55 L.J.M.C. 169; 55 L.T. 384; 34 W.R. 583 ; 50 J.P. 419. (a) 24 Q.B.D. 197 ; 59 L.J.M.C. 1 ; 62 L.T. 412. Of Rating General///. 9 to be obtained for them ? So far there can, I think, be no difference of opinion. But then arises the question : Is the owner to be regarded as one of the possible tenants in con- sidering what rent might reasonably be expected ? Bearing in mind what was the object of the Legislature in prescribing this test of annual value, I cannot myself entertain any doubt that the owner ought to be thus taken into account. I entirely concur in the decision arrived at by the Court of Appeal in Beg. v. School Board for London, (b) I think the circumstances of that case when examined are cogent to support the view which there obtained acceptance. If the School Board were to hire buildings for the purpose of establishing a school, it could not be contested that these buildings would be rateable, and that the rent which the School Board paid would be a most important element in determining the sum at which they were to be assessed. If instead of hiring school buildings they erected, upon land similarly situate, like buildings, or if they were to buy the reversion of the buildings they hired, and so become the owners, why in either of these cases should the assessment be different ? The premises are to them in all these cases of the same value and their occupation is equally bene- ficial : why should the sum at which they are to be assessed to the relief of the poor differ ? Again, suppose premises of occupation value for agricultural purposes were to be adopted by the owner for use in connection with the manufacture of some article under a patent process, which he alone was licensed to use, and that in their then condition no person would be willing to take them, would the premises cease to be rateable or be assessable only at a nominal sum although they might be much more valuable to the owner and their occupation much more beneficial than if they had remained fit for agriculture and in a condition to be readily let for that purpose? I cannot think so. These are illustrations. Many more might be adduced pointing in the same direction and to my mind conclusively showing that the object of the Legislature in enacting the provisions of the Statute of William IV., to which I have referred, would be defeated if the question what the (b) Supra. 10 A Code of the Laic of Rating. owner would have given if the premises had been to let and he had been free to take them were discarded from consideration." (c) statutory pro- In a more recent case (d) the House of Lords has held that hibition against , ., . . earning rent, where no rent can be earned because 01 a statutory prohibition, the rent which could have been earned but for such prohibition ought not to be taken into consideration in determining the rateable value of the property. ARTICLE 4.— In order to render an occupier rateable his occupation must be a beneficial occupation. Occupation J n the Merscii Docks cases (e) Blackburn, J., in delivering the must be J v ' ' ' ° beneficial. opinion of the Judges, said : "It is clear that there can be no valid rate unless the occupation be such as to be of value, and if the words ' beneficial occupation ' are to be understood as merely signifying that the occupation is of value (which is obviously the sense in which the phrase is used in many of the cases cited at the Bar) it is clear that a beneficial occupation is essential as the foundation of the rate." Again, the Lord Chancellor, in delivering judgment, said : " Occupation to be rateable must be of property yielding, or capable of yielding, a net annual value, that is to say, a clear rent over and above the probable average annual cost of the repairs, insurance, and other expenses, if any, necessary to maintain the property in a state to command such rent. It is in this sense that I under- stand ' beneficial occupation ' wherever it is said that to support a rate the occupation must be a beneficial one. For, on principle, it is by no means necessary that the occupation should be beneficial to the occupier. It is sufficient if the property be capable of yielding a clear rent over and above the necessary outgoings." (c) (1893) A.C. 588-9. (d) Sculcoates Union v. Hull Dock Co. (1895) A.C. 13(3 ; 64 L.J. M.C. 49 ; 71 L.T. 642 ; 43 W.R. 623 ; 59 J.P. 605 ; 11 R. 74, post p. 43. (e) 11 H.L.C. 443; 35 L.J. M.C. 1 ; 20 C.B.N.S. 56 ; 12 L.T. 643 ; 13 W.R. 1069 ; 11 Jur. N.S. 746. This case overruled Rex v. Salter* Load Sluice, 4 T.R. 730. Of Rating Go/era////. 11 Since the above decision the question whether a pecuniary profit must be made before property is rateable has come before the House of Lords (/), and it has been decided that property is rateable " where the occupation is of value." This will be dealt with in the next Article. Common lands are only rateable where there is a beneficial Common Lands. occupation. This was the decision in Mayor of Lincoln v. Holmes Common (g) where the Corporation of Lincoln were in occupa- tion of Holmes Common. The Court held that the Corporation who were the owners and occupiers were not rateable on the ground that the common was subject to a profit a prendre in the freemen which exhausted the whole value of the occupation. Cockburn, C.J., said : " There are two questions for our decision. First, are the Corporation of Lincoln liable to be rated in respect of the occupation of the land ; and, secondly, supposing they are liable to be rated, is the value such as that there should be a substantial rating, or ought the rate to be reduced to nothing ? I am of opinion that the Corporation are not liable to be rated. I think we can distinguish this case from Bex v. Mayor of York (h) and the other cases which preceded it (/), by referring to the complete alteration which the Municipal Corporation Act (5 & 6 Will. IV., c. 76) has introduced in the position of the freemen relatively to the Corporation. In those cases the freemen were an integral part of the Corporation ; or rather, I should say, they were the Corporation. Since the Municipal Corporation Act the freemen have been entirely detached from the corporate body. They are now no longer a part of the Municipal Corporation, and therefore do not stand to the Corporation in the relation in which the freemen did when these cases were decided. The Corporation of Lincoln, as constituted under the Municipal (/) London Count)/ Council v. Churchwardens of Erith (1893), A .(J. 562 ; 63 L.J.M.C. 9 ; 69 L.T. 725 ; 42 W.E, 330 ; 6 R, 22. (jf) L.R. 2 Q.B. 482 ; 8 B. & S. 344 ; 36 L.J.M.C. 73. (h) 6 A. & E. 419. (?) Rex v. Watson, 5 East 480 ; Bex v. Tewkesbury, 13 East 155 : Rex v. Sudbury, 1 B. & C. 389 ; Rex v. Churchill, 4 B. & C. 750. 12 A Code of the Law of Reding. Corporation Act, have vested in them whatever lands were vested in the Corporation as that body existed before, and therefore they are the owners and occupiers of the soil ; but then they are the owners and occupiers, subject to the right which the freemen and their descendants have to depasture certain cattle on those lands ; and it appears that the enjoy- ment which the freemen and their descendants have in respect of the right of pasture on those lands exhausts what may be called the profit of the land. There is nothing left for the benefit of the Corporation ; they have no beneficial interest whatever in the land They cannot be said to stand in the position of trustees, and the freemen in position of cestui que trust ; and even if they could stand in that position the case does not come within the principle laid down by the House of Lords in Jones v. 3Iersey Docks and Harbour Board, (k) The decision in that case establishes that persons who are trustees for others, and hand over to them the profits, are themselves owners and occupiers, and therefore prima facie are liable to be rated ; and the decision even goes the length of saying that, notwithstanding the persons rated derive no profit whatever, they are liable to be rated, because they can stop the amount of the rate out of the profits before they are handed over to those who are entitled to them. That principle cannot be applied to this case. The Corporation receive nothing either for them- selves or for anybody else The case therefore stands simply thus : The Corporation are owners and occupiers of the common, subject to a profit a prendre, which exhausts the whole value of the land, and leaves no beneficial value to the occupation of those persons who are owners and occupiers ; therefore I think, according to the principle which is still law, notwithstanding the decision of Jones v. Mersey Docks and Harbour Board (J), the Corporation are not liable to be rated." This case was cited and must be taken to have been approved by the Court of Appeal in Loudon County Council v. Church- wardens of Lambeth, (in) (/•) 11 H.L.C. 443; 35 L.J.M.C. 1 : 20 C.B.N.S. 56 ; 12 L.T. G43 ; 13 W.R. 1069 ; 11 Jur. N.S. 746. (7) Supra. Vide Mersey Docks Casus, (m) (1896) 2 Q.B. 25 : 65 L.J.M.C. 148 : 74 L.T. 605 ; 44 W.R. 621. Of Rating Generally. 13 In Rex v. Mayor of York (n) the Corporation were held rateable for land vested in them under an Inclosure Act, where they appointed pasture masters who made regulations respecting the enjoyment of the pastures, directed repairs, and appointed a herdsman who watched the cattle and prevented them from straying. Lord Denman, C.J., said the case could not he distinguished from Rex v. Tewkesbury (o) and Rex v. Sudbury, (p) These cases were distinguished by Cockburn, C.J., in Mayor of Lincoln v. Holmes Common (q) on the ground that they were passed before the Municipal Corporation Act, 1835. Rex v. Mayor of York (r) was decided in 1837, two years after that Act was passed. The Court there considered itself bound by the earlier cases, and this may have been the explanation of the distinction drawn by Cockburn, C.J. Otherwise it is difficult to reconcile the two decisions. In Reg. v. Chamberlains of Alnwick (s) where the facts in the case disclosed that the interest of the freemen was substantially that of commoners only, the Corporation was held not rateable to the poor in respect thereof. The law with respect to the rating of common lands is in an unsatisfactory state, and it is to be hoped that before long all the cases cited above will come under the consideration of the House of Lords. ARTICLE 5.— Property is rateable whenever the valuable occu- , . . „ pation. occupation is valuable, irrespective of whether a pecuniary profit is made. This was first decided by the House of Lords in London London sewers J Case. County Council v. Churchwardens of Erith. (t) In that case the London County Council were owners of land and premises con- sisting of a pumping station and works, which they occupied 0) 6 A. & E. 419. (o) 13 East 155. (p) 1 B. & C. 389. (q) Supra. (V) Supra. (s) 9 A. & E. 444. (0 (1893) A.C. 562 ; 63 L.J.M.C. 9 ; 69 L.T. 725 ; 42 W.R. 330; 6 R. 22. 14 A Code of the Lair of Eating. and used as a necessary part of the Metropolitan sewage system, and to enable them to perform statutory duties. The land and premises while so used were incapable of yielding a profit, and the London County Council were the only possible tenants. If the land and premises had been in the possession of a private owner instead of the London County Council, the latter would have been willing to pay a yearly rent for the same, as part of the Metropolitan sewage system, sufficient to support the rateable value at which they were assessed to the poor-rate. If the land and premises were disconnected from the sewage system, and in the hands of a tenant applied to any other purpose for which they might be available, the rateable value would be lower. The London County Council were also owners of outfall sewers used for the discharge of the sewage into the Thames, and constructed in an embank- ment erected upon land purchased for that purpose and previously rateable. The House of Lords held that the true test of beneficial occupation was not whether a profit could be made, but whether the occupation was of value, and decided that the pumping-station and works and the outfall sewers were rateable. In the exhaustive judgment of the Court which was delivered by the Lord Chancellor (Lord Herschell), all the important cases as to beneficial occupation were considered. The deci- sions of the Court of Appeal in Reg. v. School Board for London (11) and Burton-on- Trent Corporation v. Churchwardens of Egginton{.r) were approved; while the decision in Owen College v. Overseers of Chorlton-upon-Medlock (y) was overruled. It was admitted that the County Council were the only possible occupiers of the property, and that there was no profit made. The House of Lords decided that the test of beneficial occupation was not whether a pecuniary profit could be made, but whether the occupation was of value. In the course of his judgment Lord Herschell referred to what was said by (u) 17 Q.B.D. 738 ; 55 L.J.M.C. 169 ; 55 L.T. 384: 34 W.R.583; 50 J.P. 419. (./) 24 Q.B.D. 197 ; 59 L.J.M.C. 1 ; 62 L.T. 412. (y) 18 Q.B.D. 403 ; 56 L.J.M.C. 29 ; 56 L.T. 373. Of Bating General/)/. 15 Blackburn, J., in delivering the opinion of the judges in the Mersey Docks Cases (z) : — " Much reliance was placed in the argument at the Bar in the present cases on the language used by Blackburn, J., in delivering the opinion of the judges in Jones v. Mersey Docks, (z) The learned judge said : ' It is clear that there can be no valid rate unless the occupation be such as to be of -value; and if the words "beneficial occupa- tion" are to be understood as merely signifying that the occupation is of value (which is obviously the sense in which the phrase is used in many of the cases cited at the Bar), it is clear that a beneficial occupation is essential as the foundation of the rate.' The learned judge, in my opinion, did not and could not have meant that it is essential to rateability that a particular occupier of the land can make a pecuniary profit by the use to which he is putting it. D is, I think, rateable whenever its occupation is of value" He also quotes with approval that portion of the judgment "Beneficial 1 x x occupation.' of Lord Denman, O.J., in Governor of Bristol Poor v. Trait (a), where Lord Denman said : " The absence of ' beneficial occupa- tion ' was also much insisted upon ; and it was contended that that is the true criterion to ascertain whether property be rateable or not. It is not to be denied but that this phrase, ' beneficial occupation,' has been in frequent use ; and, generally speaking, it serves tolerably well to convey rather a popular notion than to give a certain rule for deciding the question of rateability in every instance. Because, if by beneficial be meant profitable, or anything like it, the expression is obviously fallacious." The Lord Chancellor also states that he agrees with Lush, J., who stated that " the rateable quality of land was not to be determined by what it once was, or by what it might thereafter become, but by what it was at the time the rate was made." (b) The House of Lords overruled the principle laid down by the Court of Appeal in the Owens College Case (c), that where 0) 11 H.L.C. 443 ; 35 L.J.M.C. 1 ; 20 C.B. N.S. 56 ; 12 L.T. 643 ; 13 W.R. 1069 ; 11 Jur. N.S. 746. (a) 5 A. & E. 1 ; 5 L.J.M.C. 113. (6) Metropolitan Board of Works v. West Ham, L.R. 6 Q.B. 193 ; 40 L.J.M.C. 30 ; 23 L.T. 490 ; 19 W.R. 246. (c) 18 Q.B.D. 403 ; 56 L.J.M.C. 29 ; 56 L.T. 373. 16 A Code of the Law of Rating. the occupier cannot legally become a tenant, the value to him of the hereditament is not to be taken into account in estimat- ing the rateable value, {ft) Hospital. It had been decided before the Mersey Docks Cases (c) that hospitals were not rateable. (/) This view was dissented from by the House of Lords in the Mersey Docks Cases ; and more recently in St. Thomas's Hospital v. Sfratton (g) the House of Lords decided that the rule laid down in the Mersey Docks Cases and in Greig v. University of Edinburgh (/?) applied to hospitals, and that St. Thomas's Hospital was liable to be rated to the relief of the poor of the parish. In Reg. v. Stapleton, (/) premises occupied as a charity school were held rateable to the poor. So was the master of a free school in respect of house occupied by himself and family, (k) School Boards. In assessing to the poor-rate schools occupied by a School Board, which make no profit in a commercial sense, as tenant of the schools, the School Board itself ought to be considered as a possible tenant, and the gross and rateable values ought to be calculated by the rent which the Board might reasonably be expected to pay for the premises for use as schools. (/) This was decided by the Court of Appeal, and approved by the House of Lords in London County Council v. Churchwardens of Erith. (m) sewage farm. The decision of Reg. v. School Board for London (n) was followed in Burfon-on-Trent Corporation v. Churchwardens of (d) (1893) A.C. 594, 595. (e) 11 H.L.C. 443 ; 35 L.J.M.C. 1. Ante p. 15. Note («). (}) Rex v. St. Ltike's Hospital, 2 Burr. 1053. (g) L.R. 7 H.L. 477 ; 45 L.J.M.C. 23 ; 23 W.R. 882. (70 L.E. 1 H.L. Sc. App. 348. Post p. 77. (0 4 B. & S. 629 ; 33 L.J.M.C. 17 ; 9 L.T. 322 ; 12 W.R. 49 ; 10 Jut. 44. (k) Rex v. Catt, 6 T.R. 332. (Z) Reg. v. School Board for London, 17 Q.B.D. 738 ; 55 L.J.M.C. 169 ; 55 L.T. 384 ; 34 W.R. 583 ; 50 J.P. 419. Vide Reg. v. Sterry, 12 A. & E. 84 ; 9 L.J.M.C. 105. (m) (1893) A.C. 562 ; 63 L.J.M.C. 9 ; 69 L.T. 725 ; 42 W.R. 330 ; 6 R. 22. 00 17 Q.B.D. 738 ; 55 L.J.M.C. 169 ; 55 L.T. 384 ; 34 W.R. 583 ; 50 J.P. 419. Of Rating Generally. 17 JEgginton (o), where it was decided that the appellants, who had purchased land for a sewage farm, under powers given them by statute, ought, in estimating the rateable value, to be considered as possible tenants. In Beg. v. Metropolitan Board of Work* (p) it was held that sewers under sewers passing under the road were not rateable. Lush, J., in delivering the judgment of the Court (Cockburn, C.J., Lush, Hannen, and Hayes, JJ.), said : " As regards the sewers, we are of opinion that they are not rateable, on the short ground that they are not at present the subject of beneficial occupation. No payment is made to the board for the use of them; the rates which they are empowered to levy are for the expense of construction and maintenance, and nothing more. Their occupation yields no profit to the board, as occupiers, either actual or potential." In Met. Board of Work* v. West Ham (a) the Court held sewers on an ■ x ' embankment. that sewers constructed on an embankment in the respondent's parish were not rateable to the poor on the ground that they were not the subject of a beneficial occupation. The only difference between this case and the preceding one is that the sewers are above the surface, whereas in Reg. v. Met. Board of Works (r) they were below. The House of Lords, in London County Council v. Church- wardens of Erith («), has decided that sewers under the public road are not rateable, but that sewers constructed in an embankment erected upon land purchased for that purpose are rateable. The Lord Chancellor (Lord Herschell) said : " I cannot regard as altogether satisfactory, in view of the fuller consideration which has been given to the matter, the grounds upon which the Court of Queen's Bench rested the non- rateability of these sewers ; the judgment seems to assume that there can only be a beneficial occupation where it is such as to yield a profit to the public body occupying the premises. (o) 24 Q.B.D. 197 ; 59 L.J.M.C. 1 ; 62 L.T. 412. (p) L.R. 4 Q.B. 15 ; 38 L.J.M.C. 24 ; 9 B. & S. 937 ; 17 W.R. 1094. (q) L.R. 6 Q.B. 193 ; 40 L.J.M.C. 30 ; 23 L.T. 490 ; 19 W.R. 246. (/■) L.R. 4 Q.B. 15 ; 38 L.J.M.C. 24 ; 9 B. & S. 937. (s) (1893) A.C. 562 ; 63 L.J.M.C. 9 ; 69 L.T. 725 ; 42 W.R. 330 ; 6 R. 22. 2 18 A Code of the Law of Bating. I have already said that, in my opinion, the true test is whether the occupation is of value, and not whether it is one by which pecuniary profit can be made, (t) But it would, undoubtedly, be a serious matter that a hereditament which has for so long a period been deemed free from rateability should now, for the first time, be subjected to it. And there is this peculiarity about the particular subject with which I am dealing: until the sewer was made no rateable subject-matter existed where the sewer now is. If its use as a sewer were abandoned, its rateability would cease, for it is obvious that no person would be willing to take it at any rent. ... So far I have referred to the case of sewers wider land the surface of which was occupied by other persons, and in ordinary course assessed to the poor-rate. But the particular case of the outfall sewer in West Ham is an exceptional one ; that sewer is not constructed underground. Thirty-seven acres of land were purchased by the Metropolitan Board of Works for the purpose of this portion of the outfall sewer. The land so purchased had, down to the time of its purchase, been assessed to the poor-rate. The sewer is carried in an earthen and concrete embankment erected upon the land at an average height of twenty-one feet above the general surface of the land adjoining. The work thus constructed, therefore, differed from the mere creation of a sewer below the surface of land which continued afterwards, as before, liable to assessment, but was an adapta- tion, to the purposes of the board, of land already occupied and rated. I confess I see the utmost difficulty in distinguishing such an erection as this upon the surface of land from any other erection specially suitable for the purposes of a particular occupier, but which might render it of less value for occupation by other persons, not requiring it for that special purpose. And if, in general, owners who occupy land in order to discharge a duty imposed on them by statute may be regarded as amongst the hypothetical tenants, I cannot find any sound basis on which to rest a distinction in favour of the Metropolitan Board of Works or their successors, the London County Council, in (0 Ante p. 13. Of Rating Generally. 19 respect of this particular use of the land which they own. It was, I am aware, held by the Court of Queen's Bench in the year 1870 that there was no distinction, for rating purposes, between a sewer underground and one carried on upon an embankment (u) ; but I have already stated to your Lordships the only ground on which the exemption of the sewers generally can, in my judgment, be rested, and I have pointed out the distinction which exists between an underground sewer and an adaptation of land already rateable to a particular purpose. Lush, J., stated that the rateable quality of land was not to be determined by what it once was, or by what it might thereafter become, but by what it was at the time the rate was made. I quite agree with this ; but if it be the law that the "owner of a hereditament may be regarded as amongst the hypothetical tenants, that rule would seem as applicable to the particular erection whose rateability is the matter in question as to any other." 0) Since the above case was decided the Court of Queen's Bench has held that sewage works on a sewage farm (e.g., a rising main, storage tanks, and effluent culverts) are rateable. (y) Since the decision in the Erith Case (z) the House of Lords have again had the question of " beneficial occupation " before them in Sculcoates Union v. Dock Co. of Kingston-upon-HuJl. (a) In that case the House of Lords decided that a dock company which is prohibited from charging tolls for running powers over its lines is not rateable in respect of the rent which a hypothetical tenant would give in respect of the lines if there were no such statutory restriction. This decision does not in any way alter or modify the decision in the Erith Case, but applies to a class of case which was not dealt with there. In the Erith Case the Lord («) Metropolitan Board of Works v. West Ham, L.R. 6 Q.B. 193 ; 40 L.J.M.C. 30 ; 23 L.T. 490 ; 19 W.R. 246. Or) (1893) A.C. 598-600. (?/) Leicester Corporation v. Beaumont Leys Churchwardens, 63 L.J.M.C. 176 ; 70 L.T. 659 ; 10 R. 401. 0) (1893) A.C. 562 ; 63 L.J.M.C. 9 ; 69 L.T. 725 ; 42 W.R. 330 ; 6 R. 22. («) (1895) A.C. 136 ; 64 L.J.M.C. 49 ; 71 L.T. 642 ; 43 W.R. 623 ; 59 J.P. 612 ; 11 R. 74. 2a 20 A Code of the Law of Rating. Chancellor (Lord Herschell) said : " There is, no doubt, a certain class of cases in which the amount of profit which -can be earned by the occupation of a hereditament is very material in ascertaining the sum at which it should be assessed. In the case of gasworks, waterworks, and other industrial undertakings, where a hereditament is enhanced in value by its connection with a profit-bearing undertaking, the profits earned and the shares of those profits attributable to any particular heredita- ment have to be taken into account, and in such cases as these any restrictions which the law has imposed upon the profit- earning capacity of the undertaking must of course be con^ sidered." (b) Public park. The question of "beneficial occupation" has recently been again discussed in London County Council v. Churchwardens of Lambeth, (c) The London County Council, upon whom no duty was imposed to provide a park for the use of the public, were empowered by statute to acquire by purchase land to be maintained by them as a park, for the perpetual use thereof by the public for exercise and recreation. They accordingly acquired certain hereditaments for that purpose. The necessary expenses of maintaining the park exceeded any sums of money which the County Council could derive from licences for the supply of refreshment therein or for grazing rights, or other- wise. The Court of Appeal held that, as the occupation of the park had no net annual value, it was not rateable to the poor. In the case, as stated, there was no finding that the London County Council would have been willing to have paid any rent. In this respect it differed from the Erith Case, (d) Exclusive occupation. ARTICLE 6.— To make an occupier liable for poor-rate such occupier must be the exclusive occupier. Whether an occupier is the exclusive occupier is a question of fact to be decided in each case. In London and North- (b) (1893) A.C. 592. (c) (1896) 2 Q.B. 25 ; 65 L.J.M.C. 148 ; 74 L.T. 605 ; 44 W.I!. 621. (d) (1893) A.C. 562 ; 63 L.J.M.C. 9 ; 69 L.T. 725 ; 42 W.R. 330 ; 6 R. 22. Of Rating Generally. 21 Western Railway Co. v. Buckmaster (e), a railway company granted to coal-owners the right to use a stable for four horses, situate within the gates shutting in the station premises from the public roads, the coal-owners agreeing to pay a monthly rent of £1 5s., and to be bound by the bye-laws which might, for the time being, be issued by the company for the govern- ment of their railway stations, premises, and conveniences. The Court of Queen's Bench held that the plaintiffs (the railway company) were rightly rated as occupiers, for that on the true construction of the agreement, looking at the situation of the stables, it was the intention of the plaintiffs to retain control over the stables, and not to part with the exclusive occupation to the coal-owners. Blackburn, J., said : " The occupier of any property is the s °^^ person who has the sole and exclusive possession of it, and he possession, is the person who ought to be rated. Whenever the owner of the property demises it to another, giving him the exclusive possession and occupation, so as to make him tenant of it, it is the tenant who should be rated and not the landlord. In this case, however, I do not think what was done did amount to a demise of any portion of this property, but merely to the giving of a license to have the easement and use of it, analogous to the case of a lodger." (/) In the case of Pimlico Tramway Company v. Assessment Com- Tramway ° Company. mittee of Greenwich Union (g) a tramway company was held liable to be rated in respect of the occupation of the road by their tramways. They were not the owners of any part of the road, but were authorized by Act of Parliament to lay down the rails thereon, the public retaining the right to pass over the road in which the rails were laid. Section 34 of the Tramways Act, 1870, gave the company the exclusive use of the tramway, and on this ground they were held rateable. (e) L.R. 10 Q.B. 70 ; 44 L.J.M.C. 29 ; 31 L.T. 835 ; 23 W.R. 160. This case was affirmed in L.R, 10 Q.B. 444 ; 44 L.J.M.C. 180 ; 33 L.T. 329 ; 24 W.R. 16, the Judges in the Exchequer Chamber being evenly divided. (/) L.R. 10 Q.B., pp. 75-6. 0/) L.R. 9 Q.B. 9 ; 43 L.J.M.C. 29 ; 22 W.R. 87. Post p. 131. 22 A Code of the Laic of Rating. occupation of j n Allan v. Overseers of Liverpool (h) the question arose HMGClS, 6tCi| 111 docks. . whether the appellants could be assessed in respect of their occupation of certain sheds. By the Mersey Docks Act the board, under whose control the docks are, may, from time to time, upon such • terms, and on payment of such rates or other sums of money, and subject to such restrictions and regulations as they think proper, set apart and appropriate any particular portion of any dock, quay, warehouses, or sheds, for the exclusive accommodation and use of any company engaged in carrying on any particular trade, who shall be desirous of having such exclusive occupation for the reception of their vessels. The board, on an application by the appellants, a steamship company, " appropriated for the use of their steamers certain berths, with the sheds attached, affording a lineal quay space of about 680 feet, and fixed a charge of 2s. 6d. per square yard per annum for the use of the shed space from the date of the occupation." There was a clause in the agreement that the agreement was to be provisional only, and made during the pleasure of the board. The board also appropriated to the appellants a further space as a coal depot, which was to be used for no other purpose and on sufferance only, upon their agreeing to pay one penny per square yard per week, and engaging to remove the coal at any time upon one week's notice. The Court held that the board had not parted with the exclusive possession to the appellants, and that the board there- fore and not the appellants were rateable. intention of the Blackburn, J., said : " In order to ascertain this [i.e., whether nnrt.ies. the board have parted with the exclusive possession] we must see what was the intention of the parties, and that depends not so much upon what words may have been used in the documents employed ; for the word ' let ' may have been used without their being a letting, and the word 'let' may have been carefully avoided, and yet it may appear that in fact the occupation has been parted with." (?) This case was followed in Rochdale Canal Company v. Brewster, (k) The facts were very similar to those in Allan v. (/*) L.R. 9 Q.B. 180 ; 43 L.J.M.C. 69 ; 30 L.T. 93 ; 22 W.R. 330. (0 L.R. 9 Q.B., p. 192. (k) (1894) 2 Q.B. 852 ; (34 L.J.Q.B. 37 ; 71 L.T. 243 ; 59 J.P. 132 ; 9 R. 680. parties. Of Rating Generally. 23 Overseers of Liverpool (/), and the Court of Appeal held that, looking at the intention of the parties, the plaintiffs had no exclusive occupation, and were consequently not rateable in respect of their occupation. Lindley, L.J., said : " The point to he decided on the present occasion is simply whether the overseers of the parish in which that property is situate are or are not entitled to rate the Rochdale Canal Company to the poor in respect of that property. This question depends on the nature of the property and on whether the Rochdale Canal Company are in such occupation of it as to render them rateable in respect of it. To determine these matters it is necessary to examine the agreement under which the Eochdale Canal Company are entitled to use and occupy the property. . . . . For rating purposes it is essential to look further [i.e., than the agreement] and to see what kind of occupation the person sought to be rated really has." The question of " exclusive occupation " came before the House of Lords in Assessment Committee of Holywell Union v. Halkyn District Mines Drainage Co. (m) A drainage company was empowered by the Act by which it was incorporated to acquire by purchase or otherwise a tunnel and watercourse, or an easement through them for the purpose of draining certain mines. The owner of the tunnel and watercourse by deed granted unto and to the use of the company, its successors and assigns, the exclusive right of drainage through a tunnel and watercourse on his land with the right of placing works in the tunnel and watercourse, but reserved to himself the mineral and other rights. The House of Lords held that the company held the paramount, and the grantor merely a subordinate, interest ; and that the company was in occupation of the soil and of the tunnel and watercourse, and was rateable in respect of them. From the judgment of the Lord Chancellor (Lord Hersehell) Exclusive ° occupation a it will appear that the question of "exclusive occupation " question of fact, is entirely one of fact. The House of Loids approved of (/) L.R. 9 Q.B. 180 ; 43 L.J.M.C. 69 ; 30 L.T. 93 ; 22 W.R. 330. (m)(1895) A.C. 117 ; 64 L.J.M.C. 113 ; 71 L.T. 818 ; 59 J.P. 566 ; 11 R. 98. 24 A Code of the Late of Rating. the decisions in Rex v. Chelsea Waterworks Co. (w) ; Pimlico Tramway Co. v. Greeiurich Union (o) ; and Lancashire Telephone Co. v. Manchester Overseers, (p) Telephone In the last-named case the Court of Queen's Bench held that company. ., the telephone company were rateable m respect of the occupation of land by the posts and wires of the company. Mathew, J., said : " Where the wire is attached to a roof that part of the root is used exclusively for its support. Where the ridge saddle is fitted on the roof, that part of the roof where the ridge saddle is fitted on is used exclusively for the purpose of maintaining the wires by that ridge saddle, and so where the wire is upon a post, the post and the land to which it is fastened are used exclusively for the purpose of supporting the wire. It is not a casual and occasional but an exclusive and permanent occupation." Telegraph posts This case was really concluded by Electric Telegraph Co. v. and wires. ^ * " J Overseers of Salforcl. (q) In that case it appeared that the Electric Telegraph Co. constructed, fixed, and laid down, with the consent of a railway company, posts, wires, and apparatus along the line of railway ; and in consideration of their being so fixed and maintained on the lands and premises of the railway company, the telegraph company maintained and worked two of the wires for the exclusive use of the railway company. The posts on which the wires rested were fixed in the ground, but were subject to removal at the option of the railway company, if found inconvenient. The Court held that the telegraph company were liable to be rated to the relief of the poor. In Paris and New York Telegraph Co. v. Penzance Union (>•) the Court held (Lord Coleridge, C.J., doubting) that the («) 5 B. & Ad. 156. 0) L.K. 9 Q.B. 9 ; 43 L.J.M.C. 29 ; 22 W.B. 87. (p) 13 Q.B.D. 700 ; 53 L.J.M.C. 195 ; 51 L.T. 160 ; 33 W.B. 203 ; affirmed on appeal 14 Q.B.D. 267 ; 54 L.J.M.C. 63 ; 52 L;T. 793 ; 33 W.B. 203 ; 49 J.P. 724. Vide also Cory v. Brisiow, 2 App. Cas. 262 ; 46 L.J.M.C. 273 ; 36 L.T. 595 ; 25 W.B. 383. Post p. 180, and Watklns v. Overseers of Milton-next-Gravesend, L.B. 3 Q.B. 350 ; 37 L.J.M.C. 73 ; 18 L.T. 601 ; 16 W.B. 1059. Post p. 181. (q) 11 Ex. 181 ; 24 L.J.M.C. 146 ; 1 Jur. X.S. 733. (»■) 12 Q.B.D. 552 ; 53 L.J.M.C. 189 ; 50 L.T. 790 ; 32 W.B. 859 ; 48 J.P. 693. Of Rating Generally. 25 telegraph company had no such exclusive occupation of the special' wires as to make them rateable to the poor. It may be convenient here to consider the decisions as to the Market toils rating of market tolls. Lessees of market stallage are rateable in respect of the profit derived therefrom but not in respect of market tolls. (.«) Lord Campbell, in his judgment in Roberts V. Aylesbury (/), said: "Stallage is a payment made to the owner of the soil in respect of the use of the soil, and the liberty to erect stalls upon the soil ; and if so it is quite clear that under 43 Eliz., c. 2 (u) he is rateable. The person making the payment has the use and occupation of that portion of the soil upon which the stall stands. It is a very different thing from the market toll which is paid only on goods sold, and then without any consideration of whether or not the goods had been deposited upon the soil." In Mayor of London v. St. Sepulchre (%) the Court followed Rex v. Bell. (//) In Reg. v. Casswell (z) the same rule was adhered to, viz., that tolls taken in respect of cattle brought into a market, and not in the nature of stallage or tolls taken in respect of the use of the soil, must not be taken into account in assessing the lessee of the market to poor-rate. Cockburn, C.J., there said : " We must abide by the distinction founded on this principle of ancient law, and take it as established that tolls payable merely as market tolls for the use of the market are not rateable, whereas the toll paid for the use of a stall which occupies the soil is rateable." In Mayor of Yarmouth v. Groom (a) a basket set up as a table was held to be stallage. More recently, in the Covent Garden case (b), where an open market is divided under the provisions of an Act of Parliament into parts, each part being (s) Rex v. Bell, 5 M. & S. 221 ; Roberts v. Aylesbury, 1 E. & B. 423 ; 22 L.J.M.C. 34 ; 17 Jur. 236. (/) Supra. Vide also Northampton v. Ward, 2 Str. 1238. («) Appendix, p. 287. \x) L.R. 7 Q.B. 333 (n) ; 41 L.J.Q.B. 109 (n). (y) Supra, (z) L.R. 7 Q.B. 328 ; 41 L.J.M.C. 108 ; 26 L.T. 574 ; 20 W.R. 624. (a) 32 L.J. Ex. 74 ; 7 L.T. 161 ; 8 Jur. N.S. 677. (b) Duke of Bedford v. Overseers of St. Paid, Covent Garde//, 51 L.J.M.C. 41 ; 45 L.T. 616 ; 30 W.R. 411 ; 46 J.P. 581. 26 A Code of the Laic of Bating. appropriated to a special purpose, as for fruit stands, vegetable stands, flower stands, etc., and by the Act tolls or rents are reserved to the owner of the market from those who use the different divisions of the market, it was held that such tolls arise out of a use of the soil and are in the nature of stallage tolls so as to be rateable for the relief of the poor. A distinction was drawn in this case between tolls payable in respect of articles carried into a market, and tolls in respect of the use of particular portions of the market which are tolls in respect of the use or enjoyment of the soil. In his judgment, Grove, J., refers to Duke of Bedford v. Emmett (c) where Bayley and Holroyd, JJ., were of opinion " that the appropriation of certain parts of the market for specific purposes was something in the nature of stallage." Peus . In Percy v. Ashford (d) the Court took a similar view where certain pens in the market were appropriated to particular owners and salesmen. In Mayor of London v. Greenwich Union (e) where the Corporation of London built a market for the reception of foreign animals, and certain charges were, under an Act of Parliament, levied on all animals landed, these charges including lairage until the animals were slaughtered, the Court held that such charges were tolls in respect of the user and occupation of the soil, and therefore rateable. In Brecon Market v. St. Mary, Brecon (/), the appellants, who were incorporated by a local Act, were authorized to regulate the market places belonging to the Corporation of Brecon, and to receive all tolls payable therefrom which were thereby vested in them. They were to pay to the Corporation £210 a year to be charged on the scheduled tolls, markets, and market- places, and to be a first charge on those tolls next after the expense of recovering them. The Court held that the appellants were not entitled to a deduction of this £210 from the net annual value of their tolls in their assessment to the poor rate. (c) 3 B. & Aid. 366. (d) 34 L.T. 579. (?) 48 L.T. 437 ; 47 J.P. 420. (/) 36 L.T. 109. Of Rating Generally. 27 In Spear v. Bodmin (g) the appellant rented two stalls in Bodmin market year by year at a rent payable weekly. The stalls rented could be removed, and there was no agreement that they should always stand on the same spot, though the appellant had a right to retain the same relative position in the row. The Court (Lush and Field, JJ.) held that there anus no such exclusive occupation as rendered the appellant liable to be rated to the relief of the poor. Easements are not rateable. In Rex v. Joliff'c (//) it was held that Easements, a right of passage over land, being an easement, was not rateable. In Rex v. Trent and Mersey Navigation Go. (i) the proprietors of quarries failed to supply a canal company with limestone in accordance with a contract. The company entered upon the quarries in accordance with the contract and took such quantities of limestone as they thought proper, paying two- pence a ton. The Court held that the company had no exclusive occupation, but a mere privilege, and consequently that they were not liable to be rated to the poor. "Whether a person is in occupation or only a licensee is a question to be determined by the construction of the agreement between the parties, (k) In Reg. v. Smith (I) S. rented a house, five rooms of which by an agreement he let to the Collector of Inland Revenue, rent to be paid to him half-yearly. It was also stipulated that the sum of £90, payable annually for the five rooms, included all expenses, "rent, rates, taxes, gas, wood, coals, and a trust- worthy person to reside on the premises to keep clean, light fires, and to attend to the same." Upon these facts the Court held that S. had not parted with the exclusive possession and was liable to be rated in respect of the whole house. In Mildmay v. Overseers of Wimbledon (m) the Court (Cockburn, C.J., Lush and Hannen, JJ.) held that the (g) 49 L.J.M.C. 69. (h) 2 T.R. 90. (i) 4 B. & C. 57. (k) Roads v. Overseers of Trwirpinytoii, L.R. 6 Q.B. 56 ; 40 L.J.M.C. 35 ; 23 L.T. 821. (I) 3 E. & E. 383 ; 30 L.J.M.C. 74. (m) 41 L.J.M.C. 133 ; 27 L.T. 365. • 28 A Code of the Law of Rating. Occupation of gas works. Occupation of river. National Rifle Association had no such exclusive occupation of the rifle butts on "Wimbledon Common as to make them rateable to the poor. In a recent case in the Court of Appeal (n) it was held that where a corporation had only a right to the use of gas mains for the sole purpose of the supply of gas, and had no exclusive occupation of the mains (which belonged to another local board), the corporation was not liable to be rated in respect of them. Kay, L.J., said : " It is impossible to maintain that the corporation who have the use of these pipes — the exclusive use — by sending gas through them, have anything more than an easement." It is interesting to compare this case with Assessment Committee of Holywell Union v. Halkyn District Mines Drainage Co. (o) in the House of Lords. In Reg. v. Stevens (p) the appellants supplied gas to the camp at Aldershot under a licence from the Crown, the gas works which the appellants occupied for the purpose of supplying the gas having been erected by the Crown. The Court of Queen's Bench (Cockbum, C.J., Crompton, Blackburn, and Shee, JJ.), held that it was unnecessary to determine whether there was a tenancy ; but as the appellants were the occupiers of the premises they were rateable to the poor in respect of them. In Rex v. Mersey and Irwell Navigation (q) by an Act of Parliament certain persons were authorized to make the rivers Mersey and Irwell navigable, and for such purpose to clear, cleanse, scour, open, enlarge, or straighten the river, to dig and cut the banks, and to build bridges, sluices, locks, etc. It was held that they were not liable to be rated to the poor for land taken for the purpose of navigation, because they were not the occupiers of that land, but had merely an easement in it. (?i) Mayor of Soutkport v. Ormshirh Assessment Committee '(1894), 1 Q.B. 196 ; 63 L.J.Q.B. 250 ; 69 L.T. 852 ; 42 W.K. 153 ; 58 J.P. 212 ; 9 R. 46. (o) (1895) A.C. 117 ; 64 L.J.M.C. 113 ; 71 L.T. 818 ; 59 J.P. 566 ; 11 R. 98, ante p. 23. ( P ) 12 L.T. 491. (q) 9 B. & C. 95. Vide also Rex v. Thomas, 9 B & C. 114 : and Bruce v. Willis, 11 A. & E. 463 ; 9 L.J.M.C. 43. Of Rating Generally. 29 Where a local statute gave a navigation company power to Towing-paths, appoint and set out towing paths along a river it was held that the company did not acquire the fee in the towing-paths, but only such a use of the soil or easement as was necessary for the purposes of the navigation, (r) The last two cases were followed by the House of Lords in Doncaster Union v. Man- chester, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire Railway Co. (s) A Lodger is not rateable. Although the lodger has the Lodger. exclusive use of one or more rooms, the servant of the owner has to go into his rooms to clean them, etc. " The occupation of the rooms is by the person who employs servants to look after them." (t) Where a person occupied a set of chambers, having no chambers. communication except through an outer door on to a staircase in the building of which the chambers form part, and the land- lord retained no control over them, the Court held that upon the agreement such set of rooms was separately occupied by the tenant, and was therefore a rateable hereditament, (u) It is always a question whether the occupation is exclusive. In the case of a set of chambers the landlord has no duties to perform as in the case of a lodger, and the tenant, having the exclusive occupation, is therefore the occupier. It is quite possible to imagine a set of chambers where the tenant would not have exclusive occupation, but in this, as in all other cases, it becomes a question of fact whether or not the tenant has the exclusive occupation. Where B. had the right of using a private box in a theatre Private box. whenever any performance took place in the theatre, it was held that he was rateable in respect of such occupation under a local Act, by which the rate was to be laid " on every person who shall inhabit, hold, occupy, possess, or enjoy any land, house, shop, wharf, warehouse, or any other building, tenement, (r) Badger v. South Yorkshire Railway and Dim Navigation Co., 1 E. & E. 347 ; 28 L.J.Q.B. 118 ; 7 W.B. 130. (s) (1895) A.C. 133 ; 71 L.T. 585 ; 6 II. 280. (t) Per Blackburn, J., in Roads v. Overseers of Trumpington, L.R. 6 Q.B., p. 56 ; 40 L.J.M.C. 35 ; 23 L.T. 821. («) Reg. v. St. George's Union, L.R. 7 Q.B. 90 ; 41 L.J.M.C. 30 ; 25 L.T. 696 ; 20 W.R. 179. 80 A Code of the Law of Rating. Refreshment contractor. Bookstall at Refreshment room at station Caretakers. or hereditament," although the proprietors of the theatre were also rated for the theatre, (.r) In Reg. v. 31 orris// (//) a refreshment contractor was held not rateable in respect of refreshment rooms in the exhibition buildings. Blackburn, J., said : " When one looks at the whole matter it is clear that the agreement [i.e., the agreement between the commissioners of the exhibition and the con- tractor] only gives to the appellant a right to sell refreshments, and does not confer upon him even for a short time any such exclusive occupation as is necessary to render him liable to pay rates." This case was distinguished from Reg. v. St. Martin- in-the-Melds. (z) The question whether Messrs. Smith & Son had such exclusive occupation of their book-stalls at Waterloo railway station as to render them liable to be rated arose in Smith and Son v. Lambeth Assessment Committee, (a) The Court held they had no such exclusive occupation of any portion of the platforms so as to render them liable to be rated, but only a license to sell books and newspapers. In Clark v. Fishcrton-Angar (b) it was assumed that a refreshment contractor at a railway station, who was the lessee of the refreshment rooms, was rateable. It must not be assumed from this decision that every refreshment contractor at a railway station is rateable. It depends on whether he is the exclusive occupier. This is a question of fact to be decided by reference to the agreement between the railway company and the contractor. Caretakers, as a rule, are not rateable, the reason being that they occupy as servants, and not as tenants, (c) Where, however, the case finds as a fact that the caretaker has a (./•) Reg. v. St. Martin-in-fhe-Fields, 3 Q.B. 204 ; 11 L.J.M.C. 112. (y) 32 L.J. M.C. 245 ; 8 L.T. 097 ; 11 W.E. 960 ; 10 Jur. 71. \z) 3 Q.B. 204 ; 11 L.J.M.C. 112 ; supra. (a) 10 Q.B.D. 327 ; 53 L.J.M.C. 1 ; 48 L.T. 57 ; 47 J.P. 244. (6) 6 Q.B.D. 139 ; 50 L.J.M.C. 33 ; 29 W.E. 334 ; 45 J.P. 358. Vide also Dodds v. South Shields Assessment Committee (1895), 2 Q.B. 133 ; 64 L.J.Q.B. 508 ; 72 L.T. 645 ; 43 W.R. 532 ; 59 J.P. 452 ; 14 R. 422. (c) Yeatps v. Chorlton-on-Medlock, 48 L.T. 872 ; 47 J.P. 630. Of Rating Generally. 31 " beneficial occupation " he is rateable, (d) The Irish Courts have decided that a caretaker is not liable to be rated, (e) A servant is not liable to be rated if his occupation is servants, strictly ancillary to the performance of his duties ; if, on the other hand, his occupation is that of tenant he is liable to be rated. In Smith v. Overseers of Seghill (/), S., a collier, resided in a house belonging to his employers, for which he paid no rent ; he was not entitled to any notice to quit, and the occupation of the house would cease at the time when his service ceased. He could not go into a house without the owner's concurrence. It was held that his occupation was not that of a servant, but of a tenant. The question of occupation by servants was thoroughly discussed in this case, which must now be regarded as the leading authority on the subject. It is always a question of fact whether the occupation is that of the master or servant, the test being whether " the apart- ments of the servant are only an appendage of the service and allotted to him for the more convenient performance of the service." (g) Where a servant occupies a house which does not belong to his master and pays the rent, such servant is the rateable occupier, (h) "Where a pauper, employed as a labourer by the Board of Ordnance, who had previously occupied a house at an annual rent of £7, which was then purchased by the Board, still con- tinued to reside in part of the premises at a weekly rent of two shillings, which was deducted out of his wages, and upon his dismissal from his employment gave up possession of the house as required, it was held that the last occupation was not as tenant but as servant. (i) (d) Hicks v. Dunstable, 48 J.P. 326. (e) North Dublin Union v. Scott, 1 Ir. C.L.E. 76 ; Limerick v. White, 2 Ir. C.L.K. 630. (f) L.R. 10 Q.B. 422 ; 44 L.J.M.C. 114 ; S2 L.T. 857 ; 23 W.K. 745. (g) Per Lord Ellenborough in Rex v. Minster, 3 M. & S. 276. Vide also Rex v. Tynemouth, 12 East 46 ; v. Gardner. Cowp. 79 ; Rex v. Armstrong, 2 Starkie 543. Qi) Reg. v. Wall Lynn, 8 A. & E. 37<). (i) Rex v. Cheshunt. 1 B. & Aid. 473. 32 A Code of the Law of Reding. Where the superintendent of a Philanthropic Society had a bedroom provided for her, but where her family was not allowed to reside with her, it was held she was only the servant of her employers, and not the rateable occupier, (k) Bxistinj? value. ARTICLE 7.— In assessing property to poor-rate it must be valued in its existing state. This rule can be easily applied where a tenant for the property can be found, as in the case of a house or a farm. More difficulty is experienced, however, in applying it to railways, canals, water and gas companies, etc., of which undertakings no tenant could possibly be found, and where for rating purposes the rent a hypothetical tenant would pay has to be ascertained. "Existing In Reg. v. Grand Junction Railway (I), to which further reference will be made hereafter, Lord Denman, C.J., said : " Though the supposition of a tenancy is to be made, yet what the incidents of the tenancy must be as to actual terms and allowances, must be determined, for the purpose of fixing the amount of the rate, by the actual state of things ; for this supposition of a tenancy is only a mode of ascertaining the existing value of the occupation to the existing occupier." In Reg. v. Westbvook and Reg. v. Everist (m), two cases which were argued together, Lord Denman, C.J., in delivering the judgment of the Court, said : " The rate is always imposed with reference to the existing value, whether temporary or enduring is immaterial. A case was supposed of a brickfield worked out in less than a year to meet the demand of some enormous contract for a public work ; the consequence would be that the land would have a very much increased value for the year, and it would be only reasonable that it should bear an increased rate for that year ; in the following year its value might sink almost to nothing, and the rate ought to fall proportionately, even to nothing, if, the brick-earth being exhausted, the (/>•) Rex v. Field, 5 T.R. 587. (/) 4 Q.B. 18 ; 13 L.J.M.C. 94 ; 8 Jur. 508. Post p. 90. (m) 10 Q.B. 178 ; 16 L.J.M.C. 87 ; 11 Jur. 515. Post p. 201. Of Rating Generally. 33 land, like an exhausted coal mine, should become entirely unproductive." In Attorney General v. Sefton(n), a revenue case, Pollock, C.B., and Wilde, B., held that " annual value " meant actual annual value, and not possible or prospective annual value. This view was approved by the House of Lords. In Beg. v. Manchester, South Junction and Altrincham Railway Co. (o), it was held that a railway must be assessed according to its value, and not according to the value of adjoining land. Land must not be assessed as it was used at any former period, (p) In Stales/ v. Overseers of Castleton (q) , a cotton mill, owing to depression in the cotton trade, was no longer worked, but was maintained at some expense as a factory, with its machinery in a fit state for working when the trade should revive. The Court- held that the rate should be made upon the annual value of the mill as a storehouse for the machinery in it, and not upon an estimate of the rent which might fairly be expected for it, if let for a reasonable term of years. Blackburn, J., there said : " The Legislature intended that the rate should be made upon an estimate of the rent which would be given for the property rebus sic stantibus." Where, however, a manufactory had to stop working owing to a strike, the Court held that the assessment was not to be reduced on that account, (r) Cockburn, C.J., in Reg. v. Overseers of Flitton (s) said : " The vaiueto existing true principle, according to which the value of the occupation occupier, to the hypothetical tenant contemplated by the Parochial Assessment Act is to be estimated, is, to assume the continuance of those circumstances which constitute the value to the existing (n) 11 H.L.C. 257 ; 34 L.J. Ex. 98 ; 12 L.T. 242. (o) 15 Q.B. 395 (n). 00 Per Lord Campbell, in Reg. v. Kentmere, 17 Q.B. 551 ; 21 L.J.M.C. 13 ; 16 Jur. 265. (q) 5 B. & S. 505 ; 33 L.J.M.C. 178 ; 10 Jur. N.S. 1147. This case was followed in Harter v. Salford, 6 B. & S. 591 ; 34 L.J.M.C. 206 ; 13 W.R. 861 ; 11 Jur. N.S. 1036. (/•) Hoyle v. Oldham Union (1894), 2 Q.B. 372 ; 63 L.J.M.C. 178 ; 70 L.T. 741 ; 58 J.P. 669 ; 9 R. 287. (.s) 3 E. & E. 450 ; 30 L.J.M.C. 89 ; 3 L.T. 689 ; 9 W.R. 309. 3 34 A Code of the Laic of Bating. Improved condition. Flooded mine. Public purposes. occupier, unless it be made to appear that those circumstances are about to undergo a change." Property must be rated in its improved state and not on the basis of the original rent under the lease, (t) Where there have been improvements property must be rated in respect of the full rateable value, without regard to the amount of benefit the occupier derives from such occupation, (u) In Metropolitan Board of Works v. West Ham (ic), Lush, J., said : " The rateable quality of land is not to be determined by what it once was, or by what it may hereafter become. .... The rateable quality of land must be determined by what it was at the time the rate was made." Lord Herschell, L.C., agreed with this in London Count// Council v. Church- wardens of Erith. (x) In Tyne Coal Co. v. Overseers of Wallsend (//), Lord Coleridge, C.J., and Grove, J., held, in the case of a coal mine which had been drowned out, that the coal company, though rateable to the poor for the surface lauds they occupied, were not rateable for the buildings, boilers, engine and plant, and railway, as these were only part of a valueless colliery, and were not shewn to have any value apart from the colliery. Grove, J., said : " You do not rate land in respect of its value being enhanced in respect of some possible future and contingent benefit, nor do you reduce its rateability in respect of some future or contingent loss, but you take only its present value, and, as it appears to me, if any other principle were adopted it would lead to endless speculation and difficulty." Property occupied for public purposes is now rateable in the same way as property occupied by any other person, according (0 Rex v. Mast, 6 T.R. 154 ; Rex v. SkingU, 7 T.R. 549 ; Rex v. Attwood, 6 B. & C. 277 ; Rex v. Granville, 9 B. & C. 188. (u) Reg. v. Rhymney Railway Co., L.R. 4 Q.B. 276 ; 38 L.J. M.C. 75 ; 10 B. & S. 198 ; 17 W.R. 530. Reg. v. Vange, 3 Q.B. 242 ; 11 L.J.M.C. 117 ; 6 Jur. 893. (w) L.R. 6 Q.B. 193 ; 40 L.J.M.C. 30 ; 23 L.T. 490 ; 19 W.R. 240. (x) (1893) A.C., at p. 600. (y) 46 L.J.M.C. 185 ; 35 L.T. 854. Of Eating Generally. 35 to its present value. In the Mersey Docks Cases (s), which overruled Rex v. Inhabitant* of Liverpool {a) and Reg. v. Mayor of Liverpool (b), Lord Cranworth said : " I can discover nothing either in the words or in the spirit of the Act [i.e., Act of Elizabeth], exempting from liability the occupier of valuable property merely because the profits of the occupation are not to be enjoyed by him, or by any one on whose behalf he is occupying, but are to be devoted to the benefit of the public." In London Count// Council v. Churchwardens of Erith (c), the House of Lords have held that a public body is rateable in respect of land and premises occupied by them where such occupation is of value, irrespective of the question whether a pecuniary profit can be made. In Rex v. Liverpool Exchange (d), it was held "that the advantages attendant upon a building, either in respect of its situation or the mode of its occupation, are to be taken into account in estimating its rateable value." Although there may be great difficulty in finding a tenant country houses from year to year of a country house, still where such property has an occupier it has a rateable value. In Clive v. Foy (e), a case came before the Court in which the parish had rated the occupier of a country house at 3| per cent, on the value, viz., £11,000. Cockburn, C.J., said : " We think you may take for granted that the tenant would not be disturbed for a term of years, and may very well rate him on that hypothesis, which would give you a mode of getting at the rateable value. That is the utmost we can say for you and the case will be remitted with this opinion of the Court." 0) 11 H.L.C. 443 ; 35 L.J.M.C. 1 ; 20C.B.X.S. 56 ; 12 L.T. 643 ; 13 W.R. 1069 ; 11 Jur. N.S. 746. Vide also the recent case, Middlesex County Council v. St. George's Union, (1897) 1 Q.B. 64 ; m L.J. Q.B. 101 ; 75 L.T. 464 ; 44 W.E. 6)0. (a) 7 B. & C. 61. (&) 9 A. & E. 435. (c) (1893) A.C. 562 ; 63 L.J. M.C. 9 ; 69 L.T. 725 ; 42 W.E. 330 ; 6 R. 22. Ante pp. 13-15. 00 1 A. & E. 465. (e) 39 J. P. 774. 3a 36 A Code of the Law of Rating. Buildings with machinery. ARTICLE 8.— Premises with machinery attached are rateable according to the existing value of such buildings combined with the machinery. This was first decided in two old cases (/), both of which came before the Court at a time when personal property was rateable. There is no doubt, however, about the principle of law as the following cases will show. attacheato ^- n ^ex v - Birmingham and Staffordshire Gas Light Co. (g) freehold. & ra ^ e wag j^j^ ^ a( j k ecause the value of certain steam-engines and machinery, affixed to various houses and buildings by being let into the ground or otherwise attached to the freehold, had not been taken into account as forming part of the annual value of the houses and buildings. Lord Denman, C.J., said : " This rate is bad on a ground which makes it unnecessary for us to discuss any other. It is expressly found that houses, to which machinery is attached, are not rated according to the increased value arising from the machinery. Such machinery constitutes a mode of occupying ; that really is clear from the beginning to the end of all the cases on the subject. This principle has never been called in question ; and, even where the machine has not been attached, a house has been held rateable in respect of it, if the value of the house was increased by the machine." Shortly after the preceding case Reg. v. Quest (h) decided that where a rate is laid upon buildings to which machinery is attached for the purpose of manufacture, the real property ought to be assessed according to its actual value as combined with the machinery, without considering whether the machinery be real or personal property, and liable, or not, to distress or seizure under a fi. fa., or whether it would go to the heir or executor, or, at the expiration of a lease, to a landlord or tenant. cranes, steam- In Reg. v. Southampton Dock Co.(i) an attempt was made to engines, etc. , ... ml obtain a reconsideration of the above decisions. I here was (/) Rex v. Hogg, Cald. 2(36 ; 1 T.R. 721 ; Rex v. St. Nicholas, Gloucester, 1 T.R. 723 (note). (g) 6 A. & E. 634 ; 6 L.J.M.C. 02. (h) 7 A. & E. 951 ; 7 L.J.M.C. 38. (i) 14 Q.B. 587 ; 20 L.J.M.C. 155 ; 15 Jur. 268. Vide also Meg. v. Morrison, 1 E. & E. 150 ; 22 L.J.M.C. 14. Of Rating Generally. 37 attached to the freehold and essential to the business of the company certain fixed plant, consisting of cranes, steam-engines, shears, derricks, dolphins, and other like ponderous machinery, which were capable of being detached as easily and with as little injury to the freehold as tenants' fixtures put up for the purposes of trade and business, and usually valued as between incoming and outgoing tenants. The Court held that the cranes, steam-engines, and other ponderous machinery were properly included in estimating the rateable value of the com- pany's premises. Lord Campbell, C.J., in delivering the judg- ment of the Court, said : " This is a rate upon buildings to which machinery is attached for the purpose of trade, and it has been solemnly decided that such real property ought to be assessed according to its existing value as combined with the machinery, without considering whether the machinery be real or personal property, or whether it be liable or not to distress or seizure under a fieri facias, or whether it would go to the heir or executor, or, at the expiration of a lease, to the landlord or tenant — Rex v. Birmingham and Staffordshire Gas Light Co. (/»•) In this last case all the arguments pressed upon us to show that such fixtures are stock-in-trade, and not to be taken into account in a rate on the realty, were urged, but urged in vain. It is of the greatest importance that a rule upon such a subject which has been laid down and acted upon, should be adhered to, and we see no reason why this rule should be now disturbed." The foregoing decision was held to settle the question raised Tum-tabies, cranes, etc. in Reg. v. North Staffordshire Railway Co. (/), as to whether certain turn-tables, cranes, attached to the railway were rateable. The Court held that they were, and that consequently no deduction was to be made on account of them. The earlier decisions were followed in Reg. v. Has/am (m) chambers used for chemical where the occupiers of premises were rated for them to the poor purposes as for "chemical works, lands and buildings." Part of the J^JJJJ* 1 *° works consisted of " chambers " used for the manufacture of (/.■) Supra, (/) 3 E. & E. 392 ; 30 L.J.M.C. 1)8 ; 3 L.T. 554 ; 9 W.R. 235 ; 7 Jur. N.S. 363. Post p. 118. (m) 17 Q.B. 220 ; 15 Jur. 972. 38 A Code of the Laic of Rating. sulphuric acid. The chambers were vessels of sheet lead, weighing each several tons, 13 feet high, 13 wide, and from 40 to 60 long. They stood in the open ah', and each was surrounded by walls of strong masonry forming an oblong which was filled up with sand, being also supported by and rivetted to a frame of wood which ran round the tops of the walls. The wooden frame was in some instances laid in mortar on the tops of the walls ; in others it merely rested upon them. Steam was conveyed into the chamber by a pipe which passed from the boiler and was rivetted to the wooden frame-work. The boiler was affixed to the free- hold and the pipe to the boiler. The Sessions found that the chambers were attached to the freehold, but not affixed thereto. It was held that, assuming the chambers not to be so annexed as to form part of the freehold, yet, being fixed machinery, attached to buildings, and necessarily so attached for the purpose of being so used, they were properly considered in the rate as increasing the rateable value of the buildings. The following case has been said to conflict with those already cited. The distinction drawn is certainly a very fine one. Machines not _R e{/ v Haktead (n) is a case where silk manufactories were attached to 3 y ' freehold. assessed to the poor-rate. The buildings contained machines which were driven by water and steam power, and there was a water-wheel and a steam-engine which communicated motive power, by means of main shafting and driving gear, to each floor in which the silk machines stood. The machines were fixed to the floor by iron screws, which were used only for the purpose of steadying the machines when in use. The Court held that in assessing the manufactories, though the steam and water power and the main shafting were rateable, yet the machines were not to be included in the rateable value. Cockbum, C.J., said : " I think there is no difficulty in holding that the chattels and machinery used in this mill are not rate- able. They are no doubt fixed to the freehold, but not so as to make them part of the freehold. According to the recent cases, if the chattels are so fixed to the freehold, that on a demise they would pass with the premises, then they may be taken as part of the rateable value. But here the Sessions find that they are not («) 32 J.P. 118. Of Rating Generally. 39 so attached to the freehold, but are merely fixed with a view to steady them. Therefore the finding concludes the case." Blackburn, J., said : "I am of the same opinion, and I do not change the opinion that I expressed in Stale 1/ v. Cast/eton. (0) I think it is a correct principle in assessments to the poor-rate, and ascertaining the rateable value of property, to take all the property that enhances the value of the occupation — in short, you must take more than the four walls of the building into account. That has been done here. But it has been contended that the machines used in the manufacture of the silk are to be added to the other items of value. The question as to these will be, are they part of the premises or not ? They may be severable by the sheriff, or by anyone else, but so long as they are attached to the building so as to be part of the premises, they would be liable to be taken into account, But in saying they are attached, we must look to the character in which they are so attached, whether it is in the sense of being accessions to the fixed property, or merely attached in the sense of steadying the machines while using them. Here it plainly appears from the case that they are fixed merely to steady them, and in no other sense, and, therefore, I think they form no part of the rateable value." In assessing gasworks to poor-rate a deduction ought to be Machinery in ...,, x j.1 connection with allowed in respect of the cost of meters which belong to tne gasworks. gas company, but are put up on the premises of consumers ; but no deduction should be made in respect of (1) retorts, (2) purifiers, (3) steam-engines, (4) boilers, (5) gas-holders, and (6) trade fixtures, such as pumps and exhausters, which are fixed to the freehold, but would be removable as tenants' fixtures. The latter, although capable of being removed, are " yet so far attached as that they were intended to remain permanently connected with the freehold," i.e., the gasworks, " or the premises used with it, and to remain permanent appendages to it, as essential to its working." (p) It is somewhat difficult to reconcile the following case either with the earlier or later decisions, except for the (0) 5 B. & S. 505 ; 33 L.J.M.C. 178 ; 10 Jur. N.S. 1147. 00 Reg. v. Lee, L.K. 1 Q.B. 241 ; 35 L.J. M.C. 105 ; 7 B. & S. 188; 13 L.T. 704 ; 14 W.'B. 311 ; 12 Jur. N.S. 225. Post p. 159. 40 A Code of the Law of Rating. Tanks ami pumps of a distillery not rateable. reason given by Lord Esher, M.R., in Tyne Boiler Works v. Longbenton. {q) In Cltidley v. West Ham(r) tanks and pumps used in a dis- tillery were held not rateable. The premises of the distillery contained tanks, which served also as roofs of buildings, boiling backs, and mash tuns, standing on brick piers against the walls. Water was pumped into the tanks by means of pipes connected with a force pump, and the water passed from this tank to supply the boiling backs by means of pipes. They were all heavy and either unattached, except by the communicating pipes, to the walls or piers upon which they stood, or fastened only by screws for the purpose of being steadied. The Court held that these articles were not fixtures and could not be properly rated in the assessment of the premises to the poor-rate. Blackburn, J., said : " Now I am not prepared to say that the various articles described in the present case may not be taken into account as enhancing the value of the premises, but that question is not asked, and we are only to say whether the things are rateable. That depends, as is stated in Holland v. Hodgson (s), on whether they are annexed to the freehold, and if they are annexed in a certain sense, with what intent they were so annexed. Applying these rules it appears by the case that all the articles are chattels, well-known in the trade, and sold separately, both as new and as second-hand. They are not attached to the premises except in the sense that the weight of the article keeps it steady, and though one or two are screwed down and some attached to pipes, which again are attached to steam-engines, or to what are clearly fixtures, this alone will not make them fixtures. I thought at first that the two pumps were annexed to the freehold, but with some hesitation I now think they are not so annexed as to come within the rule. . . . . All the items thus are nothing more than chattels which rest and steady themselves by their own weight or with the slight assistance of a screw, and are not fixtures, and are not rateable as part of the premises." ( ° v ' torateB?* 1011 " Worcester v. Droit icich Union (e) the Court of Appeal, following Mayor of Liverpool v. Overseers of Wavertree (_/'), decided that where the occupiers of land are prevented by statute from deriving the full pecuniary benefit which it is capable of pro- ducing, the land is to be rated to the poor with reference to (a) 63 L.T. 249. (b) Ante p. 41. (c) Ante p. 41. (<•/) Per Lord Esher, M.E., in Altrincham Union Assessment Com- mittee v. Cheshire Lines, 15 Q.B.D. 597 ; 50 J.P. 85. 0) 2 Ex. Div. 49 ; 40 L.J.M.C. 241 ; 36 L.T. 186 ; 24 W.R. 336. (/) 2 Ex. Div. 55 (n) 39 J.P. 101. Vide also Mayor of Peter- borough v. Stamford Union, 31 W.1L 949. Of Retting Generally. 43 the amount of profit actually made, and not with reference to the amount which might be earned by the occupiers if they were not subject to restrictions. Mellish, L.J., said : " Even in the case of reservoirs of public companies, established by Act of Parliament to supply towns with water, in estimating the rateable value of the reservoirs the Court only considers the amount of the profit which the terms of their Act enable the company to earn, not the profits which the company might earn if Parliament had enabled the company to establish waterworks without restriction as to the price to be charged to consumers. So also, in rating a railway, or any other work made under an Act of Parliament, the calculation must always commence with the profits which are actually earned according to the terms of the Act of Parlia- ment, not with the profits which might be earned if the company was unlimited in its charges." This case was followed where the value of property was limited by a private Act of Parliament. A railway company had the power to run its traffic over part of the line of the C. company on payment of a fixed annual rent. The rent was much less than the annual value of the traffic which passed over that part of the line, and the Court held that the C. company could not be assessed to poor-rate at a higher sum than the fixed annual rent, (g) This rule has recently received the sanction of the House of Dock company t rr i-r t\ sv — restriction as .Lords m bculcoates Union v. Hull Docks Co. (//), where it was to toils. decided that where no rent could be earned by a dock company because, of a statutory prohibition, the rent which could have been earned but for that prohibition ought not to be taken into consideration in determining the rateable value of the company's property. In the course of his judgment Lord Herschell, L.C., said : " But if the Legislature have said they shall not earn these suggested further profits because they shall not charge tolls, how can it be established as a matter of fact that they could earn more ? It appears to me that if you are (posing the tenant to occupy at a rent to be ascertained in each year by the actual produce and price, as it well might be, they may reasonably beforehand, from such premises as the nature of the land, its usual mode of cultivation, the preparations actually made, if any, and other such circumstances, infer what will be the rateable value in a given year." where property In Rex v. Chaplin (u) Patteson, J., said : " Where the land is criterion. not actually let, it becomes necessary to calculate what a tenant (0 10 Q.B. 178 ; 16 L.J.M.C. 87 ; 11 Jur. 515. («) 1 B. & Ad. 926. Of Eating Generally. 47 would pay for it ; where it is let, the actual rent is the criterion, unless it can be clearly shewn that that is too small. But that is not ascertained by enquiring whether the property was more or less beneficial in a particular year" ARTICLE 11.— Property must be rated in the •« Parochial parish in which it is situate. This is what is known as the Parochial Principle. Assess- ments must be made " according to the estate of the occupier in the parish." (.r) In Reg. v. Wood* (//) where the appellant owned property in two adjoining parishes, the boundaries of which were not known, and was found to be the occupier of 195 acres in one of the parishes, it was held that he was properly rated by such parish in respect of 195 acres, and that it was not necessary for the parish officers to set out the boundaries of the land in respect of which they rated an occupier. This principle, if possible, must be applied to all classes of property. The most recent case on the subject, which will be considered at length in another place (s), is Sealcoates Union v. Hull Docks Co. (a) where the House of Lords, following Mersey Pocks v. Liverpool (b) and Mersey Pocks v. Birkenhead (c), decided that where a dock company owning docks extending over more than one parish is being assessed to the poor rate, the rateable value should, where possible, be ascertained according to the profit made in each parish, and not by obtaining a rateable value for the whole of the docks and then allocating a portion of such value to each parish in proportion to the water area of the docks in that parish. This principle has been approved in the case of railways (d), canals (e), and in fact in all cases where the "parochial principle " can be applied. (x) Sir Anthony Early's Case, 2 Bulstrode 354 ; 1 Bott. 135. (y) E.B. & E. 481 ; 27 L.J.M.C. 289. Vide also Rex v. Barnes, 1 B. & Ad. 113. (z) Post p. 172. (a) (1895) A.C. 136 ; 64 L.J.M.C. 49 ; 71 L.T. 642 ; 43 W.R. 623 ; 59 J.P. 605 ; 11 R. 74. ■(b) L.R. 7 Q.B. 643 ; 41 L.J.M.C. 161 ; 26 L.T. 868 ; 20 W.R. 827. (c) L.R. 8 Q.B. 445 ; 42 L.J.M.C. 141 ; 29 L.T. 454 ; 21 W.R. 913. (d) Post p. 103. (e) Post p. 140. 48 A Code of the Law of Bating. Rent a hypothetical tenant would p»y. Rent payable in kind. Where hypothetical tenant would give a higher rent. ARTICLE 12.— The annual value of land and premises must be assessed on an estimate of the rent at which the land or premises might reasonably be expected to let, and not necessarily on the basis of the rent at which they are actually let. This Article must be read in connection with Article 2. The rating authority, in fixing the rateable value, must have regard to all the circumstances which tend to modify the value of hereditaments. The rent paid is evidence, but is not con- clusive. For example, rent may be payable " in kind," as where two railway companies agree that the traffic of each should be allowed to pass free over the line of the other. (/) The rent in such a case w r ould be nil as far as the amount of money actually paid by the tenant company to the landlord company. But the rateable value must be estimated on the basis of the rent which a hypothetical tenant would pay for the privilege enjoyed by each company respectively. Where three farms situate in the parish of B. were let at a certain sum annually, and it was found that they might reasonably have been expected to let, and might have let at a much higher sum ; the Court (Blackburn and Shee, JJ.) held that the overseers were wrong in assessing the occupiers to the relief of the poor at the rent actually paid by them ; and that the proper estimate of the net annual value was the rent at which the farms might have been reasonably expected to let. (g) Blackburn, J., said : " The Legislature has stated that the estimate according to which the rate shall be calculated shall be, not the actual rent paid, but the rent at which the premises might have been reasonably expected to let from year to year. The rent actually paid is, no doubt, prima facie the estimate, but it is not conclusive. Here the premises might have been let at a larger sum than that demanded by the landlord, and the rate therefore should have been calculated upon that amount." (/) Reg. v. London, Brighton and South Coast Radway, 15 Q.B. 313 ; 20 L.J.M.C. i24 ; 15 Jur. 372. Post p. 99.' 0/) Hayward v. Brinkworth, 10 L.T. 608. Of Rating Generally. 49 In Clark v. Fisherton-Angar (h) it was held that a refresh- where rent paid more than ment contractor could produce his books to show that his hypothetical l tenant would business was being carried on at a loss, and that consequently P»y« the rent reserved under his lease did not represent the true annual value of the premises. This case must be taken to have been overruled by the Court Evidence as to takings of a of Appeal in Dodds v. South Shields Assessment Committee (/) ggSJ^ where Lord Esher, M.B., said he did not understand Clark v. Fisherton-Angar. In that case the Court of Appeal held that the takings of a particular tenant of a public-house could not affect the rateable value, which was to be measured by the rent which might be expected to be obtained in the market for that public-house, having regard to the rent paid for similar public- houses in the same town. Lord Esher, M.R., said: " The case of the Mersey Docks v. Liverpool (k) is the real foundation of all the law in these cases, and I only venture to say with regard to one case that has been cited to us, which is the case of Clark v. Fisherton-Angar (I), that I do not understand it ; and if I do not understand a case I really do not know how to act upon it. It seems to me that if it is consistent with the case of the Mersey Bocks v. Liverpool (k), and the doctrine there laid down, it carries us no further. If it is inconsistent with it, I am prepared wholly to disagree with it." In Mersey Locks v. Liverpool (m), Blackburn, J., in delivering judgment of the Court (Blackburn, Quain and Archibald, JJ.), said : " There can be no doubt that the annual rent of a shop in Cheapside is higher than the annual rent of a similar shop in a back street, and that the reason why tenants give a higher rent is because of the superior facility for carrying on business there. But the rent and rateable value of the shop are quite independent of the amount of the shopkeeper's actual gains. The rateable value is the same whether the tenant is a nourishing trader or is carrying on business at a loss." (h) 6 Q.B.D. 139 ; 50 L.J.M.C. 33 ; 29 W.R. 334 ; 45 J.P. 358. (i) (1895) 2 Q.B. 133 ; 64 L.J.Q.B. 508 ; 72 L.T. 645 ; 43 W.R. 532 ; 59 J.P. 452 ; 14 R. 422. (k) L.R. 9 Q.B. 84 ; 43 L.J.M.C. 33 ; 22 W.R, 184. (/) Supra, (m) Supra. 4 50 A Code of the Law of Bating. Brewery with It may be convenient here to consider the question of the Tied public- J a . ,. houses. rating of a brewery with tied houses. There are two conflicting decisions. In the first, Allison v. Monkwearmouth («), the Court (Lord Campbell, C.J., and Crompton, J. ; Erie, J., dmentiente) held that in estimating the rateable value of the brewery, the annual rent paid for the goodwill of the public-houses was to be taken into account. In the second, Overseers of Sunderland v. Sunderland Union (o), the Court (Erie, C.J., and Smith, J.; Byles, J., dmentiente) held that the rateable value of the brewery was not to be increased by reason of the fact that the public-houses were tied to the brewery. It is difficult to reconcile these two decisions. Byles, J., dissented in the second case because he considered the Court in that case were bound by the decision in Allison v. Monkwearmouth (p), while Erie, C.J., and Smith, J., distinguished the case before them from Allison's case on the ground that in Allison's case " the title- deeds and leases were produced by the brewer, and the facts relevant to the rating of the brewery for the supposed profit from the tie were taken therefrom." This seems too immaterial a fact to affect the legal question, viz., whether the existence of a contract tying certain public-houses to a brewery (i.e., making certain tenants of public-houses buy all their beer from a particular brewery) is or is not a fact to be taken into consideration in fixing the rateable value of the brewery. Can it be doubted that a tenant would be prepared to pay a higher rent for a brewery with tied houses than for a brewery without tied houses ? For this reason it is submitted that Lord Campbell's decision in Allison v. Monk- wearmouth ( /;) is the decision which correctly lays down the law. Lord Campbell, C.J., there said : " The criterion is the ' rent at which the same might reasonably be expected to let from year to year,' with proper deductions. But in calculating this rent regard must be had to the pecuniary value of all the advantages which the tenant will have as tenant and occupier 0) 4 E. & B. 13 ; 23 L.J.M.C. 177 ; 18 Jur. 1075. (o) 18 C.B.N.S. 531 ; 34 L.J.M.C. 121 ; 13 L.T. 239 ; 13 W.R. 943 ; 11 Jur. N.S. 688. (p) Supra. Of Ratine/ General J ij . 51 of the demised premises connected with his occupation. In this case I consider it a fact that the tenant and occupier of the demised premises in which he is to carry on the trade of a brewer is entitled to have, and must have, during the term, the entire custom of thirty-three public-houses, i.e., that the publicans carrying on business in the public-houses are bound to buy from his brewery the whole of the beer, etc., which is to be consumed by their customers. They are bound to deal at his brewery, and it is only by occupying the demised premises that he is entitled to this advantage. This advantage is worth £150 a year. Such being the fact, what is the legal consequence ? I think that the advantage so to be derived from the occupation of the premises is to be taken into consideration in estimating the assessable value, because it would be taken into con- sideration by a tenant in determining the rent which he would be willing to pay. I agree that influence in recommending customers is not rateable, and that profits in trade cannot be rated as an hereditament ; nevertheless, I think that heredita- ments are rateable according to the advantages which will be enjoyed from the occupation of them during the period for which the rate is to be imposed." Erie, C.J., held that the contract to take beer from a particular brewery was a personal contract, and therefore not to be taken into consideration in assessing the rateable value. This, however, is rather straining the meaning of a personal contract, for the contract in this instance may be said to run with the land (pp) and must enhance the rent which a tenant from year to year would pay for a brewery with such an advantage. In assessing a public-house to the poor-rate it must be Pubiic-hou.se. remembered that the gains or losses in trade do not make any difference in the rateable value. (?) The rent a tenant from £°*^P£?2* year to year would pay will depend on the business done by the house, and will be less where the public-house is tied to a brewery than where it is free. A licence will increase the rateable value and must be taken into consideration in assessing such value. (>•) (PP) Clegg v. Hands, 44 Ch. D. 503 ; 59 L.J. Ch. 477 ; 62 L.T. 502 ; 38 W.R. 433. (q) Reg. v. North Aylesford Union, 26 L.T. 618 : 37 J.P. 14*. (r) Rex v. Bradford, 4 M. & S. 317. 4a 52 A Code of the Lax- of Rating. Evidence is not admissible, in estimating the rateable value of a public-house, to prove the takings of a particular tenant, (s) xon-parochiai ARTICLE 13.— The rateable value of property in earnings. , any parish may be increased by non-parochial earnings. This principle was laid down in Rex v. New River Co. (t) where certain land in the parish of Little Amwell was found to be of the annual value of £5 without a spring within it ; but if the advantage which the company derived from the use of the spring might by law be included in the rate upon the land, the land and spring together were of the annual value of £300. No profit was made from the spring in Little Amwell, but the profits were derived from the sale of water in other parishes. Lord Ellenborough, in giving judgment in favour of the higher assessment, viz., £300, said : " Here, then, is land, and water inclosed in a basin upon the land, which falls within the legal description of land ; and although a considerable portion of the profits of such water is derived from pipes, through which it is distributed to other places, yet it is found that the water has a certain ascertained value at the fountain-head ; and in cases of this kind it is enough to ascertain the local value of the property without inquiring whether it yields a return on the spot." Branch line as At a later period we find the case of South Eastern Railway ifne. er ' v. Dorking, (u) The case found that traffic was brought by a branch line on to the main line of the South Eastern Railway Co., and profit was thus obtained by the South Eastern Railway Co. from such branch line as a feeder to the main line. It was also found as a fact that if the branch line were in the market it would be an object of competition between the South Eastern (s) Dodds v. South Shields Assessment Committee (1895), 2 Q.B. 133 ; 64 L.J.Q.B. 508 ; 72 L.T. 645 ; 43 W.R. 532 ; 59 J.P. 452 ; 14 R. 422. (0 1 M. & S. 503. Post p. 157. (h) 3 E. & B. 491 ; 23 L.J.M.C. 84 ; 18 Jur. 672. Post p. 109. Vide other cases there cited. Of Rating Generally. 53 line and rival companies. The questions reserved for the Court were whether these matters should be taken into account in estimating the rateable value of the part of the branch line in the parish of Dorking, or whether the rateable value should be calculated solely on the profits of the line itself. The Court held that both matters were to be taken into account, inasmuch as, though lying out of the parish of Dorking, they enhanced the value of the occupation of the portion of the line in Dorking, and though there might be much difficulty in calculating the result, the Sessions were to find it as nearly as they could. Again in Reg. v. London and North Western Railway Co. (x) it was held that in assessing to the poor-rate a part of a branch line passing through a particular parish the fact that three other companies would be willing to pay what was equivalent to a large rent for it was to be taken into account as an element in ascertaining the rent at which it might reasonably be expected to let from year to year. In the course of his judgment, Blackburn, J., said : " Ever since the case of Rex v. The New River Co. (y), the case of the Amwell spring, it has been held that the value of the occupation is to be considered as enhanced by the matters to which it would give facility." This principle and the authorities in support of it will be further commented upon in the Title on Railways, (s) ARTICLE 14.— Where the owner is the occupier owner-occu- the rate must be based upon the probable rent a pi hypothetical tenant would pay for the property or premises. In the case of the owner being the occupier of a house or other building it is not a difficult matter to ascertain what rent a hypothetical tenant would pay ; but other and more com- plicated questions arise in the case of railway, canal, gas and other companies, where the owners work the various concerns for their own profit. 0) L.R. 9 Q.B. 134 ; 43 L.J.M.C. 81 ; 29 L.T. 910 ; 22 W.R. 263. Post p. 113. Vide other cases there cited. (y) Ante?. 52. Post \>. 157. (:) Post p. 90. 54 A Code of the Law of Rating. Rent of land. Prevailing practice. Unoccupied property not rateable. Landlord in possession. The rent of laud, apart from improvements, is taken at a percentage of the purchase price. So, again, is the rent of rail- way stations, (a) This rule, however, is liable to modification according to " the circumstances and conditions under which the owner has become the occupier." This was decided in London Count// Council v. Churchwarden* of Erith (b) where Lord Herschell, L.C., said : "It was said that a practice prevails of taking five per cent, on the cost, in the case of buildings, as a basis for arriving at the rental. Such a rule of thumb may be all very well where the premises would be likely to find com- peting tenants, but is not by any means necessarily applicable where it is thought that the owner would be likely to give a higher rental than any one else. It would often be obvious that he would never be willing to pay the rent arrived at in such a fashion, inasmuch as it would be more advantageous for him to become the owner. There are many other circumstances, too, which may affect the answer to the question what the owner of premises would have been willing to give if instead of becoming the owner he had become the tenant of them. In all cases of the description of which I am speaking, the whole of the circum- stances and conditions under which the owner has become the occupier must be taken into consideration, and no higher rent must be fixed as the basis of assessment than that which it is believed the owner would really be willing to pay for the occupation of the premises." (c) Where the owner cannot legally be tenant he is nevertheless to be taken into account as a possible hypothetical tenant for the purpose of determining the rateable value, (d) It is a rule that unoccupied property is not rateable, (e) There are, however, some cases where landlord is in possession of land, which though unlet, has been held to be occupied by (a) Reg. v. North Staffordshire Railway, 3 E. & E. 392 ; 30 L.J. M.C. 68 ; 3 L.T. 554 ; 9 W.R. 235 ; 7 Jur. X.S. 363. (b) (1893) A.C. 562 ; 63 L.J.M.C. 9 ; 69 L.T. 725 ; 42 W.R. 330 : 57 J.P. 821 ; 6 R. 22. (c) (1893) A.C. 592-3. (rf) London Council v. Erith, supra ; ante p. 8. (e) Reg. v. Maiden, L.R. 4 Q.B. : 10 B. & S. 323; 38 L.J.M.C. 125 ; 33 J.P. 645. Of Riding Genera////. 55 him. Mogg v. Overseers of Yatton (/) is a good example of this class of case. The appellant was the owner of 80 acres of grass land. The land remaining unlet, he instructed an auctioneer to sell the grass. The conditions of sale described the sale as a sale of grass for a certain time, and set out the conditions under which the purchasers were to be allowed to turn cattle out to eat the grass. The Court held that the appellant was properly rated to the poor in respect of the land for a period coincident with that for which the grass was sold. In Smith v. Assessment Committee of the New Forest Union (g), S. was the owner in fee of a piece of land which he had never enclosed, cultivated, used, or let. He had affixed a bill to a tree growing on the land stating that the land was to let. The tenant of some adjoining land had allowed his cattle to graze on the land without the consent of S. The Court of Appeal held that S. was not in occupation and consequently not liable to be rated to the poor. In an Irish case(/?) where a landlord, having evicted the tenants, occupied the land, but not the buildings on the land, he was held not rateable in respect of the buildings. In Pembroke v. Overseers of Wye (J) where P., the owner of where owner grass lands, which were unlet, entered on July 7th and cut the grass and stacked the hay, the Court held that P. was occupier from July 7th, but that the overseers had no power to rate P. as occupier before that date. In Rex v. Morgan (k) the Court refused to grant a mandamus to compel the justices to issue a distress warrant where an owner had been rated and had not appealed. The justices had refused to grant a distress warrant because in their judg- ment the owner was not the occupier and had been wrongly rated. Owners can now be rated to the poor instead of occupiers Poor-rate x A Assessment and only under the provisions of the Poor Bate Assessment and jg ^ 011011 Act ' (/) 6 Q.B.D. 10 ; 50 L.J.M.C. 17 ; 29 W.R. 74 ; 45 J.P. 324. (g) 61 L.T. 870. (Y) New Ross Union v. Byrne, 30 L.R. Ir. 160. (0 47 J.P. 359. \k) 2 A. & E. 618. 56 A Code of the Law of Rating. occupiers for Collection Act, 1869. (/) By section 1 occupiers of tenements for a term not exceeding three months may deduct the poor- rate paid by them from their rents. Section 2 provides that no occupier shall be compelled to pay to the overseers at one time or within four weeks a greater amount of the rate than would be due for one quarter of the year. owners may Section 3 provides that owners may agree to pay the rate, rlte e s! topay and be allowed a commission not exceeding 25 per cent, on the amount thereof, vestry may Section 4 provides that vestries may order the owner to be to pay rates, rated instead of the occupier. If such an order be made the following enactments shall have effect so long as such order is in force : — " (1) The overseers shall rate the owners instead of the occupiers, and shall allow to them an abatement or deduction of 15 per cent, from the amount of the rate. " (2) If the owner of one or more such rateable heredita- ments shall give notice to the overseers in writing that he is willing to be rated for any term not being less than one year in respect of all such rateable hereditaments of which he is the owner, whether the same be occupied or not, the overseers shall rate such owner accordingly and allow to him a further abate- ment or deduction not exceeding 15 per cent, from the amount of the rate during the time he is so rated. " (3) The vestry may by resolution rescind any such order after a day to be fixed by them, such day being not less than six months after the passing of such resolu- tion, but the order shall continue in force with respect to all rates made before the date on which the (1) Appendix p. 387. West Ham v. Fourth City Mutual Budd- ing Society (1892), 1 Q.B. 654 ; 61 L.J.M.C. 128 ; 66 L.T. 350 : 40 W.*R. 446 ; 56 J. P. 438. Of Rating Generally. 57 resolution takes effect. Provided that this clause shall uot be applicable to any hereditament in which a dwelling-house shall not be included." The whole Act and the cases decided in connection with it will be found in the Appendix, (m) This Act must be taken to have impliedly repealed section 19 of Sturges Bourne's Act (59 Geo. III., c. 12). (n) The vestry are only entitled under the Poor Pate Assessment and Collection Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict., c. 41), to rate the owner instead of the occupier where the rateable value of the hereditament does not exceed the amount specified in section 3, i.e., £20 if the hereditament is situate in the metropolis ; or £13 if situate in any parish wholly or partly within the borough of Liverpool ; or £10 if situate in any parish in Manchester or Birmingham, or £8 if situate elsewhere, (o) In Reg. v. Dodd (p) it was decided that where an owner compounds to pay the rates whether the tenement be occupied or not, he is entitled to the same deductions in respect of rates as if the tenement had not been compounded for. Referring to Sturges Bourne's Act (59 Geo. III., c. 12) (q), section 19 of which the Court, in Churchwardens of West Ham v. Fourth Cit// Mutual Building Society (r), held was impliedly repealed by the Poor Rate Assessment and Collection Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict., c. 41) («), the House of Lords decided that the owner of a house let " on any agreement by which the rent is reserved or made payable at any shorter period than three months," cannot be assessed to the poor-rate instead of the occupier if the rent is at a rate which amounts to more than £20 per annum, (t) O) Post p. 387. (ti) Appendix p. 311. (o) Norwood v. Salter (1892), 2 Q.B. 118 ; 61 L.J.M.C. 193 ; 67 L.T. 376. O) L.E. 1 Q.B. 16 ; 6 B. & S. 903 ; 35 L.J.M.C. 97 ; 12 Jur. 159. (5) Appendix, p. 311. (r) (1892) 1 Q.B. 654 ; 61 L.J.MJJ. 128 ; 66 L.T. 350 ; 40 W.R. 446 ; 56 J.P. 438. (s) Appendix, p. 387. (t) Overseers of West Ham v. lies, 8 App. Cas. 386 ; 52 L.J.M.C. 650 ; 49 L.T. 205 ; 31 W.R. 928 ; 47 J.P. 708. 58 A Code of the Law of Rating. Furnished houses. The owner is rateable as occupier of a f urnished house kept ready for occupation. Per Lush, J., in Reg. v. St. Pancras. (u) The same opinion was expressed by the Court in an Irish case. (./•) Rent for furniture must be deducted from rent paid in order to ascertain rent of house. (//) Promoters of undertakings uniler Lands Clauses Act. No claim for deficiency rate on portion completed. ARTICLE 15. Where promoters of an under- taking become possessed of lands under the Lands Clauses Act (8 & 9 Vict., c. 18), or the Special Act or any Act incorporated therewith, they are liable until the works are completed and assessed to the poor-rate, to make good any deficiency in the poor- rate that may arise during construction. Such deficiency shall be computed according to the rental at which such lands, with any building thereon, were valued or rated at the time of the passing of the Special Act. As a general practice property is not rated during construc- tion. As, however, great loss would fall on parishes where undertakings in the nature of railways, etc., were in course of construction if no rates were paid, section 133 was introduced into the Lands Clauses Act (8 & 9 Vict., c. 18). The purport of section 133 in so far as it deals with the question of poor-rate is given in the above Article. In Reg. v. Metropolitan District Railway Co. (s) it was held that the railway company were liable to make good the deficiency in the assessment until the entire system of railways, which the company was empowered to make under the special Act, was completed. This case, however, was overruled in East London Railway v. Whitechurch. (a) The East London Railway were authorised to take lands for the construction of several small railways. A portion of one of these railways was completely («) 2 Q.B.U. 581 ; 46 L.J.M.C. 243 ; 37 L.T. 126 ; 25 W.R. 827. (x) Stanton v. Poicell, 1 Ir. C.L. 182. {y) Per Blackburn, J., in Reg. v. Lee, L.R. 1 Q.B. 253 ; 35 L.J. M.C. 105 ; 13 L.T. 704 ; 14 W.R. 311 ; 12 Jur. 225. («) L.R. 6 Q.B. 698 ; 40 L.J.M.C. 113. («) L.R. 7 ILL. 81 ; 43 L.J.M.C. 159 ; 30 L.T. 412 ; 22 W.R. 665. Of Rating Generally. 59 constructed in one parish and was worked there. Until its completion there, the directors had paid in that parish the deficiency rate under the clause in the special Act which was similar in terms to section 133 of the Lands Clauses Act, 1845. The House of Lords held that the rate was properly a parochial rate and that on the completion of the portion of the railway in that parish, the title of the parish officers to claim the deficiency rate there had ceased. As soon, therefore, as there is a beneficial occupation of the works constructed they must be assessed to the poor-rate. With regard to clauses inserted by special arrangement the Private bar- Lord Chancellor (Lord Cairns), in the course of his judgment, said : "I will only add to what I have said that I attach little, if any, weight at all to some arguments which were attempted to be drawn from the other clauses in this Act, which are in the nature of private bargains with particular parishes. We all know how these clauses are inserted in an Act of Parliament of this kind. They are in the nature of private arrangements put into an Act at the instance of particular parties, who either act with greater caution than other parties, or act witli a desire to make a better bargain for themselves than other parties have made. They are not put in by the Legislature as part of a general scheme of legislation which it desires to express, but they are in the nature of particular contracts, and ought not to have any effect upon the construction of a general clause such as that which I have read to your lordships." In Mayor of London v. St. Andrew, Holborn (&), the Court corporation held that under section 133 of the Lands Clauses Act, 1845, a good deficiency, corporation taking land for public purposes were liable to make good the deficiency, but were not liable to be rated to the relief of the poor in respect of such lands. In Wheeler v. Metropolitan Board of Works (c) the Metro- politan Board of Works were authorised by a special Act (incorporating the Lands Clauses Act, 1845) to acquire land to make a new street. The Court held that they were promoters, and must make good the deficiency. (5) L.R. 2 C.P. 574 ; 36 L.J.C.P. 292 ; 10 L.T. 665 ; 15 W.K. 928. (c) L.U. 4 Ex. 303 ; 38 L.J. Ex. 165 ; 20 L.T. 984. 60 A Code of the Law of Rating. Where more land taken than required. Lands pur- chased to silence opposi- tion. AVhere the works contemplated by the special Act are not such as would be assessable to poor-rates when completed, the deficiency must nevertheless be made good. No deficiency, however, can be recovered in respect of Crown property, (d) In Governor of Poor of Bristol v. Mayor of Bristol (e), an urban sanitary authority, acting under its statutory powers, took for the purposes of improvements, lands situate in a number of parishes and liable to be assessed to the poor-rate. In some cases more land was taken than was required for the purpose, so that the sanitary authority became possessed of surplus lands which were vacant and unassessed. Such land was to be dis- posed of either by sale in fee simple or by the creation of rent- charges which were to be sold within a specified time. Such time had not expired when the rating authority brought an action against the sanitary authority to recover the deficiency in the assessment under section 133 of the Lands Clauses Act, 1845. The Court of Appeal held that the works were completed so as to relieve the undertakers from liability to make good the deficiency when the streets were fully made and such of the lands taken as might be liable to assessment had become assessable. The Court also held that each scheme described in the . schedule to the special Act constituted a separate under- taking, and that the deficiency in the assessment must be calculated on each separate undertaking within the rating area affected by it. Where the promoters of a railway company purchased houses beyond the limits of deviation from the line of railway, in order to obtain the withdrawal of the opposition of the owners of such houses to the passing of the special Act, the Court held the company could not be heard to say that they had become possessed of the houses otherwise than by virtue of the Act, and that they were consequently liable to make good the deficiency. It was further decided that as the statute directed that the deficiency should be computed according to the rental at which the houses were valued or rated at the time of the (d) Stratum v. Metropolitan Board of Works, L.R. 10 C.P. 76 ; 44 L.J.M.C. 33 ; 31 L.T. 673 ; 23 W.R. 447. (e) 18 Q.B.D. 549 ; 56 L.J.Q.B. 320 : 56 L.T. 641. Of Rating Generally. 61 passing of the special Act, the fact that some of them were then unoccupied was immaterial in estimating the amount of the deficiency. (/') Where the owners of houses on land taken by the promoters where owners compound, of an undertaking for the purposes of their works had made agreements, under section 3 of the Poor Rate Assessment and Collection Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict, c. 41) (g), with the rating authority of the district to pay the rateb instead of the occupiers, subject to a deduction of 25 per cent., the Court held that, on the true construction of section 133, the deficiency which the promoters were liable to make good must be computed having regard to the rateable value at the time the special Act was passed, and that they were not entitled to claim the deduction of 25 per cent, from the amount of the rates levied according to that value. (A) The Borough Rate and the County Rate are respectively Borough-rate. ° J L J County-rate. made chargeable on the poor-rate (/) ; and it has been held that any deficiency in the poor-rate, which the promoters of an undertaking are liable to make good under section 133 of the Lands Clauses Act, 1845, includes any deficiency in respect of amounts raised for borough-rate and county-rate, as well as any deficiency in the assessment for poor-law purposes. (/.•) ARTICLE 16.— Where premises are let on a Yearlytenancv - yearly tenancy, and the tenant pays rates and taxes, the rateable value is the rent paid to the landlord, less cost of insurance, tithe-commutation rent-charge (if any), repairs, and renewals. This is the tenure under which the Parochial Assessment Act (6 & 7 Will. IV., c. 96) (/) has enacted that property shall be (/") Putney v. London and South Western By. Co. (1891), 1 Q.B. 440 ; 60 L.J.M.C. 438 ; 64 L.T. 280. () Appendix, p. 315. (q) L.R. 2 Q.B. 542 ; 8 B. & S. 607 ; 36 L.J.M.C. 109 ; 16 L.T. 790 ; 15 W.R. 1059 ; post p. 68. 64 A Code of the Law of Bating. for tithe rent-charge, and " renewal," in accordance with the decision of the Court in Reg. v. Wells, (r) Metropolis. With respect to deductions in the case of hereditaments in the Metropolis, the reader is referred to the third schedule of the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869. (s) weekly ARTICLE 18.— Where premises are let on a weekly tenancy the rateable value is the sum paid for rent during the year less an amount to be deducted by the landlord for expense of collection, rates, taxes, repairs, insurance, tithe commutation rent-charge (if any), and renewals. In order to ascertain what a yearly tenant would pay, it is necessary to deduct a sum for the cost of collecting the rent, because under a weekly tenancy a landlord has to collect his rent fifty-two times during the year, whereas under a yearly tenant a landlord only collects his rent four times a year. The landlord pays the rates, taxes, and tithe commutation rent-charge (if any), does the repairs, and pays for renewals, and insurance. These sums, therefore, must all be deducted. Modeofcaicu- Example of the mode of calculating the rateable value of lating rateable value. weekly tenements : — £ s. d. 52 weeks' rent at 5s. per week 13 Deductions : — £ s. d. Cost of collection, 5 °/ , or 3d. a week 13 Repairs, insurance, &c, 20 °/ , or Is. per week 2 12 3 5 o Rateable value + rates = £9 15 (r) Ante p. 63. («) Appendix, p. 434. Of Rating Generally. 65 Taking the rates at 5s. in the £, we can obtain the rateable value as follows : — Rateable Rateable Rateable value-{-rates. value. value-|-rates. £1 5s. : £1 :: £9 15s. Rateable value. = £7 16s. (rateable value). "With respect to deductions in the case of hereditaments in Metropolis. the Metropolis, the reader is referred to the third schedule of the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869. (t) In Smith v. Birmingham {u), where the Recorder had found as a fact that a hypothetical tenant would pay £13 a year [that being in fact 52 times the weekly rent] for a tenement let at 5s. a week, the appellant, who was rated as owner, claimed deductions in respect of losses by reason of the house remaining unlet for some time, and by reason of losses of rent through inability of the tenants to pay, and in respect of the necessary cost of collection of the rent actually received. The Recorder further found that by reason of losses and " empties " the landlord would be unable to collect more than 95 per cent, of the rent, and that he would have to pay 5 per cent, as the cost of collecting the rent received. The Court of Appeal held that there was nothing unreasonable or not justifiable in point of law, and that therefore the finding of the Recorder was con- clusive of the fact. The Court, therefore, held that the appellant was not entitled to the deductions, inasmuch as the test of gross estimated rental is the rent which a tenant from gear to gear would agree to give, and not the sum which the land- lord ultimately receives. By the Poor Rate Assessment and Collection Act, 1869 °™ e a 7 ft f ted (32 & 33 Vict., c. 41) (a-) owners may, in certain cases, agree 0C0U P ieE - to pay the rates instead of the occupier, or the vestry may order the owner to be rated instead of the occupier. In either case the owner is entitled to a reduction, (y) (<) Appendix, p. 434. O) 22 Q.B.D. 703 ; 58 L.J.M.C. 161 ; 53 J.P. 787. (x) Appendix, p. 387. (y) Vide Article 14 and Appendix, pp. 387, 388. 66 A Code of the Laio of Rating. ?£ni!nt ARTICLE 19.— The occupier of any rateable here- ditament let to him for a term not exceeding three months shall be entitled to deduct the amount paid by him in respect of any poor rate assessed upon such hereditament from the rent due or accruing due to the owner, and every such payment shall be a valid discharge of the rent to the extent of the rate so paid. This is section 1 of the Poor Rate Assessment and Collection Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict., c. 41). (s) This Act must be taken to have impliedly repealed s. 19 of Sturges Bourne's Act (59 Geo. III., c. 12). (a) Deductions- ARTICLE 20.— The allowance for rates and taxes s 'must be made on the net rateable value after the rates and taxes themselves, in addition to all the other proper allowances, have been deducted. This is the deduction for rates and taxes made in accordance with s. 1 of the Parochial Assessment Act (6 & 7 Will. IV., c. 96). The question when the deduction for rates and taxes should be made arose in Ttjne Improvement Commissioners v. Chirton. (b) Cockburn, C.J., said : " The only practical way of treating the rates and taxes is to treat them as any other outgoings. The tenant contemplated by the Parochial Assess- ment Act (6 & 7 Will. IV., c. 96) would consider the rates which he would be obliged to pay before he could see what return he would get for the capital invested by him. He could not tell what amount of rent would be proper until he knew the amount of the rates which are to be assessed upon the net rateable value. Those who make the rates would get into a (z) Appendix, p. 387. Ante p. 55. (a) West Ham v. Fourth City Mutual Building Society (1892), 1 Q.B. 654 ; 61 L.J.M.C. 128 ; 66 L.T. 350 ; 40 W.E. 446 ; 56 J.P. 438. For Sturges Bourne's Act, vide Appendix, p. 311. (6) 32 L.J.M.C. 192 ; 6 L.T. 489. Of Rating Generally. 67 difficulty if they were merely to strike a balance for the profits, and then to make an assessment upon that balance. The allowance should be upon the net rateable value." (c) This case followed the rule laid down in Rex v. Hull Dock Co. (d), where Abbot, C.J., said: " The whole worth or value of land is made up of what is paid in rent and what in rates and other outgoings. Land intrinsically worth £40 a year can only pay a rent of £30 if it is to pay £10 per annum in other ways; and in estimating the rent both landlord and tenant look to the value of the thing on the one hand, and to the outgoings on the other, and the outgoings must be deducted from the value before the rent can properly be fixed." The Court held that the poor-rate must be calculated on such a sum as would, together with the rate, make up the whole amount of profits. The deduction for rates and taxes must be the rates and taxes the hypothetical tenant would have to pay, and not necessarily the rates based on the existing valuation list, (e) In estimating- the rate " fair average expenses ought to be Average ° , expenses to be allowed, but not any extraordinary expenditure which might deducted. happen to make the property unprofitable in a particular year." (/) ARTICLE 21.— Where property is of a perishable ^^ g ns - nature a deduction must be made for renewal. This was first decided before the Parochial Assessment Act (6 & 7 Will. IV., c. 96) in 1829 in the case of Rex v. Lower Mitton. (g) This case was followed by the Court in Reg. v. Cambridge Gas Co.(h) The same rule was laid down with (c) When all deductions have been made from the rent, the amount remaining = rent+rates and taxes. The mode of ascertaining the amount of rates and taxes is by rule of three, e.g., if the rates were 5 shillings in the £, amount before rates deducted : rateable value : : 25s . : 20s. (d) 3 B. & C. 516. (e) Reg. v. South Staffordshire Waterworks Co., 16 Q.B.D. 359 ; 55 L.J.M.C. 88 ; 54 L.T. 782 ; 34 W.K. 242 ; 50 J.P. 20. (/) Per Lord Ellenborough in Rex v. Agar, 14 East 262. \g) 9 B. & C. 810. (h) 8 Ad. & E. 73 ; 7 L.J.M.C. 50. 5a 68 A Code of the Law of Rating. respect to buildings of a perishable nature by Cockburn, C.J., in Beg. v. Well*, (i) The questions for the opinion of the Court were (1) whether the amount expended upon repairs ought to be deducted from the rent actually paid in order to arrive at the net annual or rateable value of the premises ; (2) whether any allowance should be made in respect of any contingent or future renewal or reconstruction of buildings and machinery, or either and which, and, if so, to what amount. The considered judgment of the Court (Cockburn, C.J., and Shee, J.) was as follows : " Two questions present themselves for our decision in this case, both turning on the construction to be put on that part of the first section of the Parochial Assessment Act, 6 & 7 Will. IV., c. 96, which provides that in estimating the value at which property is to be assessed, a deduction is to be made from the rent at which the same might be reasonably expected to let by the year, and which is to be taken as the criterion of value, of ' the probable annual average cost of the repairs, insurance, and other expenses necessary to maintain it in a state to command such rent,' The first question is whether, where houses or other buildings, either with or without land, are let to a tenant, and the tenant agrees to take upon himself, either wholly or in part, the repairs and other expenses to which the section refers^ and which would ordinarily fall upon the landlord, an allowance is to be made in respect of such repairs and expenses, as though they were defrayed by the landlord. " On the hearing we were disposed to think that, as the rate, when assessed, is to be paid by the occupier, the tenant, the repairs and other expenses necessary for keeping the property in proper condition, which he has thus taken upon himself, might, as against him, be taken as so much rent, and would not in his hands, be capable of being deducted. On further consideration, however, we are of opinion that the standard of value adopted by the Legislature is the value of the property to the owner, whether it remains in his own occupation or is let to a tenant. Now, to the owner the measure of this value is (i) L.R. 2 Q.B. 542 ; 8 B. & S. 607 ; 36 L.J.M.C. 109 ; 16 L.T. 790 ; 15 W.R. 1059. Of Rating Generally. 69 the rent at which the property is let, or might be let, subject to the deduction which such owner, as a prudent man, ought to make from the available income which the rent would other- wise afford, in order to meet the expenses necessary for keeping the premises in a state to command the rent. " Where, by an arrangement between the landlord and the tenant, the latter takes upon himself to defray these expenses, or any part of them, it is obvious that the rent he can afford to pay will he pro tanto less than if such expenses were borne by the landlord. We cannot think the statute meant to make the rateable value of the premises depend on the terms on which they are actually let, but upon that rent which might reason- ably have been expected if they had been let on the statutable terms. In order, therefore, to give effect to the intention of the Legislature, it is necessary to consider these expenses as added to the rent, but then as to be deducted by the landlord ; thus leaving the rent actually paid by the tenant as the amount on which the rate ought to be assessed. We therefore answer the first question by saying that the cost of repairs borne by the tenant ought not to be deducted from the rent actually paid, and that the rent so paid is the rateable value of the premises. " The second question submitted to us is, whether any allow- ance should be made in respect of any contingent or future renewal of buildings or machinery. We are of opinion that such allowance ought to be made. Farm buildings and machinery are, by the effects of weather and of wear and tear, reducible to a state which will render them unworthy of repair, and necessitates their reconstruction. They cannot at length be kept up but at an expense which renders it practically im- possible, because not reasonably prudent, to keep them up. " Provision made for a future liability to reconstruct them, involving, as it ought to do, a prudential parsimony as respects all but temporary and indispensable repairs, is an expense which may properly be included among the expenses necessary to maintain a hereditament, consisting in parts of subjects perishable, in a state fit to command the rent, and which it does, in fact, while standing and in use, command. There seems also no distinction in principle between a sum annually 70 A Code of the Law of Rating. laid by to make good, when it shall become necessary, an inevitable loss by the destructive agency of time, and a fund laid by for an indemnity against a loss by fire, or storm, or other peril insured against. But although a deduction in respect of the amount which ought, as a matter of reasonable prudence, to be set aside by the owner of property for the reconstruction of buildings and machinery, ought to be made from the rent before the latter is adopted as the test of value, yet, under the circumstances of the present case, the reasoning on which our answer to the first question is founded, is equally applicable to the one now under consideration, and we are therefore of opinion that no allowance ought to be made in respect of this head of allowance." (k) SfreSrs^ ARTICLE 22.— Where the tenant undertakes to do repairs no deduction is to be made from the rent paid by the tenant in respect of such repairs. This was the decision in Reg. v. Wells. (/) Deductions- Sewer Rate. ARTICLE 23.— In assessing to the poor-rate, allowances must be made in respect of sewer or drainage rate, lighting rate, and general rate. That a deduction was to be made for sewer rate was decided in Rex v. Adames (m), and followed in Reg. v. Gainsborough Union, (n) In the latter case the Court held "that it was an expense necessary to maintain the land in a state to command the rent." It was decided in Reg. v. Goodchild (o) that deduc- tions were to be allowed for the other rates mentioned in this Article. (&) }.B. 84; 43 Ante p. 67. Vide also Mersey Docks v. Liverpool, L.R. 9 L.J.M.C. 33 ; 22 W.R, 184. (I) L.R. 2 Q.B. 542 ; 8 B. & S. 607 ; 36 L.J.M.C. 109. (m) 4B. & Ad. 61. L.R. 7 Q.B. 64 ; 41 L.J.M.C. 1 ; 20 W.R. 250. Vide also Reg. v. Hall Dare, 5 B. & S. 785 ; 34 L.J.M.C. 17 ; 11 Jur. N.S. 59. E. B. & E. 1 ; 28 L.J.M.C. 233. Vide also Reg. v. Smith, 55 L.J.M.C. 49 ; 54 L.T. 431 ; 50 J.P. 215. (n) Of Rating Generally. 71 ARTICLE 24.— In estimating the rateable value, Deduction- no deduction from the gross value is to be allowed for water rate. This was decided in Reg. v. Bilston. (p) Cockburn, C.J., said : " It is neither a tenant's rate nor an expense necessary to keep the premises in repair, or to maintain them in a condition to command the rent." ARTICLE 25.— In assessing to the poor-rate a Reductions- deduction may be made for tenant's income-tax. income-tax. This was decided in Reg. v. Goodchihl. (q) There were two cases decided before Reg. v. Goodchihl which caused great doubt as to whether such a deduction as this should be made. In the earlier one, Reg. v. Great Western Railway (/•), Lord Denman, C.J., said: "It does not strike us that there is any reasonable distinction between this and any other outgoing chargeable on the tenant, which would certainly affect the amount of the rent he would be willing to pay." In the later case, Reg. v. Southampton Dock Company (s), Lord Campbell, C.J., said : " This is not a tax upon the subject- matter rated, which the tenant as such would be obliged to pay, but upon the net income of the tenant after paying the rent of the premises by which his profits are earned." ARTICLE 26.— In assessing to the poor-rate no Deducuons- i i i r> Landlord's deduction is to be made in respect of landlord's property-tax, land-tax. property-tax or land-tax. So held in Reg. v. Goodchihl. (t) O) L.R. 1 Q.B. 18 ; 6 B. & S. 908 ; 35 L.J.M.C. 73 ; 13 L.T. 327 ; 14 W.R. 83 ; 12 Jur. N.S. 139. (q) E. B. & E. 1 ; 27 L.J.M.C. 233 ; 22 J.P. 144 ; 4 Jur. 1050. (r) 6 Q.B. 179 ; 15 L.J.M.C. 80 ; 10 Jur. 134. (s) 14 Q.B. 587 ; 20 L.J.M.C. 155 ; 15 Jur. 268. (0 E. B. & E. 1 ; 28 L.J.M.C. 233. 72 A Code of the Law of Eating. ARTICLE 27— An outgoing occupier is only liable for as much of the rate due as shall be pro- portionate to the time of his occupation; and an incoming occupier for so much of the rate as shall be proportionate to the time between the com- mencement of his occupation and the expiration of the period for which the rate is made. These provisions were made by the Poor Bate Assessment and Collection Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict., c. 41), s. 16, and the Poor Eate Assessment and Collection Act (1869) Amendment Act, 1882 (45 & 46 Vict, c. 20), s. 3. (a) These statutes have the effect of annulling the decisions in Edwards v. Rusholme (?) and Werburgh Overseers v. Hutchin- son, (y) Exemptions from rating. Crown pro- perty. ARTICLE 28.— The following are exempt from rating : Crown Property ; County Buildings used for Police and Courts of Justice ; Personal Pro- perty ; Turnpike Tolls ; Churches and Chapels ; Literary and Scientific Societies ; Lighthouses (other than those under the control of local authorities) ; Volunteer Storehouses ; Sunday and Ragged Schools ; Premises occupied by Ambas- sadors, etc. ; Property exempted by local Acts of Parliament. Crown Property is exempt, not being mentioned in the Statute of Elizabeth. In the Mersey Docks Cases (s), the lead- ing case on this subject, the Lord Chancellor (Lord Westbury) said : " The only occupier exempt from the operation of the Act (u) Appendix, pp. 392, 395. (x) L.R. 4 Q.B. 554 ; 38 L.J.M.C. 153. (y) L.R, 5 Ex. 19 ; 49 L.J.M.C. 23 ; 28 W.R. 153. Vide also Hare v. Putney, 7 Q.B.U. 223 ; 50 L.J.M.C. 81 ; 45 L.T. 387 ; 29 W.R. 721 ; 46 J.P. 100, where the Court of Appeal affirmed Werburgh v. Hutchinson. (z) 11 H.L.C. 4J3 ; 35 L.J.M.C. 1 ; 20 C.B. N.S. 56 ; 12 L.T. 643 ; 13 W.R. 10o9 ; 11 Jur. N.S. 746. Of Rating Generally. 73 is the King, because he is not named in the Statute ; and the direct and immediate servants of the Crown whose occupation is the occupation of the Crown itself, also come within the exemption." The question again came before the House of Lords in Leith Harbour Commissioners v. Inspector of Poor (a), and the House of Lords held that the case was not distinguishable from the Mersey Docks Case. The latter therefore became a Scotch as well as an English decision. Royal Palaces are not rateable to the poor. Servants who Royal Palaces occupy separately house and land, whether they pay for them by rent or services, are rateable, (b) Where the site of a palace is demised for a certain permanent interest, the grantees who occupy it are rateable, (c) In Reg. v. Ponsonby (d) it was held that occupiers of a royal palace by permission of the Crown are rateable to the poor in respect of the apartments so held by them. Stables rented by the colonel of a regiment, by order of the Barracks. Crown for use of the regiment (the colonel not using them for his own horses nor occupying them at all), were held not liable to be rated, (e). Where, however, the commanding officer in barracks had Excess of ac- ° commodation. distinct apartments allotted to him, one in particular for trans- acting the business of the regiment, and others fitted up for the accommodation of himself and his family who resided with him, the said apartments containing, among other rooms, a kitchen, wash-house, and coach-house, together with a stable- yard and garden, Lord Ellenborough held that he was rateable to the relief of the poor for the latter because he had a beneficial occupation, of the premises beyond his necessary accommodation for the purpose of the public service. (/') The same principle (a) L.ll. 1 H.L. Sc. & Div. App. 17. (b) Rex v. Mathews, Caldecott's Settlement cases 1. (c) Duke of Portland v. Parish Officers of St. Margaret, West- minster, 1 Caldecott's Settlement cases 3 (note a). (d) 3Q.B. 14 ; 11 L.J.M.C. 65. (e) Amherst v. Sommers, 2 T.K. 372. (/) Rex v. Terrot, 3 East. 506. 74 A Code of the Law of Rating. was laid down in Lord Bute's Case(g), Eyre v. Smallpage {h) , and Hurdis's Case, (i) In Rex v. Chelsea Waterworks (k) , a com- pany holding under a warrant from the Crown were held rateable for the exclusive beneficial occupation they had in the land. Prisons. The governor and other servants of the Crown who occupy rooms in a prison are not liable to be rated. (/) But they are rateable in respect of any occupation they may enjoy in excess of what is necessary for the performance of their duties. In Dartmoor case. Gambier v. Li/dford (m) the question of rating Dartmoor convict . prison came before the Court. Land and buildings in Dartmoor were rented to the Government and the Duchy of Cornwall by the Directors of Convict Prisons, and were used for the purpose of a convict establishment and of reclaiming and cultivating the land by the labour of the prisoners. The produce of the land was consumed in the establishment or sold, the proceeds of sale being applied entirely in reduction of the convict estimates. A house within the precincts of the prison with a small garden was assigned as quarters to the governor of the prison, together with a coach-house and stabling. There were also quarters Governor occupied by the deputy-governor and other officers of the prison quarters. within the prison walls. All these quarters were occupied rent- free. At a distance from the prison, and not connected with it by a boundary-wall or otherwise, were houses and cottages, assigned to and occupied by other of the prison officers, some of whom paid rent for them and others received less wages in proportion to the value of the premises occupied by them. All sums received for rent were applied in reduction of the prison expenditure. No more rooms were occupied by the governor, deputy-governor, or any of the other officers (either within or without the prison walls) than were necessary for the proper discharge of their duties and for the adequate accommodation of the families of such of them as were married. But the (g) Bute v. Grindall, 1 T.R, 388. (h) 2 Burr. 1059. (*) Rex v. Hurdis, 3 T.R, 497. (k) 5 B. & Ad. 156. (1) Reg. v. Shepherd, 1 Q.B. 170 ; 10 L.J.M.C. 44 ; 5 Jur. 432. (ro) 3 E. & B. 346 ; 23 L.J.M.C. 69. Of Rating Generally. 75 coach-house and stabling of the governor were not necessary to enable him properly to discharge his duties. A part of the building in the prison was occupied as a canteen for the sale of canteen. beer to the prison officers, no profit being derived therefrom beyond what was sufficient to pay the wages of the man who supplied the beer. A part of the buildings outside the prison walls was occupied by a grocer, who carried on his business Grocer's shop, there, supplying goods to the residents in the establishment and others. There was a farm at a distance of half-a-mile from the ™ r arm. prison, in the cultivation of which the convicts of the establish- ment were employed, and its proceeds were wholly applied for the benefit of the establishment. The Court (Lord Campbell, C.J., Coleridge and Wightman, JJ.) held that the prison itself was not rateable ; that the canteen and grocer's shop were rateable ; that the quarters occupied by the governor and other officers within the prison in discharge of their duties were not rateable ; that the coach-house and stables of the governor were rateable ; that the farm was profitably occupied and was rate- able. It was also held (Coleridge, J., dissent iente) that the residences occupied by the officers outside the prison walls were rateable. It is only in respect of excess of accommodation that servants Excess of ac- p.-iy-N, j_ii- ic • •-.! commodation. oi the Crown are rateable m respect oi premises occupied by them. This principle, which underlies all the cases, was clearly stated by Lord Campbell in Reg. v. Stewart (n) and Reg. v. Fuller, (o) Land lying outside a prison and worked by convicts is rateable, (p) Premises rented by the Postmaster-Greneral and occupied as Post office. a post-office are not rateable in respect of such occupation, (q) All land, property and undertakings acquired by the Land acquired Postmaster-Greneral under the Telegraph Act (31 & 32 Vict., graph Act!" c. 110) are rateable at sums not exceeding the rateable value at (») 8 E. & B. 360 ; 27 L.J.M.C. 81 ; 4 Jur. N.S. 187. (o) 8 E. & B. 365 (note). (p) Governor of Bristol Poor v. Walt, 5 A. & E. 1 ; 5 L.J.M.C. 113. (q) Reg. v. Smith, 7 E. & B. 483 ; 26 L.J.M.C. 105 ; 3 Jur. X.S. 769. 76 A Code of the Law of Rating. which they were properly assessed or assessable at the time of purchase or acquisition. The Act, however, provides no means for enforcing payment, (>•) Where premises taken over for telegraph purposes have ceased to be used as such, the occupier of such premises is not liable to be assessed in any sum exceed- ing the rateable value at which the premises could have been properly assessed at the time of the purchase. («) Fortifications are no longer exempt from rating. By an Act of Parliament " to make better provision for acquiring lands for the defence of the Eealm " (28 & 24 Vict., c. 112), it is provided (section 33) that land taken for the purposes of this Act shall be liable to be rated, but " shall not be assessed to any tax or rate at a higher value or rent than that at which such lands were assessed at the time of such vesting." In Reg. v. Temple (t) where the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury on behalf of the Lords of the Committee of Council on Education fitted up and used premises as a normal and model school for the training of masters of schools for pauper and criminal children, each student paying £30 a year, Lord Campbell held there was no exemption from rateability. It is difficult to reconcile the preceding case with that of the Royal Academy Case (a) where Lord Denman, C.J., held that the Royal Academy was exempt although it was in receipt of an income of £5,000 a year. The Museum of Practical Geology Case (x) was distinguished from Reg. v. Temple (//) on the ground that the Museum was erected on Crown property and was therefore exempt. This decision was followed in Reg. v. McCann (z) which decided that the Royal Bridge at Chelsea was exempt on the (/•) Reg. v. Postmaster-General, 28 L.T. 337 ; 21 W.R. 459. («) St. Gabriel, Fenchurch, v. Williams, 16 Q.B.D. 649 ; 55 L.J. M.C. 14 ; 54 L.T. 270. (0 2 E. & B. 160 ; 22 L.J.M.C. 129. («) Beg. v. Shce, 4 Q.B. 2 ; 12 L.J.M.C. 53. (./■) De la Beche v. St. James's. Westminster, 4 El. & Bl. 385 ; 24 L.J.M.C. 74 ; 1 Jur. X.S. 375. (//) Supra. (z) L.R. 3 Q.B. 677 ; 37 L.J.M.C. 123 ; 19 L.T. N.S. 115 ; 16 W.R. 985. Of Rating Generally. 77 ground that it was constructed by the Government out of public funds, and was de facto an occupation by servants of the Crown. The University of Edinburgh has been held not exempt from university of J ° l Edinburgh. rating (a) on the ground that property granted by the Crown to the University, or for the purposes of a University, is not property granted for the service of the government of the country. This was contrary to the view taken in the Oxford Poor Rate Case, (b) A Reformatory School which has been certified under the and^industnai Reformatory Schools Act, 1866 (29 & 30 Vict., c. 117), is ™ hooU * rateable to the poor, the building not being occupied by the Crown or by servants of the Crown, (a) A similar decision was given in the case of an Industrial School, certified under the Industrial Schools Act, 1866 (29 & 30 Vict., c. 118) (d), and followed in County Council of Durham v. Chester-le- Street, (e) Buildings used for police courts and stations, county county build- courts, and all county buildings occupied at assize time by the judges are exempt from rating. It was decided in the case of Lancashire Justices v. Overseers Police. of Stretford(f), and in Reg. v. *SY. Martin's, Leicester (g), that buildings used as a police-station and occupied by the police are exempt from rating. In Martin v. West Derby (h), a superintendent of the police for a county police division occupied a house which was rented for him by the county authorities, and which he furnished. His rent was paid out of the police rates and deducted from his salary. The house was a quarter of a mile from the police- station. The Court of Appeal held that the superintendent was (a) Greig v. University of Edinburgh, L.R. 1 H.L. Sc. App. 348. (b) 8 E. & B. 184 ; 27 L.J. M.C. 33. (c) Tunnicliffe v. Birkdale, 20 Q.B.D. 450 ; 56 L.J.M.C. 109 ; 59 L.T. 190. This case over-ruled Sheppard v. Bradford, 16 C.B. N.S. 369 ; 33 L.J.M.C. 183 ; 10 L.T. 421 ; 12 W.R. 867. (d) Beg. v. West Derby, L.R. 10 Q.B. 283 ; 44 L.J.M.C. 98 ; 32 L.T. 400. (e) (1891) 1 Q.B. 330 ; 60 L.J.M.C. 9 ; 63 L.T. 461. (/) E. B. & E. 225 ; 27 L.J.M.C. 209 ; 4 Jur. N.S. 1274. (g) L.R. 2 Q.B. 493 ; 8 B. & S. 536 ; 36 L.J.M.C. 99 ; 16 L.T. 625 ; 15 W.R. 1096. (h) 11 Q.B.D. 145 ; 52 L.J.M.C. 56 ; 31 W.R. 489 ; 47 J.P. 500. 78 A Code of the Law of Rating. rateable to the poor in respect of such house, as his occupation was a beneficial one ; and the house, being no part of the police- station, did not come within the recognised heads of property which is treated as Crown property. The decision in Gambler v. Overseers of Lydford (i) was approved. Again where a police officer resided with his family in a cottage two miles distant from the nearest police-station the house was held rateable, (k) Residence of It will be seen from the next case that the Courts are deter- chief constable, . , . . ~ ,. etc. mined not to extend the principle laid down in Gambier v. Lydford. («) In Showers v. Chelmsford Union (7) the chief constable, the deputy chief constable and two other officers of the constabulary force of the county occupied as residences part of a building, consisting of, in addition to the chief constable's and deputy chief constable's houses, quarters for the other two officers and their families, clerks' offices, store-rooms for police clothing, a parade room, stables, coach-house, etc. The whole of the premises were enclosed by a wall and used solely by the police force for the purposes of, and were the head-quarters of, the county constabulary, the chief constable being bound to reside there. The amount of the rent of each officer was deducted from his pay. The Court held that the rule exempting from rateability property occupied for the purposes of the government of the country did not apply to the premises occupied by the appellants as residences, and that each of them was rateable to the relief of the poor. county court. A building used exclusively for a County Court is exempt from rating as there is no beneficial occupation of it. (m) Assize courts, Buildings used for Assize Courts, judges' lodgings, and Sessions Courts, ° , etc - county hall are also exempt from rating, (n) The ground 01 the exemption is that the property is used for Crown purposes (i) Ante p. 74. (k) Maeharg v. Stoke-upon-Trent, 48 J. P. 775. (I) L.R. (1891) 1 Q.B. 339 ; 60 L.J.M.C. 55 ; 64 L.T. 755. (m) Reg. v. Manchester, 3 E. & B. 336 ; 23 L.J.M.C. 48. (n) Reg v. Worcestershire Justices, 11 A. & E. 57 ; 9 L.J.M.C. 17 ; Hodgson v. Local Board of Carlisle, 8 E. & B. 116 ; Reg. v. Castle View, Leicester, L.R. 2 Q.B. 493 ; 8 B. & S. 536 ; 36 L.J.M.C. 99 ; 16 L.T. 625 ; 15 W.R. 1096. Of Rating Generally. 79 and that there is no beneficial occupation. It is different, however, where there is a beneficial occupation as in the case of Lancashire Justices v. Cheetham. (o) There the justices provided courts, etc., for the assizes, and provided in such courts, for the corporation of the city of M., for £900 per annum (viz., £600 for the use of the premises, and £300 for expenses), all the accommodation required for the City Quarter Sessions and the City Court of Eecord. The £600 was applied by the justices in part payment of the annual expense of keeping up the Courts. The justices were held rateable to the relief of the poor for their occupation of the Courts, etc., in respect of the £600 per annum, on the ground that they had a beneficial occupation within the principle laid down in the Mersey Docks Cases, (p) The Middlesex County Sessions House, Clerkenwell, is exempt from rating as the buildings are used for public purposes connected with the government of the country, (q) This decision followed Comber v. Justices of Berkshire (r) in which case it was held by the House of Lords that income-tax was not payable in respect of county buildings used for the administration of justice and for police purposes. In the recent case of the County Council of Middlesex v. county council Assessment Committee of St. George's Union (s) it was held that premises used by a county council for the purposes of the administrative business of the county are not exempt from rating. Where the premises are jointly occupied by the quarter sessions of a county and a county council, the occupation must be apportioned, and they are rateable to the extent to which they are occupied by the county council. Local Boards are not exempt from rating in respect of pre- Local Boards. mises occupied by them. (o) L.R. 3 Q.B. 14 ; 8 B. & S. 548 ; 37 L.J.M.C. 12 ; 16 W.R. 124. (p) 11 H.L.C. 443 ; 35 L.J.M.C. 1 ; 20 C.B. N.S. 56 ; 12 L.T. 643 ; 13 W.R. 1069 ; 11 Jur. N.S. 746. (q) Nicholson v. Assessment Committee of Holborn Union, 18 Q.B.D 161 ; 56 L.J.M.C. 54 ; 55 L.T. 775 ; 35 W.R. 230 ; 51 J.P. 341. (r) 9 App. Cases 61 ; 53 L.J.M.C. 239 ; 50 L.T. 405. («) (1897) 1 Q.B. 64 ; 66 L.J. Q.B. 101 ; 75 L.T. 464. 80 A Code of the Law of Rating. Pump-room. Personal Property. Turnpike Tolli In Reg. v. Justices of Hull {t) the municipal corporation of H. were by their town council constituted the Local Board of Health of a district co-extensive with the borough. The Local Board occupied a yard within H., in the parish of S., solely for the purpose of repairing the highways in the district of which they, as Local Board, were surveyors. The parish of S. was partly not within H. The Court held that the Local Board were rateable to the relief of the poor in S., as occupiers of the yard, their occupation not being for such public purposes as to exempt them from rateability. In Keighley Local Board v. Krighky Churchwardens (u), a Local Board were held rateable in respect of some gas-works, on the ground that the general ratepayers of the parish were not benefited, but only those within the district of K. In Reg. v. Harrogate (.r) commissioners appointed for the improvement of Harrogate were held rateable in respect of a pump-room over the sulphur water springs. Personal property was exempted from rating by 3 & 4 Vict., c. 89. (#) This Act was originally in force for one year only. This limitation was removed by the Statute Law Revision Act, 1874 (No. 2), (37 & 38 Vict., c. 9G) which repealed section 2 of 3 & 4 Vict., c. 89 (s) . The Act is continued from year to year by the Expiring Laws Continuance Acts. Although profits of trade are not rateable, they may affect the rent. Lord Denman, C.J., said : " The profits of trade cannot as such be brought into the rate, but if the ability for carrying on a gainful trade upon the land adds to the value of the land, that value cannot be excluded because it is referable to trade." (a) By 3 Geo. IV., c. 126, s. 51, it was provided that tolls taken at a gate on a tumpike-road should be exempt from (0 4 E. & B. 29 ; 23 L.J.M.C. 183. (u) 29 J.P. 71. (x) 15 Q.B. 1012 ; 20 L.J.M.C. 25 ; 15 Jur. 422. (y) Appendix, p. 324. (z) Appendix, p. 324. (a) Reg. v. Grand Junction Railway Co., 4 Q.B. 18 ; 13 L.J.M.C. 94 ; 8 Jur. 508. Of Rating Generally. 81 rating. In the case of Rex v. The Trustees of the Dover Road (b) it was held that land upon which trustees had made a road, and in respect of which they received tolls, was exempt under this Act. Churches and chapels are exempt from rating by 3 & 4 ggjjjf fl '" 1 Will. IV., c. 30. (c) Before this Statute was passed the trustees of a Methodist Chapel who received the pew rents were held rateable by Lord Ellenborough.(r/) Bv 6 & 7 Vict., c. 36 (e), land, houses, or buildings occupied Literary and J . Scientific by literary and scientific societies are exempt from rating, societies. There is a provision in the Act that a society, to be entitled to the exemption, shall be supported wholly or in part by annual voluntary contributions, and may not by its laws make any dividend, gift, division, or bonus in money, unto or between any of its members. It is further provided that such societies must get a certificate from a barrister-at-law that they are entitled to exemption. (/) The contributions must be voluntary. Where a society returns to every contributor the equivalent of his contributions in money's worth, the society was held by the House of Lords not to be supported by voluntary contributions within the meaning of section 1 of the Act. (g) This must now be regarded as the leading case. The following are cases in which various societies have been held exempt. In Churchwardens and Overseers of Birmingham v. Shaw (h) ^ ean ™s the Birmingham New Library was held exempt, and Lord " voluntary.' Denman, C.J., said : " It is perhaps not easy to determine what the Legislature intended by the word ' voluntary ' in this com- bination. . . . Upon consideration we think that annual contributions will satisfy the condition required if they com- mence of the party's own choice, are so continued, and may be (6) 5 A. & E. 692 ; 6 L.J.M.C. 25. (c) Appendix, p. 314. (d) Rex v Agar, 14 East 256. (e) Appendix, p. 325. (/) Section 2. Appendix, p. 327. (g) Overseers of the Savoy v. Art Union of London (1896), A.C 296 ; 65 L.J.M.C. 161 ; 74 L.T. 497 ; 45 W.R. 34. (h) 10 Q.B. 868 ; 18 L.J.M.C. 89 ; 13 Jur. 357. 6 82 A Code of the Law of Rating. withdrawn at pleasure. ... If the contributor was free to commence his subscription and incurs no legal obligation to continue it when he has once commenced, and upon ceasing to contribute will lose no more than the privileges of membership in respect of which he became a contributor, it seems to me he must be considered a voluntary contributor unless we add some- thing to the idea of voluntariness, which in ordinary language it does not impart. And that is what, in fact, is done by those who contend that it must be also gratuitous and bring no return of any kind to the contributor." Lord Herschell and the other learned Law Lords in the House of Lords (/) did not agree with this view of the meaning of the word " voluntary." Lord Herschell there said : "I do not think it was intended to exempt from rating buildings belonging to a society merely because the payments by which it was wholly or in part supported were made voluntarily and not compulsorily , when they were not made gratuitously, but were the price of advantages obtained in return for them. The expression ' supported by voluntary contributions ' has long been well-known in connec- tion with hospitals and other institutions ; I think the essential idea conveyed by them is that the payments are a gratuitous offering for the benefit of others and not the price of an advan- tage purchased by the contributor." ha" e e been held ^e view taken by the learned Lords in the foregoing case is to be exempt, fae same as that expressed in the Neic University Club Caseif), and in the case of Commissioners of Inland Revenue v. Forrest. (/) In Reg. v. Manchester Overseers (m), the Man- chester Institution, in Earl of Clarendon v. St. James's, Westminster (n), the London Library, in Linnrean Society v. Churchwardens of St. Anne, Westminster (o), the Linnsean Society, in Reg. v. Bradford Library (])), the Bradford Library (i) Overseers of Savoy v. Art Union of London (1896), A.C. 296 ; 65 L.J.M.C. 161 ; 74 L.T. 497 ; 45 W.R. 34. (k) 18 Q.B.D. 720 ; 56 L.J. Q.B. 462 ; 56 L.T. 909 ; 35 W.R. 774. (/) 15 App. Cas. 334 ; 63 L.T. 36 ; 39 W.R. 33 ; 54 J.P. 772. (m) 16 Q.B. 449 ; 20 L.J.M.C. 113 ; 15 Jur. 219. (») 20 L.J.M.C. 213 ; 10 C.B. 806 ; 15 Jur. 492. (o) 3 E. & B. 793 ; 23 L.J.M.C. 148. (p) 1 E. & E. 88 ; 28 L.J.M.C 73. Of Rating Generally. 83 and Literary Society, and in Liverpool Library v. Mayor of Liver- pool (q), the Liverpool Library, were all held exempt from rating. On the other hand, religious societies and educational societies Reiipious X - /J - 1, KOCi'i have been held not to come within the Act granting exemp- tion. (>•) A news room and library vested in subscribers at an annual rent was held not exempt in Reg. v. Phi/tips, (s) The same case also decided that the certificate of a barrister under the statute to the effect that a society is entitled to the benefit of the Act does not furnish conclusive proof that the society is so entitled. In the Manchester Portico Case (t) the society, consisting of Mu8t be ... ,., , exclusively for subscribers who paid £'2 10s. per annum, provided a library and purposes of r x science, htera- news room for members. It was held that it was not exempt ture, or fine from poor-rate in respect of the premises, because the purposes to which they were appropriated were not exclusively purposes of science, literature, or the fine arts ; and the promotion of these was not the primary object of the Society, inasmuch as the use of the premises and their contents was confined to the members themselves. The Russet/ List it at ion was held not entitled to exemption from poor-rate on similar grounds, (a) In Purchas v. Holy Sepulchre (x), following Purvis v. Traill (y), the Cambridge Philosophical Society was held not exempt from rating. In Purvis v. Traill a society instituted for the purposes of literature, science, and the fine arts let its premises for other purposes. It was held liable to be rated although the funds were applied to the objects of the institution. In Reg. v. Brandt (s) a society was by its rules declared to be concerts to instituted exclusively for the promotion of the science or art of (q) 5 H. & N. 526 ; 29 L.J.M.C. 221 ; 8 W.K. 498. (r) Reg. v. Jones, 8 Q.B. 719 ; 15 L.J.M.C. 129 ; 10 Jur. 613 ; Reg v. PococJc, 8 Q.B. 729 ; 15 L.J. M.C. 132 ; 10 Jur. 662. 0) 8 Q.B. 745 ; 17 L.J.M.C. 83 ; 12 Jur. 431. (0 Reg. v. Gaskell, 16 Q.B. 472 ; 21 L.J.M.C. 29 ; 15 Jur. 1156. (u) Russell Institution v. St. Giles-in-the-Fields mid St. George, Bloomsbury, 3 E. & B. 416 ; 23 L.J.M.C. 65. (./■) 4 E. & B. 156 ; 24 L.J.M.C. 9 ; 1 Jur. N.S. 304. O) 3 Ex. 344 ; 18 L.J.M.C. 57. (z) 16 Q.B. 462 ; 20 L.J.M.C. 119 ; 15 Jur. 223. 6a 84 A Code of the Laic of Rating. music by the giving of concerts or other musical performances at the concert hall belonging to the institution. Concerts were given to which members of the society, and persons having tickets which members were entitled to give, were admitted. The Court held that the society, though instituted for the purpose of promoting the fine arts, was not exempt, as it appeared that the promotion of the fine arts was not the primary object of the society, but only incidental, the primary object being the gratification of the subscribers. In Reg. v. Cockburn (a) the United Service Institution was held not exempt from rating, on the ground that " Professional Art " and the other objects of the society were not " purposes of science, literature, or the fine arts exclusively," within the meaning of the statute, zoological Reg. v. Zoological Society of London (b) decided that the exempl 110 * Zoological Society was not exempt. Lord Campbell said : " It tends to advance science; but can that be said to be its exclusive object ? We must exercise our judgment upon this as a matter of fact ; and doing so, I see that the society has also another object, namely amusement, amusement of a most innocent and laudable kind, but still differing from the pure pursuit of science. If I were called upon to decide the point I should say that the contributions were not voluntary." In Scott v. St. Martin' s-in-the-Fields (c) the Working Men's Educational Union was held not exempt, inasmuch as the promotion of science, literature, and the fine arts was not the direct object of the institution, but only a means among others, for effecting the general elevation of the physical, intellectual, moral, and religious condition of the working classes. The Institution of Civil Engineers was held not exempt (d) on the ground that the society, the primary object of which is the acquisition and advancement of scientific knowledge for the purposes and in the interests of a particular profession, such as (a) 16 Q.B. 480 ; 21 L.J.M.C. 53. (b) 3 E. & B. 807 ; 23 L.J.M.C. 139 ; 18 Jur. 786. (c) 5 E. & B. 558 ; 25 L.J.M.C. 42 ; 1 Jur. N.S. 1207. (>/) Reg. v. Institution of Civil Engineers, 5 Q.B.D. 48 ; 49 L.J. M.C. 34 ; 42 L.T. 145 : 28 W.R. 253 ; 44 J.P. 265. Of Rating Generally. 85 that of civil engineers, is not a society instituted for purposes of science exclusively within the meaning of the statute. The same principle has been followed in an Irish case, (e) The statute requires that a certificate from a barrister should Appeal, be obtained when exemption from rates is claimed. (/) Any ratepayer who is assessed to any rate from which exemption is granted may appeal to the Sessions. If the order of the Sessions is good on the face of it, the Court of Queen's Bench will not interfere, (g) In Reg. v. Pocock (h) the Court held that an appeal within Time for appeal, four calendar months next after an assessment made after notice of the filing of the barrister's certificate was in time within 6 & 7 Vict., c. 36, sec. 6. (i) By Section 731 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894 (57 & 58 Lighthouses. Vict., c. 60) lighthouses are exempted from all rates. Section 731 of 57 & 58 Vict., c. 60, is an almost verbal reproduction of Section 430 of the Merchant Shipping Act, 1854. It provides that " all lighthouses, buoys, beacons, and all light dues, and other rates, fees, or payments accruing to or forming part of the Mercantile Marine Fund, and all premises or property belonging to or occupied by any of the general lighthouse authorities, or by the Board of Trade, which are used or applied for the purposes of any of the services for which those dues, rates, fees, and payments are received, and all instruments or writings used by or under the direction of any of the general lighthouse authorities, or of the Board of Trade in carrying on those services, shall be exempted from all public, parochial, and local taxes, duties, and rates of every kind." In Mersey Docks and Harbour Board v. Llaneilian (/>•) a tower Lighthouses 1 under local was used as a lighthouse and also as a telegraph station, in authorities not ° . exempt. respect of which the Mersey Docks and Harbour Board received (e) Magee College Trustees v. Commissioners of Valuation, 19 W.E. 328. (/) Appendix, p. 327. (g) Reg. v. Stacey, 14 Q.B. 789 ; 19 L.J.M.C. 177 ; 14 Jur. 549. (h) 8 Q.B. 729 ; 15 L.J.M.C. 132 ; 10 Jur. 662. (i) Appendix, p. 328. (A) 14 Q.B.D. 770 ; 54 L.J. Q.B. 49 ; 52 L.T. 118 ; 33 W.R. 97 ; 49 J.P. 164. 86 A Code of the Laic of Rating. Lighthouse- rating of. Volunteer storehouses. tolls from vessels using their docks, which tolls were to be applied, in accordance with an Act of Parliament, to conservancy pur- poses, and could not be higher than was necessary to meet the conservancy expenditure. The Court of Appeal decided that as the tower was incapable of profitable occupation, it was not rateable to the poor. This view was over-ruled by the House of Lords in London County Council v. Erith. (J) Lord Coleridge, C.J., and Mathew, J., in the same case held that lighthouses under control of local authorities are not exempt from rating. This was not disputed in the Court of Appeal. It must there- fore be taken as settled that lighthouses under control of local authorities are not exempt from rating. With regard to the rating of lighthouses, it was held in Rex v. Coke (m) and Rex v. Tynemouth (n) that the dues payable to lighthouses were not to be taken into account in estimating the rateable value of a lighthouse. These two cases have been recently followed in Lancaster Commissioners v. Barrow- in-Furness, (o) Volunteer storehouses are exempted from all county, parochial, or other local rates by the Volunteer Act (26 & 27 Vict., c. 65). Section 26 provides that: "The commanding officer of a volunteer corps or administrative regiment, receiving any arms, ammunition, or other stores supplied at the public expense or by subscription, shall, subject to the approval of the lieutenant of the county to which the corps belong, or in which the headquarters of the administrative regiment are situate (as the case may be), appoint a proper storehouse for the depositing and safe keeping of such arms, ammunition, or stores. Every such storehouse shall be free from all county, parochial, or other local rates and assessments." It was decided in Pearson v. Assessment Committee of Holborn Union (p) , that all premises occupied by a volunteer corps for (I) (1893) A.C. 562 ; 63 L.J.M.C. 9 : 69 L.T. 725 ; 42 W.R. 330 ; 6 R. 22. Ante p. 13. (m) 5 B. & C. 797. Vide also Bex v. Fowke, 5 B. & C. 814. (») 12 East. 46. (o) (1897) 1 Q.B. 166 ; G6 L.J. Q.B. 90 ; 75 L.T. 358. Q>) (1893) 1 Q.B. 389 ; 62 L.J.M.C. 77 ; 68 L.T. 351. Of Rating Generally. 87 the purposes of the service of the corps, and being reasonably necessary for such service, were exempted from rates. Sunday and Ragged Schools are exempted from rating by Sundayand Ragged 32 & 33 Vict., c. 40 (q), but such exemption is in the discretion schools. of the rating authority, (r) Ambassadors are exempt under a well-recognised rule of in- Ambassadors #1 TT->7 11 • 111 1 ail(1 attaCll ^ S ' ternational law. in Parkinson v. Potter (s) it was held that this exemption applies to an attache. In Macartney v. Garbutt (t) it was held that the exemption also applies to an English subject who becomes a member of a foreign embassy in England. In Novello v. Toogood (u) where the servant of an ambassador did not reside in his master's house, but rented and lived in another, the Court held that his goods in that house, not being necessary for the convenience of the ambassador, were liable to be distrained for poor rates. Workhouses have in some instances been exempted from property rating by private or local Acts (x), where but for such exemption ^c^Acts/" 7 they would be rateable, (y) Easements are exempt from rating, (s) Easements. Unoccupied property is not rateable ; but houses completely unoccupied finished, although not occupied, are rateable hereditaments within the meaning of the Union Assessment Committee Act, 1862 (25 & 26 Vict., c. 103). (ff) Allotments are in the case of the general district rate in an Allotments, , t m orchards, urban district, or a separate rate levied in respect of special agricultural expenses in a rural district, rateable only to the extent of (q) Appendix, p. 385. (r) Bell v. Crane, L.E. 8 Q.B. 481 ; 42 L.J.M.C. 122 ; 29 L.T. 207; 21 W.R. 911. (s) 16 Q.B.D. 152 ; 55 L.J.M.C. 153 ; 53 L.T. 818. (0 24 Q.B.D. 368 ; 62 L.T. 656 ; 54 J.P. 437. («) 1 B. & C. 554. (x) Holborn Union v. Vestry of St. Leonard's, Shoreditch, 28 L.T. 106 ; 21 W.R. 541. (//) Governor, etc., of Bristol Poor v. Wait, 5 A. & E. 1 ; 5 L.J.M.( !. 113 ; Reg. v. Wallinqford Union, 10 A. & E. 259 ; 8 L.J.M.C. 89; Reg. v. Toxteth Park Local Board, 1 B. & S. 167; 30 L.J.M.C. 154. (z) Ante pp. 27-29. («) Reg. v. Overseers of Maiden, L.R. 4 Q.B. 326 ; 10 B. & S. 323 ; 38 L.J.M.C. 125 ; 33 J.P. 645. Appendix, pp. 354, 364. A Code of the Law of Rating. Canal Company exempt. Property exempted by mistake. Metropolis- omission. one-fourth of the net annual value by 54 & 55 Yict., c. 33 (b) ; orchards are relieved to the same extent by 53 & 54 Yict., c. 17. (c) By the Agricultural Eates Act, 1896 (59 & 60 Vict., c. 16), agricultural land (including allotments and orchards) are relieved of one-half of all rates for five years from March 31st, 1896, but this is not to alter the relief afforded by the aforesaid Acts, (d) .... . Where a statute empowered the proprietors of a canal to take tolls in respect of vessels navigating such canal, and expressly exempted such tolls from the payment of all rates and taxes, it was held that the land occupied by the eanal was also thereby exempted from poor-rate, (e) Rex v. Inhabitants of Barnby Dun (/) is another example of exemption from rating under a private Act. Exemptions under a local Act are not taken away by a public Act which contemplates the continuance of the local Act. (f) - Where property has been wrongfully exempted from rating, it may nevertheless be rated subsequently, as the inhabitants of a parish have no power to bind their successors to exempt property from rates, (h) Section 45 of the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict., c. 69) («) makes the valuation list for the time being in force in the Metropolis conclusive evidence of the gross and rateable value of the several hereditaments included therein, and of the fact that all hereditaments required to be inserted therein have been so inserted. It would seem therefore that in case of mistake no proceedings can be taken until the expiration of five years from the time when the last valuation list was made. If any hereditament is omitted it will remain exempt so long as it does not appear in the valuation list. (b) Appendix, p. 452. (c) Appendix, p. 451. (d) Section 1, subs. (2), Appendix, p. 453. (e) Rex v. Calder and Hebble Navigation, 1 B. & Aid. 263. (/) 2 A. & E. 551. {(/) Walsall V.London <£• North-Western Railway, 4 A pp. Cas. 467 ; 48 L.J.M.C. 166 ; 41 L.T. 106 ; 28 W.R. 52. i]i) Reg. v. Ellis and Greenwood, 12 L.J.M.C. 20 ; 7 J.P. 179 ; Great Western Railw-ay v. Denchworth, 25 J.P. 342. (i) Appendix, p. 416. Of Rating Generally. 89 Lunatic asylums were exempt under the Lunatic Asylums Lunatic 17 Asylums not Act, 1853, but this Act has been repealed by the Lunacy Act, exempt. 1890 (53 Vict., c. 5). Section 263 of the later Act provides that " lands and buildings already or to be hereafter purchased or acquired for .the purposes' of any asylum, and any additional building- erected or to be erected thereon, shall, while used for those purposes be . assessed to county, parochial, district and other rates made after the commencement of this Act on the same basis and to the same extent as other lands and buildings in the same parish, township, or district." Certain corporation property was exempt from rating under corporation 4 & 5 Vict., c. 48, but this Act as well as the Municipal Corporation Act, 1835, was repealed by the Municipal Corporation Act, 1882 (45 & 46 Vict,, c. 50). Before the decision in Jones v. Mersey Docks (k) it wae generally supposed that land held for public purposes was not rateable. This doctrine was exploded by the decision of the House of Lords in the Mersey Docks Case, "which marks ah epoch in the law of rating." (/) The case of Reg. v. Mayor of Oldham (m), decided under 4 & 5 Vict., c. 48, has therefore no application now to the rating of corporation property. (/>•) 11 H.L.C. 443 ; 35 L.J.M.C. 1 ; 20 C.B.N.S. 56 ; 12 L.T. 643 ; 13 W.R. 1069 ; 11 Jur. N.S. 746. Ante p. 34. (/) Per Lord Herschell, L.C., in Loudon County Council v. Erith (1893) A.C. 562 ; 63 L.J.M.C. 9 ; 69 L.T. 725 ; 42 W.R. 330 ; 6 R. 22. (m) L.R, 3 Q.B. 474 ; 37 L.J.M.C. 169 ; 18 L.T. 240 ; 16 W.R. 789. 90 TITLE II. EATING OF EA1LWAYS AND TRAMWAYS. Rent payable by tenant from year to year. basis of rate. ARTICLE 29.~To ascertain the rent which a tenant from year to year would pay for a railway, deduct from the gross receipts, the working expenses; interest on capital; tenant's profit; a sum for depreciation of rolling-stock; a sum equivalent to the annual value of land occupied by stations and buildings appurtenant to the line; a sum for renewals; and a sum for rates and taxes, and insurance (if any). Gross receipts This is the mode of ascertaining the rateable value of a railway in accordance with section 1 of the Parochial Assess- ment Act. (a) It was so decided in Beg. v. Grand Junction Railway Company (b), where Lord Denman, C.J., in delivering the judgment of the Court, said : " The gross yearly receipts of the company, as occupiers of and carriers on the railway, must include the proper subject-matter of the rate ; they have therefore taken a sum agreed to represent them as the hrst point to start from ; they then assume an amount of capital employed in the trade, and deduct from the former sum 5 per cent, on the latter for the interest of this capital, and 20 per cent, for the profits which ought to be made upon it ; thirdly, for the depreciation of stock beyond the usual repairs and expenses ; fourthly, they deduct from the gross receipts the annual cost of conducting the trade ; fifthly, they deduct the annual value of all the lands occupied by stations, etc. ; and (a) Appendix, p. 315. (6) 4 Q.B. 18 ; 13 L.J.M.O. 94 ; 8 Jur. 508. Vide also specimen valuation, Appendix, p. 493. Rating of Railways. 91 sixthly, a sum per mile for the reproduction of rails, chairs, sleepers, etc. These deductions, taken together, seem to us to include whatever is properly referable to the trade, as dis- tinguished from the increased value which that trade gives to the land. We do not now speak of the amounts allowed under Amount a A question for each item, and we are not competent to give any opinion on sessions. this point, which is properly for the Sessions ; but if these are the proper heads of deduction, then the residue must represent the value of the occupation ; and if so, this alone is brought into the rate, and the profits of the trade are excluded; Accordingly the Sessions have found, as an inference from the facts, that the residue is the sum which a tenant from year to year might reasonably be expected to give for the railway and corporeal hereditaments, exclusive of the stations and other buildings (which are rated separately), such tenant being assumed stations rated . . separately. to have the same and no other power of using the railway — the same and no other advantages and privileges than the company now possess." This case was followed by Reg. v. Great Western Railway (c), Deductions n . „ ., for stations and where the question of what deductions should be made trom the other buildings, gross receipts was dealt with at some length. With regard to the deduction for stations and other buildings appurtenant to the railway, Lord Denman, C. J., said : " The appellants next claimed to deduct the rateable value of the buildings appurtenant to their own line, and also to the branch lines respectively, and rated or rateable elsewhere than in the respondent parish, separately from the railway itself. This also is an allowance which was conceded in the case last referred to ; for it would be hardly worth while to distinguish between those rated and rateable only ; and we have no means of drawing the distinction in fact. It is to be remembered that the respondents properly treat the whole line, the whole profits, the whole outgoings, as entire ; and then the question is, whether there is any distinction between this and other out- goings necessary to the earning the profits by which the rateable value of the land in the respondent parish is enhanced ? It seems to us there is none; and if so we agree with the (c) 6 Q.B. 179 ; 15 L.J.M.C. 80 ; 10 Jur. 134. 92 A Code of the Law of Rating. Deduction for renewals. Insurance. Working expenses. learned counsel for the appellants, that in principle it is indifferent whether the station be in the same parish or at a distance." Hence a deduction is to be made for stations and buildings appurtenant to a railway because they are rated separately. The manner in which stations, etc., are to be assessed will be dealt with hereafter, (d) Under this head a deduction of 5 per cent, is usually made, though that amount is liable to be increased, (e) In the case last referred to an allowance for depreciation, over and above the annual amount allowed for repairs, was disallowed on the ground that the amount so disbursed was paid out of capital and not out of revenue. In a subsequent case, however, it was decided that a deduction for renewals ought to be allowed. (/) It is now always allowed in practice. No mention is made in the judgments in either Reg. v. Grand Junction Railway (g) or Reg. v. Great Western Railway (h) of any deduction for insurance, but such a deduction would be a legitimate one under the Parochial Assessment Act (6 & 7 William IV., c. 96), where any sum is expended under that head. Working expenses include repairs of permanent way and works ; locomotive expenses ; carriage and waggon repairs ; passenger, goods, and mineral traffic charges ; general charges ; miscellaneous charges ; legal expenses ; and Government duty. The last-named is a tax imposed on all passenger receipts except third class and Parliamentary, (i) Locomotive expenses include wages of enginemen and firemen, waste, oil, tallow, firewood, wages of labourers and cleaners ; cost of superintendence, including clerks and office charges ; repairs of engines and tenders, comprising wages, materials, etc. ; coke and coal consumed by locomotive engines ; lighting and gas ; repairs of buildings, turn-tables, etc. (d) Post p. 130. (e) See specimen valuation, jwst p. 493. (/) Reg. v. Great Western Railway, 15 Q.B. 1085 ; 21 L.J.M.C. 84 ; 16 Jur. 217. As to deductions for renewals, vide post p. 119, and specimen valuation, post p. 493. (g) Ante p. 90. (h) Ante p. 91. (0 5 & G Vict., c. 79, and 7 & 8 Vict., c. 85, s. 9. Rating of Railways. 93 Traffic charges comprise the expense of guards, police, and inspectors ; porters, clothing ; stores ; disbursements ; lighting and gas at stations ; and charges generally in connection with passengers, goods, minerals, live stock, mails, etc. Genera/ charges include superintendence and clerks ; stationery accounts ; disbursements and tickets ; sundry office expenses ; advertising ; postage, etc. ; travelling expenses ; loss on light gold ; medical expenses, etc. With regard to " general charges," Lord Campbell in Reg. v. Great Western Railway (k), referring to these charges, said : " Some are general, having no more connection with, or influence on, one part of the whole line than on any other, incurred for the sake of the whole line, and contributing to profits everywhere. Of course these must be distributed, and to every mile must be apportioned some share, on whatever principle the apportionment is to be settled." Directors' salaries are a proper allowance under this head. (/) ^ 1 r a e r c i g° rs ' But the duties of the directors must be strictly necessary to the occupation, otherwise the salaries will be disallowed, (m) In railway as in other cases the amount for interest on capital Amount for "* interest on and tenant's profit is a question for the Sessions. In Reg. v. g^JSt' London and South- Western Railway Co. (n) 5 per cent, was allowed g^ciation. for interest on capital, and 20 per cent, for tenant's profit, while 12^ per cent, was allowed for depreciation. In Reg. v. Grand Junction Railway Co.(o), only 10 per cent, was allowed for tenant's profit. These amounts are liable to considerable variation. The amount to be allowed for depreciation and the manner Amount of in which it is to be assessed are questions of fact with which how calculated, the Court will not interfere. In Great Eastern Railway v. Haughley (p) the arbitrator made an allowance for annual repairs taken upon an average of (k) 15 Q.B. 1085 ; 21 L.J.M.C. 84 ; 16 Jur. 217. (/) Reg. v. Southampton Dock Co., 14 Q.B. 587 ; 20 L.J.M.C. 155 ; 15 Jur. 268. (/«) Reg. v. St. Giles's, Camberwell, 14 Q.B. 571 ; 19 L.J.M.C. 122 ; 14 Jur. 519. (>0 1 Q.B. 558 ; 11 L.J.M.C. 93 ; 6 Jur. 686. (o) Supra, (p) L.R, 1 Q.B. 666 ; 35 L.J.M.C. 229 ; 7 B. & S. 624 ; 14 L.T. 458 ; 14 W.R. 779 ; 12 Jur. N.S. 596. 94 A Code of the Law of Rating. several years. The Company contended that the arbitrator ought, as a matter of law, to have allowed for the depreciation of stock by taking its value at the beginning of the year and then ascertaining what a new tenant would give for it at the end of the year, and making the difference the amount to be dis- tributed over the line for this deduction. Cockburn, C. J., said : " I do not think there is anything in the statute that makes it necessary or incumbent upon us to say, that if the Sessions or the arbitrator have found that fact in a particular way, they must necessarily be wrong. The tenant must be taken as coming in as a tenant from year to year, and then the question remains, what may he be reasonably expected to give as the annual rent of such premises ? Before that fact can be arrived at a deduction must be made from his profits in respect of what he would allow for the depreciation in the stock used for the purposes for which he takes the premises, and how he could calculate this is a pure question of fact dependent on the surrounding circumstances. Being then a question of fact we are not called upon to express an opinion ; it is sufficient to say that the arbitrator has not deviated from the rule laid down in the statute in taking into account the surrounding circumstances." Rates and taxes. The rates and taxes must be deducted in accordance with the decision in Tijne Improvement Commissioners v. Chirton. (?) ARTICLE 30 —The gross receipts of a railway A^ hat gross . receipts include, company, which form the basis of the rateable value, include tolls received, traffic receipts, and terminals. Fares included. In Reg. v. South-Western Railway Co. (;•), where it was sought to exclude the fares received by the railway company in arriving at the rateable value, Lord Denman, C.J., said : " Then do the fares increase the value of the buildings and lands ? No one can doubt it. Indeed, the case has answered that they do ; that a higher rent for the buildings and lands (?) 32 L.J.M.C. 192 ; 6 L.T. 489. Vide Article 20, ante p. 66, and specimen valuation, Appendix p. 493. 0) 1 Q.B. 558 ; 1 1 L.J.M.C. 93. See specimen valuation, Appendix, p. 493. Rating of Railways. 95 would only be obtained in consequence of the facility afforded by the occupation of them to the carrying on of a lucrative trade, and earning the profit on those fares." In a later case (*) where the railway company received tolls from another company and were carriers themselves, the same question came before the Court. The Grand Junction Railway Co., besides carrying on a trade as carriers on their own line, took tolls from other parties exercising the trade of carriers over their line. A third class of carriers hired from the Grand Junction Railway Company locomotive engines and the use of stations, for which they paid compensation and tolls. The Court held, as in the South-Western case (t), that the receipts earned by the company as carriers as well as the tolls received by them were to be regarded as the basis of rateable value. In delivering the judgment of the Court, Lord Denman, C.J., points out the difference between the two cases, and applies the same principle to both. The company cannot, however, be assessed upon a toll which ^ot?ake Pany they do not take, although empowered to do so. empowered to In Reg. v. Stockton and Darlington Railway Co. («), where the cc railway company were empowered to take a toll which they did not take upon the ground that, if they did take it, the carriage of the goods would be altogether lost to them, the Court held that as the toll was not in fact taken it could not be assessed to the poor-rate. " Terminal " is the term given to the remuneration earned Terminals. by a railway "for the accommodation afforded in receiving, loading and unloading, despatching and delivering the goods either taken in or given out at the stations." (oj) Terminals do not include collection and delivery, for which railway companies have an enhanced rate. In Reg. v. the Eastern Counties Railway Co. (//) the railway company were rated to the poor-rate of the parish of Great (s) Reg. v. Grand Junction Railway Co., 4 Q.B. 18 ; 13 L.J.M.C. 94 ; 8 Jur. 508. (t) Supra, (u) 8 L.T. 422. (x) Per Blackburn, J., in Reg. v. Eastern Comities Railway Co., 32 L.J.M.C. 174 ; 4 B. *& S. 58 ; 9 Jur. N.S. 1339. 0) Supra. 96 A Code of the Law of Bating. Amwell in respect of their line of railway running through the parish. The company made a gross charge to their customers for goods carried over their line, such charge including not only the carriage along the line, but also the various services rendered at the stations in loading, unloading, etc. No appropriation was made in the books or accounts of the company of such last portion of the amount charged for the carriage of goods ; but according to the clearing system mentioned in the Railway Clearing Act, 1850 (13 & 14 Vict., c. xxxiii.) the railway company calculated the terminal charges upon £6,036, the gross parochial earnings in Great Amwell, to be £2,829, and they contended that the gross amount of parochial earnings was the difference between these two sums. The Court held that the stations were to be rated as only indirectly contributing to the profits of the line ; that the amount of the terminals, and the amount of the expenses incurred in earning them, were parts of the general earnings and expenses of the line, and were to be treated as any other part of the gross receipts and outgoings. Blackburn, J., said : " "We are of opinion that we must, in conformity with the established practice, treat the station as only indirectly con- tributing to the profits of the line, and consequently as being liable to be rated as land and buildings, whose value is to some extent enhanced by their capacity of being employed in connection with the line. We think the amount of these terminals, and the amount of the expenses incurred in earning them, are parts of the general earnings and expenses of the line, and are to be treated in the same way as any other part of the gross receipts and outgoings." collection and Collection and delivery, strictly so called, form, as has been be included in already stated, no part of terminals or terminal service, and being performed off the line should not in any way be brought into the accounts for rating purposes. Where, therefore, they are included in the rates for conveyance, as in carted rates, the cost of the service and reasonable profit thereon should be deducted from them in the gross receipts, (z) (z) Manchester, Sheffield and Lincolnshire Railway Co., and the Trent, Ancholme and Great Grimsby Railway Co..\. Caistor Union, 2 Xev. and Mac. 53. gross receipts. Rating of Railways. 97 ARTICLE 31.— In ascertaining the rateable value Toiipaiato , another of a railway company the aggregate of sums PMdcwggjy™** to another railway company as toll must not be EJggft,, taken into aCCOUnt. rateable value. This question was raised in Reg. v. St. Pancras (a), and that the law as there laid down is strictly in accordance with the rule in the Parochial Assessment Act (6 & 7 Will. IV. c. 96) will be seen from the facts of the case and the judgment of the Court. By arrangement between the North London and Blackwall Eailway Companies the passengers were booked through and carried from stations on the North London line along and to stations on the Blackwall line, the North London Company paying over out of the whole fare charged a fixed sum to the Blackwall Company for every passenger so carried, such sum being a reasonable one. The Court held that in ascertaining, for the poor-rate, the rateable value of a part of the North London line in a particular parish, the aggregate of the sums so paid over to the Blackwall Company must be thrown out of consideration. Cockburn, C.J., said : " We have frequently had occasion to com- plain of the inapplicability of the principle of landlord and tenant, which is to be found in the Parochial Assessment Act, to the case of railways ; but this is a case to which it may well apply, because it is quite clear that any one, in considering what would be the } r early value to a tenant of this railway would exclude altogether from consideration as to profit, and therefore as to rent, the toll that is taken by the appellants in respect of that portion of the line which belongs to the Blackwall Com- pany. . . . The result is that not one farthing of this money goes into the pockets of the North London Company ; and therefore, any one considering the value of the North London line would exclude all consideration of this as being taken merely on behalf of the Blackwall Company. The amount of these receipts cannot be taken into account at all in determin- ing what the tenant from year to year would give. The justice of this is manifest. The Blackwall Company are rateable in (a) 3 B. & S. 810 ; 32 L.J.M.C. 146 ; 9 Jur. N.S. 1102. 98 A Code of the Lair of Rating. Receipts from trade upon another com- pany's lines. respect of these very receipts over their line ; but why the parish of St. Pancras is to have the benefit of the payment, is to me quite incomprehensible. If St. Pancras received a rate for it from the appellants [i.e., the North London Railway Co.] on the one hand, and the Blackwall Company, receiving the toll as a profit in respect of their line, were to pay a rate in respect of it, on the other hand, the same line would be paying twice over in two different parishes. That would be manifestly unjust." It should be observed that in this case the amount paid to the Blackwall Company was held to be reasonable. ARTICLE 32.— Where the receipts of a railway company include sums trade carried on upon such sums must not as part of the gross the rateable value. which are derived from another company's lines, be taken into account receipts in ascertaining This was decided in Reg. v. Grand Junction Railway Co. (h) A part of the receipts of the railway company was derived from the company's carriages and engines running upon another company's line. The Court held that such sums do not form part of the rateable value of the hereditament. Lord Denman, C.J., said: "Again, it is contended that the existing facts of this case show the unreasonableness of the rate. The carrying trade of the company goes beyond their own line upon the railway of other sets of proprietors ; but the receipts arising from this have been excluded from the rate : this, it is said, is inconsistent. How can the profit which the same engine earns by drawing goods over one mile be of a different character from that it would earn in the same employment over the next mile? So far from their being any inconsistency in this, it is necessarily involved in the principle on which the rate rests. That the distinction can be made, and has been made, is no slight proof of the soundness of that principle. The moment the engine leaves the railway of the company, what it earns ceases to have (b) 4 Q.B. 18 ; 13 L.J.M.C. 94 ; 8 Jur. 508. Rating of Railways. 99 any connection with their occupation of the railway. It may, and of course does, increase the value of the occupation of that other line in which it then works ; and will, of course in the shape of toll, proportionately increase the rate which the occupier will pay; but if it were allowed to swell the charge upon the company, it could only do so in respect of the profits of the trade; and this our principle excludes. " ARTICLE 33.— Where one railway company Free running has free running powers over the line of another poy company, and the latter enjoys the same privilege over the lines of the former, the privilege enjoyed by each company must be taken into account in estimating the rateable value of such company. In Reg. v. London, Brighton and South Coast Railway Co.(c), Exchange toil, by an agreement between the Brighton Railway Company and the South-Eastern Eailway Company, the traffic of the latter passed toll-free over a certain portion of the line of the former in consideration of the traffic of the former passing toll- free over an equal portion of the line of the latter. A portion of the line of the Brighton Railway, affected by this agreement, was within the parish of Croydon, the respondents; but no part of the line of the South-Eastern Company was within that parish. The Court held that, in estimating the rateable value of the Brighton Railway within the respondent parish, the value of the tolls which would have been received in respect of the passage of the traffic over the South-Eastern Railway Company was to be considered as rent " in kind " earned by the Re;it "inland.' land, but that such earnings must be subject to the same deductions as if they had been received in money. In giving judgment Coleridge, J., said : " The third question arises on what is called the exchange toll. The substance of the transaction between the appellants and the South-Eastern Company, out of which this arises, appears to be this : that the traffic of the latter is to pass free over a certain portion of (c) 15 Q.B. 313 ; 20 L.J.M.C. 124 ; 15 Jur. 372. 7 a 100 A Code of the Lem of Rating. the line of the former, in consideration of the traffic of the former passing free over a certain portion of the line of the latter. A certain distance, between two and three miles, of the appellants' [i.e., the Brighton Kailway Company's] line, within the parish of Croydon, is affected by this arrange- ment. We think that the Sessions rightly decided this to be rent in kind earned by this land ; it seems to us exactly the same in substance as if so many tickets were daily issued without money paid for them to the South-Eastern Company, in return for so many received from them ; the tickets mutually transferred would on either side represent so much money earned. But then, we think these earnings must be subject to exactly the same deductions as if they were received in money." In a later case, Midland Railway Co. v. Badgworth (d), the question again came before the Court. A railway was con- structed under the powers of an Act of Parliament from Gloucester to Cheltenham, for the common purposes of the Great "Western Company and the Midland Company, each paying half the cost ; on the completion the half of the railway nearest Gloucester became the sole property of the Midland Company, and the half nearest Cheltenham the sole property of the Great Western Company. Each company was bound to keep its own half in repair and supply the staff of officials, etc., necessary on that half for the traffic of both companies. The railway was constructed for broad and narrow gauge traffic, with three rails on each line ; and in practice the Great Western Company used the broad gauge, and the Midland Company the narrow, so that of the three rails one was used in common and one exclusively by each company. The traffic of the Midland Company far exceeded that of the Great Western Company. The Court held that there was no rateable occupation by the Midland Company of the Great Western Company's half of the railway, but only an easement, and that the Midland Company were therefore not rateable to the poor of a parish through which that half of the railway passed. (V) 34 L.J.M.C. 25 : 11 L.T. 303 ; 13 W.R. 202 ; 11 Jur. N.S. 14. Rating of Railways. 101 The Court subsequently came to a different conclusion. As The question u •/ re-considered. a consequence of the decision in Midland Railway v. Badgworth, the G-reat Western Railway Company were rated in the parish of Badgworth at an amount made up, to use the words of the judgment of Mellor, J., in the case just cited, " of the value of the occupation of the line to the Great Western Company, plus the use which the Midland Company makes of it," i.e., of the value of the occupation of the line to the Great Western Railway Company plus the value of the toll which would have been paid by the Midland Company, had the latter com- pany paid toll instead of allowing the Great Western Railway free running powers over their half of the line. The Great Western Railway Company appealed from this assessment, (e) The Court held that the rateable value of the Great Western Company's occupation was the amount of their own profits in that parish, enhanced only by the value to them of their right to run free over the Midland Company's half of the railway. Cockburn, C.J., said: "I think the Great Western Railway Company are rateable in respect of this property according to the profit they make of it, plus the increased value by reason of their having the right of running, not only over this portion and the rest of their own line, but also over the Midland line. I think it would not be a sound principle to lay down, that the appellants are liable in respect of the profit which the Midland Company make on this portion of the line, unless that profit were no more than equivalent to what the appellants get in exchange for this right of the Midland Company to run over the appellant's portion, viz. : the value of the corresponding easement which the appellants have over the Midland line. I think that the Sessions would be warranted in assuming that, whatever profit the Midland Company make on this portion of the line, the appellants make the same profit on the corresponding portion of the Midland Railway. But if that prima facie case is displaced by evidence of the fact that the Midland Company make a great deal more by the line than the appellants, I think the Sessions must get at the value in the best way they can ; they must ascertain what is the value to the (e) L.R. 2 Q.B. 251 ; 36 L.J.M.C. 33 ; 15 W.R. 579. 102 A Code of the Late of Rating. appellants, or what would be the value to any oue who came in their place as a yearly tenant, of this property enhanced by the easement of running free over the other half of the line." This view is undoubtedly sound and strictly in accordance with the rule laid down in the Parochial Assessment Act (6 & 7 Will. IV., c. 96, s. 1). (/) Hence the gross receipts of a railway company must include, in addition to traffic receipts and tolls received, any privileges or advantages enjoyed by the company which enhance the value of its occupation of the land rated. K^ss^a 18 * ARTICLE 34.— A railway company must be SSStdKA assessed to the poor-rate in respect of the full from occupa- ra teable value of premises occupied by it, without regard to the amount of benefit which they themselves may derive from the occupation. In Reg. v. Rhymney Rail 'tea y Company (g), the owners of certain docks and wharves let the wharves to a railway company who became the sole occupiers. An agreement was entered into by the railway company whereby certain wharfage dues payable on all goods shipped or unshipped at the wharves were reserved to the owners of the docks and were paid direct to them by the owners or consignees of the goods. The Court held that the railway company, as the sole occupiers of the wharves, were rightly assessed in respect of the full rateable value of the premises, including the wharfage dues, in accordance with the rule laid down in the Mersey Docks Cases [It). Mellor, J., who delivered the judgment of the Court (Cockburn, C.J., Mellor, Hannen, and Hayes, J J.) said : " We are of opinion that the appellants [i.e., the railway company], as sole occupiers of the wharves, are liable to be rated in respect of the full rateable value of the premises in their occupation, without regard to the (/) Appendix, p. 315. (g) L.R. 4 Q.B. 276 ; 38 L.J.M.C. 75 ; 10 B. & S. 1 ( J8 : 17 W.I!. 530. (h) 11 H.L.C. 443; 35 L.J.M.C. 1 : 20 C.B.N.S. 56: 12 L.T. 643 : 13 W.B. 1069 • n j ur . N.S. 746. Rating of Railways. 103 precise amount of benefit which they themselves derive from such occupation. We consider the principle to be involved in the decision of the Mersey Docks Cases (t), and it is very distinctly stated in the judgments pronounced by the noble lords who took part in the decision of those cases. We had occasion to refer to this decision and to act upon it, in the recent case of Reg. v. Sherford (k) , which has a very close appli- cation to the present case. In that case .... we pointed out the fallacy of confounding the rateable value of the property occupied with the remunerative value to the particular occupier T The law is otherwise with regard to profit which might have been earned but for a statutory prohibition. (/) ARTICLE 35.— The poor-rate payable by a rail- Parochial . , , , x • i Principle. way company in any parish must be ascertained, where possible, on the parochial principle. The " Parochial Principle," to which reference has been made in Article 11 (m), is that upon which all land, however occupied , is to be rated, where such principle can be applied. " The value,"' said Coleridge, J., in delivering the judgment of the Court in the three cases to which reference is about to be made, "which the land occupied in each parish produces, after the due allowances, is that upon which the occupier is to be rated in each." That is as good a definition of the "parochial principle " as has been given by any judge. The question was first raised in 1851, in three cases which were heard together, — Reg. v. London, Brighton, and South Coast Railway, Reg. v. South-Eastern Railway Co., and Reg. v. Midland Rail- way Co. («), when it was decided that the rateable value of the portion of a railway occupied in any particular parish must be deduced from the net earnings in that parish, ascertained by (i) Supra. (Jc) L.E. 2 Q.B. 503 ; 8 B. & S. 596 ; 36 L.J.M.C. 113 ; 16 L.T. 663 ; 15 W.E. 1035. (/) Vide Article 9, ante p. 42, and the cases there cited. (m) Ante p. 47. In) 15 Q.B. 313 ; 20 L.J.M.C. 124 ; 15 Jur. 372. 104 A Code of the Law of Rating. a comparison of the profits and outgoings arising in that parish ; and not by treating the rateable value, however con- stituted, of the whole of the line, as entire, and dividing it among the several parishes simply according to the distance which the line passes through in each. The Brighton Company contended for a mileage division as against the parochial principle upon which the company had been rated. It had been conceded in a previous case (o) that the mileage principle was not the correct principle, but the question now came before the Court for the first time. Coleridge, J., in delivering the judgment of the Court, said : " Now, upon the legal principle we have no doubt. The poor- rate and the principles of its assessment are entirely statutory. The 6 & 7 Will. IV., c. 96 (p), made expressly with a view ' to establish one uniform mode of rating for the relief of the poor,' prescribes the rule ; the rate must be made on ' an estimate of the net annual value of the several hereditaments rated there- unto,' such value to be arrived at in the manner stated in the first section ; the subject is parochial ; the inquiry is to be conducted by parochial authorities with limited powers ; if any matters specified in the section are locally situate without the parish, that is, if any such affect the amount of ' the net annual value,' or the ' rent reasonably to be expected,' they will, of necessity, fall within the range of the inquiry, but beyond this the principle does not go. This principle, so limited and understood, was not first created by the statute just mentioned ; the Court had decided so early as in 1827, in the case of Hex v. Kingsmnford (q), that it was to be found in the original statute of Elizabeth; and since that decision it has been uniformly applied to cases where the same party, whether company or individual, occupies in different parishes, land forming one entire property, such as a canal, though the profits may be earned in different proportions and with a different rate of outgoings in each ; the value which the land (o) Rerj. v. London and South-Western Railway Co., 1 Q.B. 558; 11 L.J.M.C. 93; 6 Jur. 686. (p) Appendix, p. 315. (q) 7 B. & C. 236. Post p. 140. Rating of Railways. 105 occupied in each parish produces, after due allowances, is that upon which the occupier is to be rated in each." The question again came before the Courts in Reg. v. The Branch line ___ cannot be Great Western Railway, (r) The Great Western Railway SSttS.'™™ Company was assessed to the relief of the poor of the parish of Tilehurst, in respect of two miles and a half, being a portion of a branch line which was originally constructed as an in- dependent railway, but was afterwards incorporated with the Great Western Railway by Act of Parliament, and was worked by the company as part of their entire railway. No separate account of receipts and expenditure was kept in respect of the branch as distinguished from the rest of the railway. The branch could be worked as a separate railway under indepen- dent management, but at a greater cost, and with a larger moveable stock than was bestowed upon it. It was found that the actual expenses of the company were not in the proportion of the actual gross receipts either on the branch or throughout the entire railway, nor were either such gross receipts or such expenses at one uniform rate per mile throughout the entire railway. The parties were agreed upon the gross annual receipts from the whole railway, and the gross annual receipts from the two miles and a half in Tilehurst. The Court held that, in order to ascertain the net rateable value of the two miles and a half in Tilehurst, the deductions from the gross revenue ought to be distributed on the parochial principle by ascertaining what expenses are incurred in earning the gross receipts on the two miles and a half ; and that this principle does not preclude a consideration of expenses wherever arising ra 1 i o Expenses locally, which are necessary for keeping the subject of the rate ansui £ locall y- at the value which is the measure of assessment. The Court further held that the branch line could not be separated from the rest of the railway ; and that the rateable value of the two and a half miles in the parish of Tilehurst could not be assessed in" the ratio which the gross annual receipts in Tilehurst bore to the gross annual receipts of the entire railway, as was contended by the parish. The railway company, in addition to endeavour- ing to separate the expenses of the branch line from those of (r) 15 Q.B. 1085 ; 21 L.J.M.C. 84 ; 16 Jur. 217. 106 A Code of the Late of Rating. the whole railway, wanted to allocate the expenses on the mileage principle. Lord Campbell, C.J., thought that, as there would be extreme difficulty in applying the principle of the Parochial Assessment Act to the case of a railway extending through several parishes, the case should stand over for the purpose of fresh legislation. Parliament did not interfere, however, and Lord Campbell, C.J., delivered the judgment of the Court, in which he said that the principle contended for by the company, viz., the mileage principle, and that contended for by the parish, viz., that the rateable value of the parish should be in the same ratio to the rateable value of the whole railway as the receipts in the parish bore to the gross receipts of the whole railway, were both wrong principles. In the course of his judgment he said : " The remaining question is, what is the net rateable value of the two miles and a half ? Now, as the net rateable value is that which remains of the gross receipts after all just deductions are made, it might seem at first sight that we might confine our inquiry to the two miles and a half, and that we only incumber the investigation use- lessly by introducing into it any consideration of the gross and rateable value of the whole line. But the circumstances of a railway make this absolutely necessary. The inquiry may become, and undoubtedly does become, more complicated and difficult thereby, but it would be wholly incomplete and illusory even in its result, unless we did so. Of the outgoings of a railway, some are general, having no more connection with or influence on one part of the whole line than on any other, incurred for the sake of the whole line, and contributing to the profits everywhere. Of course these must be distributed, and to every mile must be apportioned some share, on whatever principle the apportionment is to be settled. .Some, again, seem- purely local : a tunnel here, an inclined plane there (we purposely mention striking and definite peculiarities) ; yet even these are contributing to the earnings everywhere ; without these the traffic on either side could have no existence. It would be wrong to set these wholly and exclusively against the receipts earned in the same part of the line. "We need not dwell on this, because, in principle, some distribution is on all Rating of Railways. 107 hands agreed to be necessary ; the only difficulty is in deter- mining what mode is to be adopted for making it justly, — a difficulty, we believe, actually insurmountable in fact, if strict mathematical accuracy were insisted on. It is our business, however, only to lay down the general rule, and in applying it much must be left, not only to the experience and acuteness, but also to the good sense and good faith and candour of the parties concerned, whose interests will be found in the end to be best consulted by this mode of dealing. How, then, are the deductions from the total gross revenue which constitute the difference between it and the total net rateable value to be apportioned, so as to arrive at the actual sum which constitutes the rateable value of the two miles and a half ? There is no difficulty in giving the answer ; indeed, principle and authority leave us no option ; it must be done by acting on what is called the parochial principle. . . . We are to ascertain what ex- penses are incurred in earning the gross receipts on the two miles and a half, what charges (parochial or otherwise) they are liable to, what is fairly to be deducted for tenants' profits, and so on ; 'the same process in kind is to be gone through with regard to the two miles and a half as would be with regard to the whole line if that were in one parish. We need not now repeat the reasoning which appears in our judgment (s) before referred to. But, as we then said, and have now in part repeated, this principle does not preclude a consideration of charges and expenses, wherever arising locally, which are necessary for keeping the subject of assessment at the value which is made the measure of that assessment. And further, we must add, that wherever it is found that such charges and expenses do in fact apply equally to every mile of a railway, it is a convenient and allowable mode to arrive by a mileage division at the proportional part to be assigned to the miles in any particular parish. This is no departure from the parochial principle, if it be assumed as to particular charges (central superintendence, for instance), that a separate investigation of them as they actually arise in, or are referable to, a particular (s) Reg. v. London, Brighton, and South Coast Railway Co., 15 Q.B. 313 ; 20 L.J.M.C. 124 ; 15 Jur. 372. 108 A Code of the Law of Rating. parish, would lead us to the same result as a mileage distribu- tion of the whole. It becomes by the hypothesis but another mode of arriving at it ; in many cases it will be the more con- venient and just, and in some, perhaps, it may be the only practical mode." ARTICLE 36.— The rateable value of a railway company may be enhanced by non-parochial earnings. This subject has already been briefly touched upon. (/) Here, however, it will be discussed solely with regard to its effect upon the rating of railways. The first case in which the question was raised and the principle laid down was Bex v. New Rii-er Co. (a) The first railway case raising the question of contributive value was The Newmarket Railway Co. v. «SY. Andrews-the- Less. (.r) The facts were as follows : The Newmarket Eailway Company were empowered by Act of Parliament to make a branch line of railway joining that of the Eastern Counties Company, and an agreement was entered into between the two companies (which was afterwards confirmed by an Act of Parliament) whereby, in consideration of the benefit likely to accrue to the Eastern Counties Company from the making of such branch, and the working of it in connection with their railway, the Eastern Counties Company agreed that whenever the net earnings of the Newmarket Railway Company, after payment of working expenses and other charges, etc., should not be sufficient to pay a dividend of £3 per cent, on their share capital, the Eastejn Counties Company would pay to the Newmarket Company such sum as would be sufficient to make up the said dividend to the rate of £3 per cent. ; provided that the sum payable in any year should not exceed £5,000. The net earnings of the Newmarket Railway Company were not sufficient to pay the said dividend of £3 per cent, in the year (7) Ante p. 52. («) 1 M. & S. 503 ; ante p. 52. (.»•) 3 E. & B. 94 ; 23 L.J.M.C. 76 ; 18 Jur. 572. Vide also Hey. v. Lapley, 9 B. & S. 568. Rating of Railways. 109 preceding that in which they were rated, and the Eastern Counties Company, in pursuance of their agreement, paid to them £3,705 to make up the dividend to the said rate. The Court was divided in opinion. Coleridge and Erie, JJ., held that in rating the Newmarket Eailway Company to the relief of the poor, the sum of £3,705 ought not to be taken into consideration as increasing the rateable value, as it was not an earning of the branch or money paid by way of rent for the use of the branch, or springing from the profits of the occupation ; but a payment arising from a collateral contract of guarantee in case the profits of the occupation should fall short of a certain amount, Lord Campbell, C.J., dissented on the ground that the sum received by the Newmarket Railway Company was not in the nature of a collateral agreement, but a sum received in respect of their occupation, and was part of the profits of the occupation, and ought therefore to be taken into consideration in assessing the value of that occupation. The view taken by Lord Campbell, C.J., seems to be the south-Easte™ correct new, and was followed in South-Eastern Railway Co. v. VorUng. Dorking, (y) The Reading, Guilford, and Reigate Railway Company constructed a railway joining the main line of the South-Eastern Railway Company at Reigate. LTnder powers in their Act of incorporation, the Reading, Guilford, and Reigate Company leased their line for 1,000 years, at a rental of £41,000, to the South-Eastern Company. The Reading, Guilford, and Eeigate Company was afterwards amalgamated with the South-Eastern Company, who were bound by the Amalgamation Act to pay to the shareholders of the Reading, Guilford, and Reigate Company annuities equal to the rent of £41,000. The Reading, Guilford, and. Reigate line brought a great deal of additional traffic to the main line of the South- Eastern Railway, and that company thus derived a great advantage from the Reading, Guilford, and Reigate line as a feeder to their main line. Further, it was found that the Reading, Guilford, and Reigate line, if in the market, might be an object of competition in consequence of the rivalry exist- ing between the South-Eastern and other companies. It was (//) 3 E. & B. 491 : 23 L.J.M.C. «4 ; 18 Jur. 672. 110 A Code of the Law of Rating. also found that the annual gross earnings of the Heading, Gruilford, and Reigate line, less the proper deductions, fell short of £41,000. The South-Eastern Company were rated as occupiers of so much of the Reading, Gruilford, and Reigate line as passed through the parish of Dorking, upon a valuation founded upon the said rent of £41,000. The questions for the opinion of the Court were : Firstly, whether the South-Eastern Railway Company were properly rated on the basis of the said rent or annuity. Secondly, whether the South-Eastern Rail- way Company were liable to be assessed in respect only of the net profit derived from the traffic passing through Dorking, irrespective of any rent paid by the company, and of the value of the Reading, Gruilford, and Reigate line as increasing the traffic on the main line. Thirdly, whether the parish officers were entitled to take into consideration in their assessment the value of the line to the South-Eastern Company as an integral part of the South-Eastern Railway in addition to the net profit as derived from the traffic passing through the parish of Dorking. As to the first question, the Court (Lord Campbell, C.J., Coleridge, Erie, and Crompton, JJ.) held that the rent of £41,00<>, although it was evidence of the rent at which the Reading, Gruilford, and Reigate line might reasonably be expected to let to a tenant from year to year, could not be taken as the conclusive or sole criterion of the rate- able value, and that the assessment could not therefore be supported. On the second and third questions the judges were also agreed, with the exception of Erie, J., who adhered to his opinion in the Newmarket case. They held that the South-Eastern Railway Company were properly assessable in respect, not only of the net profits derived from the traffic passing through Dorking, but also in respect of the rent paid and the value of the Reading, Guilford, and Reigate line to them, as an integral part of their railway and as increasing the traffic on their main line. Lord Campbell, C.J., said : " I am of opinion that the liability of the appellants [i.e., the South-Eastern Railway Company] cannot be confined to the net profit derived by the appellants from the traffic Eating of Railways. Ill passing through the parish of Dorking. They are only to be assessed in that parish in respect of property occupied by them in that parish ; but its value in the parish may be enhanced by circumstances existing out of the parish. ... I adhere to the rule of rating which I laid down in Newmarket Railway Com- pany v. 67. Andreivs-thc-Less (z), which I there attempted to support and illustrate. This, I think, is in entire harmony with our decision in Reg. v. Great Western Railway Com- pany." (a) In all the cases on this point there seems to be more or less disagreement among the judges. In view, however, of more recent decisions, it must be taken that the true principle is laid down in the case of the South-Easter)i Rail/ray v. Dorking, (b) In London and North- Western Railway v. Cannock (c) the North-Western line leased the Cannock Chase line at a yearly rental payable in perpetuity. The expenses of the branch line in the parish of Cannock exceeded the receipts. The Court, nevertheless, held that the line had a value above that of agricultural land, and that, in estimating that value, the fact that the branch line would produce a profit to the main line of the North- Western, must be taken into consideration. We now come to two cases which are in conflict with the preceding cases, and with Reg. v. London and North-Western Railway Co. (d) and the subsequent cases which will be referred to hereafter. In Great Eastern Railway v. Haughley (e) the traffic of the Hanghiey case. Great Eastern Eailway passing through the parish of Haughley passed through other parishes where, owing to the increased traffic, the working expenses were less in proportion to the earnings than in the parish of Haughley. The Court held that in assessing to the poor-rate this was not to be taken into (z) Ante p. 108. (a) 15 Q.B. 1085 ; 21 L.J.M.C. 84 ; 16 Jur. 217. (b) Ante p. 109. (c) 9 B. & S. 335 ; 9 L.T. 325. (d) L.R. 9 Q.B. 134 ; 43 L.J.M.C. 81 ; 29 L.T. 910 ; 22 W.E. 263. (e) L.R. 1 Q.B. 666 ; 35 L.J.M.C. 229 ; 7 B. & S. 624 ; 14 L.T. 458 ; 14 W.B. 779 ; 12 Jur. X.S. 596, 112 A Code of the Law of Rating. account as reducing the average expenses over the whole line, and so contributing to enhance the rateable value of the railway in the parish of Haughley. Cockburn, C.J., said : " Let us take the case presented of a through passenger from Norwich to London. It is correctly stated by Mr. Field that beyond Haughley, on the route to London, a great accession of traffic takes place, and that the carriages which start from Norwich with a limited number of passengers, are, before they arrive at London, filled with a large accession. Mr. Field says that the effect of this addi- tional traffic is to reduce the rate of expense with reference to each individual traveller ; and that, therefore, taking the case of those individuals who have started from Norwich, it is not the expense of carrying those passengers through the parish of Haughley for which the estimated expenditure is to be made, but all the other passengers that join the railway and occupy carriages after the train has proceeded on must also be taken into account. It is a very ingenious mode of putting the argument ; but I think there is a plain and palpable fallacy in it. It is not with reference to each individual passenger that the expense is to be ascertained, according to my view. You must ascertain the expense of the whole of the traffic between Norwich and London. Upon parts of the line the expense of conveying that traffic would be less, and the profits would be greater than upon others, but the expenses upon an average are uniform throughout. ... It seems to me, therefore, that there is a fallacy in the way in which Mr. Field puts his argument, and that we are not to take the additional traffic beyond Haughley into account as a matter of expense, but to take it into account as a matter of profit. Then, if it is dealt with as a matter of profit, inasmuch as it occurs beyond the parish of Haughley, it is an accident with which the parish of Haughley has no concern, but which affects the rateability of the property where the profit accrues, and not elsewhere." This case was followed in Beg. v. Llantrissant. (f) The Great Western Eailway rented the Ely Valley Eailway, which ran through the parish of Llantrissant and formed a junction with (/) L.R. 4 Q.B. 354 ; 38 L.J.M.C. 93 ; 20 L.T. 364 ; 17 W.R. (371. Rating of Railways. 113 their own line. The Court held that the Great Western Rail- way, who were the occupiers of the Ely Valley Railway, were only to be rated in respect of the profits which the Ely Valley Railway earned within the parish of Llantrissant, and that the value of the traffic contributed by the Ely Valley Railway to the main line of the Great Western Railway ought not to be taken into consideration in estimating the amount of the rate in the parish of Llantrissant. It is difficult to reconcile the last two cases with those which Reg. y. Llantrissant. preceded them. Indeed Mellor, J., in Reg. v. Llantrissant (g), said : " It is not very easy, and I do not attempt to reconcile all that has been said in the various cases on the subject of assessing to the poor-rate branch lines of railway, or lines con- tributing to the traffic or feeding of other lines. It appears to me to be immaterial whether the line be a main or a branch line. The true principle on which the rate ought to be made is -by ascertaining what is the rateable value in each particular parish through which the railway passes, and that is to be based on what a hypothetical tenant would give for the line in that particular parish." The more recent cases all follow Rex v. Neie River Co. (h) and the Dorking case. (/) The most important of them is Reg. v. London and North- Western Railway Co. (/»•). In that London and case the London and North- Western Railway acquired a Railway c . branch line which communicated with their main line on the terms that the shareholders of the company by whom the line was made should become stockholders in the London and North- Western Railway Company to an amount calculated as the expense of making the line. The branch line communicated with the lines of three other companies, and the North- Western Railway charged very low fares on the branch in order to divert the traffic from the other lines on to their line. It was found in the case that if the branch line had been in the market GiO Supra. Qi) 1 M. & S. 503. Post p. 157. (0 Ante p. 109. (k) L.E. 9 Q.B. 134 ; 43 L.J.M.C. 81 ; 29 L.T. 910 ; 22 W.E. 263. 8 114 A Code of the Late of Rating. either of the three other companies would, in consequence of the traffic which it would bring to their line, have been willing to acquire it upon the same terms as those upon which the North- Western Company held it. The Court held that in assessing to the poor-rate a part of the branch line, the fact ra™e. etitlve that three other companies would be willing to pay what was equivalent to a large rent for it was to be taken into account as an element in ascertaining the rent at which it might reason- ably be expected to let from year to year. Blackburn, J., said : " Ever since the case of Rex v. New River Co. (7), the case of the Amwell Spring, it has been held that the value of the occupation is to be considered as enhanced by the matters to which it would give facility. How much would the occupier get from the occupation enhanced by everything which his occupation would give him ? . . . Supposing the railway [i.e., the branch] were to be put up to be let from year to year, what rent would be actually given ? That is what the Sessions would have to get at. It would be a difficult question to decide ; but I do not think we can disregard the fact that there are four competitors who would bid against each other." Quain, J., said : " The test is, what would the line be reason- ably expected to let for from year to year ? And, as I under- stand it, the Dorking Case (m) distinctly decides that, in ascertaining that, you may take into consideration not only the actual earnings in the parish, but also what further profit the tenant would make by reason of the occupation, although that profit may be earned elsewhere." This case was followed by London and North- Western Rail- wag v. Irthlinghorough (11), where Blackburn, J., said : " Where there are no direct rateable profits, the line in a parish is liable to be rated on the basis of receipts derived from traffic on the other parts of the line ; and this is the test of the hypothetical tenant's rent." (I) 1 M. & S. 503. Post p. 157. (m) Ante p. 109. («) 35 L.T. 327. 157. Rating of Railways. 115 ARTICLE 37.— In assessing a railway to poor- Deduction for rate the allowance in respect of interest on capital and _ . _ teuant 8 capital and tenant's profits must be calculated p™^\- h d ow with reference to the actual value of the rolling stock at the time the rate is made. This was decided in Reg. v. North Staffordshire Railway Co. (o), where the question for the Court was whether the percentage amount to be allowed for interest on capital and tenant's profits is to be calculated upon the capital invested in the rolling stock taken at its cost price, or upon the depreciated value of the rolling stock as estimated at the time the rates were made, or at any other time. Cockburn, C.J., said : " "We are of opinion that the allowance must be made Deduction must with reference to the actual and not to the original value. The reference to . , « actual value. point has already been decided by this Court in the case 01 Reg. v. Great Western Railway Co.(p), in which decision we entirely concur. In addition to the reasons given in the judgment of the Court in that case, it may be observed that, as under the Parochial Assessment Act, tenant's profits upon stock must necessarily be calculated with a view to their deduction from the gross earnings, in order to ascertain what a tenant would give for the entire property, nothing could be more inconvenient than that a different principle should prevail in calculating the profits in the two cases. Now the question, when considered under the Parochial Assessment Act, must be looked at, not with reference to the railway company, who may have expended on the purchase of the stock a much larger sum than such stock would now realise, but with reference to an incoming tenant, and the amount of capital which such tenant would have to lay out in the purchase of the rolling stock necessary to carry on the undertaking. It is obvious that what it would be worth the while of a person (o) 3 E. & E. 392 ; 30 L.J.M.C. 68 ; 3 L.T. 554 ; 9 W.R. 235 ; 7 Jur. N.S. 363. O) 6 Q.B. 179 ; 15 L.J.M.C. 80 ; 10 Jur. 134. 8A 116 A Code of the Law of Hating. or company about to embark in a commercial undertaking to give as rent for the premises in which it was to be carried on, would depend on the amount to be deducted, in addition to repairs and other necessary outgoings, from the gross earnings in respect of the profits due to the capital to be employed in the concern. But it is plain that a tenant would calculate such profits on the amount of capital actually required to be expended on the stock ; not on what may have been the value of such stock at some other time or in some other hands." Hwinvoil-ed° f ^ s Cockburn, C.J., says in his judgment, the point had been raised in Reg. v. Great Western Railway Co. (q) The Court there held that the question involved no principle of law, but intimated that the deduction should be made on the actual value of the stock at the time the rate is made. In London and North- Western Railway v. Wigan Union (r) the Court disallowed a claim for trade profits in respect of the business the company carried on as manufacturers and repairers of their own stock. Floating In Req. v. North Staffordshire Railway Co. (s) the Court capital. ' •' \ / allowed a deduction for floating capital where necessary, and this decision was followed in two cases before the Railway Commissioners. (/) where company Where a railway company possessed no rolling: stock, and possess no j l j l o j rolling stock. wnere the rolling stock required was furnished by another company, no deduction for profit on capital was allowed, (u) The Commissioners, however, allowed " a deduction for tenant's profit, as distinct from profits on capital, of five per cent, upon the gross receipts, such percentage to cover outla} T in floating capital, stores, furniture, and the like." (q) 6 Q.B. 179 ; 15 L.J.M.C. 80 ; 10 Jur. 134. (r) 2 Nev. & Mac. Kail. Cases 240. (s) 3 E. & E. 392 ; 30 L.J.M.C. 68 ; 3 L.T. 554 ; 9 W.R. 235 ; 7 Jur. X.S. 363. (0 Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire Railway Co. v. Caistor Union. 2 Nev. & Mac. Rail. Cases 53 ; and London and North- Western Railway Co. v. Wigan Union. 2 Nev. & Mac. 240. (u) Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire Railway Co. v. Caistor Union. Supra, Rating of Railways. 117 In a canal case, too, where the caual company were not canal company, themselves carriers, ten per cent, was allowed for tenant's profit, although no allowance was made for tenant's capital; none being required, (an) Where no tenant's profits may be made, no deduction will gj^fj^, i -n t • j> ;i / \ not allowed be allowed m respect oi them, (y) where no profit may be made. ARTICLE 38. In assessing a railway to poor- no deductions ■"• v ^ - for things rate no deduction is to be made in respect of essential to (A ) things attached to the freehold, (B) things essential to and intended to remain permanently connected with the railway. This is a subject more intimately connected with the rating of machinery, and will be found dealt with under that head. (3) Reg. v. Southampton Bock Co. (a) is the first case in which this question was raised. Attached to the freehold and essential to the business of the dock company was certain fixed plant, consisting of cranes, steam-engines, shears, derricks, S^am-raSnes. dolphins, and other like ponderous machinery ; which, however, were capable of being detached, as easily and with as little injury to the freehold, as other fixtures put up for the purposes of trade and business of the tenant, and usually valued as between incoming and outgoing tenants. The Court held that the cranes, steam-engines, and other ponderous machinery were properly included in estimating the rateable value of the company's premises. Lord Campbell, C.J., in delivering the judgment of the Court (Lord Campbell, C.J., Coleridge, Wightman, and Erie, J J.) said : " But this is a rate upon buildings to which machinery is attached for the purpose of trade, and it has been solemnly decided that such real property ought to be assessed according to the existing value as combined with the machinery, without O) Rex v. Woking, 4 A. & E. 40 ; 5 L.J.M.C. 17. \y) Mersey Docks v. Liverpool, L.E. 9 Q.B. 84 ; 43 L.J.M.C. 33 ; 22 W.E. 184. Post p. 162. (z) Ante p. 36. (a) 14 Q.B. 587 ; 20 L.J.M.C. 155 ; 15 Jur. 268. Vide also Reg. v. Morriso?i, 1 E. & B. 150 ; 22 L.J.M.C. 14. 118 A Code of the Law of Bating. considering whether the machinery be real or personal property, or whether it be liable or not to distress or seizure under a fieri facias, or whether it would go to the heir or executor, or at the expiration of a lease to the landlord or tenant, — Rex v. Birmingham and Staffordshire Gas LigJit Com- pany, (b) In this last case all the arguments pressed upon us to shew that such fixtures are stock-in-trade, and not to be taken into account in a rate on the realty, were urged, but urged in vain. It is of the greatest importance that a rule upon such a subject which has been laid down and acted upon, should be adhered to, and we see no reason why this rule should be now disturbed." The next case on the subject is Beg. v. North Staffordshire Railway Co. (c) The railway company were obliged, in order to work their line properly, to provide, in addition to such Turn-tabioe and rolling stock as above referred to, certain turn-tables, cranes, cranes. , . weighing-machines, stationary steam-engines, lathes, electric telegraph and apparatus, office and station furniture, and gas-works used for supplying the stations with gas. The company claimed a deduction for interest on capital and tenant's profits in respect of all these. Cockburn, C.J., delivered the judgment of the Court, and said : " The second question is whether the company are entitled to a deduction in respect of various articles therein specified, being things necessary for carrying on the business of the company. The articles to which such a question may have reference may be divided into three classes — first, things moveable, such as office and station furniture ; secondly, things so attached to the freehold as to become part of it ; and thirdly, things which, though capable of being removed, are yet so far attached as that it is intended that they shall remain permanently connected with the railway or the premises used with it, and remain permanent appendages to it, as essential to its working. It is clear that in respect of the first class of articles a deduction should be allowed. It is equally clear that no deduction should be allowed as to the second. As to the (fe) 6 A. & E. 634 ; 6 L.J.M.C. 92. Aide p. 36. (c) 3 E. & E. 392 ; 30 L.J.M.C. 68 , 3 L.T. 554 ; 9 W.R. 235 ; 7 Jur. N.S. 363. Rating of Railways. 119 third, the question is finally settled by the decision of this Court in Reg. v. Southampton Dock Co." (d) These eases were followed in Reg. v. Lee (e), Reg. v. ffalstead(f), Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire Railway v. Caistor Union (g), Laing v. B inhopwear mouth (h), Tyne Boiler Works v. Longbenton (/), and Gifford, Fox fy Co. v. Chard Union, (k) In Great Western Railway v. Melksham Union (I) an attempt J^ l8 e ^ d was made to exclude the sleepers and rails from rateability, but the Court refused to allow the exemption on the ground that " the facts showed that the sleepers are substantially an addition to the freehold, and give an additional value to the land." Since this case was decided it has been decided that the rails are attached to the freehold and cannot be distrained, (in) ARTICLE 39.— In assessing a railway to poor- Deducts for rate the company is entitled to an annual deduction ie for renewals, in addition to the annual deduction for repairs. The subject of deductions for renewal in the case of perishable buildings has already been dealt with, (n) With regard to railways the question was raised in the three railway cases, (o) In delivering the judgment of the (d) Ante?. 117. (e) L.R. 1 Q.B. 241 ; 35 L.J.M.C. 105 ; 13 L.T. 704 : 14 W.R. 311 ; 12 Jur. X.S. 225. Post p. 159. (/) 32 J.P. 118. Ante p. 38. (g) 2 Xev. & Mac. 53. (h) 3 Q.B.D. 299 ; 47 L.J.M.C. 41 : 37 L.T. 781 ; 26 W.R. 351. Ante p. 41. (0 18 Q.B.D. 81 ; 5(3 L.J.M.C. 8 : 55 L.T. 825 ; 35 W.R. 110 ; 51 J.P. 420. Ante p. 41. (k) 63 L.T. 249. Ante p. 42. (Z) 34 J.P. 692. (to) Turner v. Cameron, L.R. 5 Q.B. 306 ; 10 B. & S. 931 ; 39 L.J. Q.B. 125 ; 22 L.T. 525 ; 18 W.R. 544. («) Ante p. 67. (o) Reg. v. London, Brighton and South Coast Railway Co. ; Reg. v. South-Eastern Railway Co. ; Reg. v. Midland Railway Co., 15 Q.B. 313 ; 20 L.J.M.C. 124 ; 15 Jur. 372. 120 A Code of the Law of Rating. Court, Coleridge, J., there said with regard to the deduction which the companies claimed for renewals : " As a general principle we do not understand the respondents to deny that a deduction for the purpose here stated, and as stated, is proper to be made ; the objection which they raise to the particular claim of the company is founded on two circumstances : first, that the proper provision is already made under a head called ' working expenses ' to which we do not agree ; secondly, that if more may be at any time necessary, the necessity has not yet arisen, because the company has not yet incurred the expense, nor laid by from their receipts any sum to meet it when it shall arise. This question, under nearly the same circumstances, came before the Court in Reg. v. Great Western Railway Co. (p) and was decided against the company ; but we are desired to review that decision. We there said that we thought such an expense, as distinct from mere annual repair, fell under the same principle, and was an unobjectionable head of deduction when it should be actually incurred or provided for ; but we thought that as no allowance would be made for annual repairs in any year in which no repairs took place, so none should be made for this annual depreciation in value, unless at least there were funds set aside to meet it when it should be thought Decision in Reg. expedient to do the work of renewal. In that case, too, there explained.' was a further circumstance which had some influence on our judgment, and which is not found here, that whatever expense had been in fact incurred the company had chosen, rightly or wrongly, at all events conclusively on themselves, to make a charge on their capital, and not on their receipts, converting it therefore into landlord's improvements, rather than tenant's repairs. . . . We have considered this question with much attention, and, upon the whole, we think that the company are entitled to a deduction on this head. We cannot make a substantial distinction between this and house property, or any other of a perishable nature which must require renewal." (p) 6 Q.B. 179 ; 15 L.J.M.C. 80 ; 10 Jur. 134. Rating of Railways. 121 This decision was followed in Reg. v. Great Western Rail way (q) and in practice a deduction for renewals is always allowed. (>•) In London and North- Western Railway v. Wigan Union (s) only one half of the amount claimed under this head was allowed on the ground that part of the amount claimed had already been charged under the head of tenant's repairs. The question as to what amount should be deducted for Amount of 1 deduction for renewals in a parish came before the Court in London and renewals in * parish. North- Western Co. v. Harborne. (t) It was held that the parochial principle must be followed. Cockburn, C.J., said : " Each parish is entitled to the benefit of the value which • the land within it has acquired for the purposes of rating. The proper mode of making the deduction in respect of the maintenance of the railway from the gross annual value is not by following the mileage principle, but simply by taking the actual outlay in the parish ; and this item is not to be varied by expenses under this head in other parishes along the same railway." The same rule was followed in the Caistor Union Case, (a) The question how the amount to be deducted for depreciation Deduction for of rolling-stock should be calculated was discussed in the ronfng stock- Great Eastern Railway v. Haughley (x), where it was decided que ' that it was a question of fact for the Sessions. Cockburn, C.J., said : " A tenant might make the deduction upon one principle or he might make it on another ; that is a question of fact to be ascertained by those who are the judges of it. I do not think there is anything in the statute [i.e., the Parochial Assessment Act] that makes it necessary or incumbent upon us to say that if the Sessions or arbitrator (q) 15 Q.B. 1085 ; 21 L.J.M.C. 84 ; 16 Jur. 217. (;•) Vide Specimen Valuation, Appendix, p. 493. (s) 2 Nev. & Mac. Rail. Cases, 240. (t) 34 J.P. 644. (u) 2 Nev. & Mac. Rail. Cases, 53. (x) L.R. 1 Q.B. 666 ; 35 L.J.M.C. 229 ; 7 B. & S. 624 ; 14 L.T. 458 ; 14 W.R. 779 ; 12 Jur. N.S. 596. Ante p. 111. 122 A Code of the Law of Rating. have found that fact in a particular way they must necessarily be wrong. The tenant must be taken as coming in as a tenant from year to year, and then the question remains, what may he be reasonably expected to give as the annual rent of such premises ? Before that fact can be arrived at, a deduction must be made from his profits in respect of what he would allow for the depreciation in the stock used for the purposes for which he takes the premises, and how he would calculate this is a pure question of fact dependent on the surrounding circumstances. Being thus a question of fact we are not called upon to express an opinion ; it is sufficient to say, that the arbitrator has not deviated from the rule laid down in the statute in taking into account the surrounding circumstances." no deduction ARTICLE 40.— In assessing a railway to the for loss on ..... „ poor-rate no deduction is to be made for loss on branch lines. In Reg. v. Great Western Railway Co. (y), Lord Denman, C.J., in dealing with a claim under this head, said : " We think this cannot be allowed. If the rate in question had been imposed on land forming any part of the branch lines themselves, it is clear that the circumstances of the receipts not equalling the rent, in other words, that the line was worked at a loss, could not have affected the rate. The occupation would still have been beneficial, in the sense in which that word is used for the purpose of assessing the rate ; and the rent which, from whatever motive, the appellants found it worth their while to give, would have regulated the amount. This is not that case, in the way in which it is sought to make this expenditure bear on the rate assessed on any part of the main line ; it is more like money laid out in the way of improvement, for which no deduction should be made." (y) 6 Q.B. 179 ; 15 L.J.M.C. 80 ; 10 Jur. 134. branch lines. Rating of Railways. 123 ARTICLE 41.— In assessing a railway to theSSSSte 1 " poor-rate no deduction is to be made for good-will, laruamentair x , __ _, . , expenses or parliamentary expenses, or landlord s income-tax. ggg^ With regard to the deduction claimed on account of Goodwin. goodwill, Lord Denman, C.J., in Reg. v. Grand Junction Railway Co. (z), said : " This objection appears capable of two answers : the first and the decisive one is, that the purchase of goodwill implies that the trade is sold; that the company are to be bound to surrender their trade to the lessee, and no longer to be carriers on the line ; but the calculation of the Sessions proceeds on no such supposition. All those special advantages indeed, for carrying it on, which the occupation gives them, whatever they may be, they must necessarily surrender ; but the moment they have leased the railway they would become part of the public, and have the right of carrying on their trade, retaining all the goodwill, with all those advantages which were carefully reserved to the public. Secondly, although the supposition is, that a tenancy is to be made, yet what the incidents of that tenancy must be, as to the actual terms of allowance, must be determined for the purpose of fixing the amount of the rate by the actual state of things ; for this supposition of a tenancy is only a mode of ascertaining the existing value of the occupation to the existing occupier. Now, here there is no tenancy, in fact, paid for ; and therefore no deduction ought, in fact, to be made on account of its price." A similar claim was made and disallowed in Reg. v. Overseers of Mile End Old Town, (a) With regard to a claim for a deduction in respect of g^° ntary parliamentary expenses incurred in promoting the railway, Lord Denman, C.J., in Reg. v. Great Western Railway Co. (b), said : " The appellants claim, thirdly, an allowance for £21,000 yearly interest on the sum expended in forming their company, obtaining their Act of Parliament, raising their capital, and 0) 4 Q.B. 18 ; 13 L.J.M.C. 94 ; 8 Jur. 508. (a) 10 Q.B. 208 ; 16 L.J.M.C. 184 ; 11 Jur. 988. (6) 6 Q.B. 179 ; 15 L.J.M.C. 80 ; 10 Jur. 134. 124 A Code of the Law of Rating. Income-tax. other original expenses. For this there is no foundation. These expenses have no connection with the rateable value of the railway ; they might have all been incurred and no railway ever constructed. As well might the purchaser of an estate with borrowed money, and after an expensive litigation as to the title, claim to deduct his interest and expenses from the poor-rate on the land when in his occupation." Where the income-tax is tenant's income-tax a deduction is to be allowed, but not where the income-tax would be payable by the landlord, (c ) Exclusive occupation. ARTICLE 42.— Where a railway company per- mits another person to occupy part of its property, such railway company is rateable in respect of such occupation, unless it has disposed of the exclusive occupation. This was decided in London and North- Western Railway Co. v. Buckmaster (d) and Smith and Son v. Lambeth Assessment Committee, (e) The cases on " Exclusive occupation " are collected in Art. 6. (/) Rent paid for use of station. ARTICLE 43.— Where one railway company pays rent to another railway company for the use of a station the full value of such rent must be taken into account in assessing the rateable value of the station. This question came before the Court in Reg. v. F/etton. (g) The Eastern Counties Railway Company, the sole owners of a station (c) Reg. v. Goodchild, E. B. & E. 1 ; 27 L.J.M.C. 233 ; 22 J.P. 144 ; 4 Jur. N.S. 1050; Reg. v. Great Western Railway Co., supra ; Reg. v. Southampton Dork Company, 14 Q.B. 587 ; 20 L.J.M.C. 155 ; 15 Jur. 268. Vide Art. 25, ante p. 71. (d) L.R. 10 Q.B. 70 ; 44 L.J.M.C. 29 ; 31 L.T. 835 ; 23 W.R. 160. This case was affirmed in L.R. 10 Q.B. 444 ; 44 L.J.M.C. 180 ; 33 L.T. 329 ; 24 W.R. 16, the judges in the Ex- chequer Chamber being evenly divided. Ante p. 20. (e) 10 Q.B.D. 327 ; 53 L.J.M.C. 1 ; 48 L.T. 57 ; 47 J.P. 244. Ante p. 30. (/) Ante p. 20. (g) 3 E. & E. 450 ; 30 L.J.M.C. 89 ; 3 L.T. 689 ; 9 W.R. 309. Rating of Railways. 125 in 1848, entered into an arrangement, by deed, with the North- Western Railway Company, by which the latter company was, for 999 years to have the joint use of part of the station, and the exclusive use of another part, on certain stipulated terms In consequence of the falling-off in their traffic, the station became of less value to the North-Western Company, and the real present value to them was much below the sum actually paid by them to the Eastern Counties Company under the agreement. The Court held that the Eastern Counties Com- pany were to be deemed the persons rateable for the whole occupation of the station, and that they were assessable to the full amount which they received from the North- Western Company. Cock burn, C.J., said : " The London and North- Western Company are not occupiers of the station at all ; they have only an enjoyment by way of user, in other words, an easement. The occupiers are the Eastern Counties Company, Easement subject to the easement of the other company; and the true question is, what would a tenant coming into the place of the Eastern Counties Company give for such occupation ? Now it is plain that a tenant coming into their place, in considering what rent he would give after the necessary deductions, would take into account, as increasing the value of the premises, the amount to be annually paid by the London and North- Western Com- pany for their use of the station. It is true the Eastern Counties Company, if they were to let the station, though they could, of course, let it subject to the right of the London and North- Western Company to use it, might, taking a lower rent from their immediate lessee, reserve to themselves the receipt of the amount annually payable by the London and North- Western Company. Whether, under such circumstances, they would or would not still remain liable as occupiers, quoad a moiety of the line, the London and North- Western having only an easement therein, it is unnecessary to decide. It is sufficient, in our opinion, for the present purpose, to say that, rebus sic stantibus, they are assessable to the full amount of what they receive. The true principle, according to which the value of the occupation to the hypothetical tenant contemplated by the Exclusive occupation. 126 A Code of the Law of Rating. Parochial Assessment Act is to be estimated, is to assume the continuance of those circumstances which constitute the value to the existing occupier, unless it be made to appear that those circumstances are about to undergo a change. . . . At present the Eastern Counties Railway Company, as occupiers of this station, derive a profit, not only from their use of the station, but also in respect of a sum annually paid by the London and North- Western Company for their use of it, and they ought in justice to contribute to the local burdens in proportion to the entire benefit which they derive from the occupation ; and we think that they fail legally, as they certainly do morally, in the attempt to withdraw themselves from such fair and equal contributions." This judgment was delivered on the assumption that the Eastern Counties Company had not ceased to be the occupiers of the station. The same question came before the Court again in Reg. v. Lord Sherard, (h) when it was found as a fact that the North- Western Railway Company were in " exclusive occupa- tion " of part of the station. Cockburn, C.J., said : " We have looked at this deed and we adhere to the opinion we formed the first time this question was before us. (/) The effect of the deed is simply to give the right to the use of the station to the North- Western Company without taking the occupation out of the Eastern Counties Company. The latter are the occupiers and must be rated for so much of the station as remains after what Mr. Keane gave up as being in the exclusive occupation of the North- Western Company ; and as to these buildings, etc., the rate must be amended ; but as to the residue of which the North- Western Company have the use by the terms of the deed, we are of opinion that the occupation is in the Eastern Counties Company, and therefore, as to that, the rate will stand." (h) 33 L.J.M.C. 5. (i) Reg. v. Fletton, supra. Rating of Railways. 127 ARTICLE 44.— Deductions which have to be Deductions for made in respect of stations, buildings and sidings, stations. must be calculated on the actual value at which such stations, etc., ought to be assessed. This was decided in Reg. v. North Staffordshire Railway Co. (/»•) Actual value. where it was contended that a station or building appurtenant to a railway ought to be assessed on the original cost of con- struction. The Court, however, decided otherwise. In Reg. v. Eastern Counties Railway Co. (I) Blackburn, J., said : " We must in conformity with the established practice, treat the station as only indirectly contributing to the profits of the line, and consequently as being liable to be rated as land and buildings whose value is to some extent enhanced by their capacity of being employed in connection with the line." The principle upon which this value is to be estimated was En h anced laid down in Reg. v. West Middlesex Waterworks Co.{m) It' was there decided that the company were to be rated in respect of their plant, engine-house, etc., in the parish of Hampton, in which parish they derived no profit whatsoever, " as mere land and buildings, with fixtures and machinery attached, and deriving some additional value from their capacity of being applied to such purposes as that of a water company. Such additional value is derived from an increase of demand beyond supply, according to the principle regulating exchangeable value, and not by reference to receipts earned in any other parish, beyond assuming that they are sufficient to pay all outgoings, including profits on capital." The principle laid down in the West Middlesex Waterworks canal Case was followed in the Birmingham Canal Navigation Co. v. Birmingham, (n) The company had premises occupied by Wharves wharves, an engine-house, and reservoirs. The assessment upon en^'ne^hou^ (Is) 3 E. & E. 392 ; 30 L.J.M.C. 68 ; 3 L.T. 554 ; 9 W.E. 235 ; 7 Jur. N.S. 363. (0 4 B. & S. 58 ; 32 L.J.M.C. 174 ; 9 Jur. N.S. 1339. (to) 1 E. & E. 716 ; 28 L.J.M.C. 135 ; 5 Jur. N.S. 1159. Post p. 152. (n) 19 L.T. 311. 128 A Code of the Law of Rating. the wharves and reservoirs was made upon the whole area, each taken as a whole as wharf land and buildings, with fixtures and machinery attached, and deriving some additional value from the capacity of being applied to such purpose* as those of a canal. The engine-house was a building in which were erected steam- engines and machinery used for pumping water into the reservoir. These engines were kept ready to work at any moment, but were only actually used on an average about twenty days in each year, dependent chiefly on the state of the rainfall. The engine-house was assessed at the rent which it was con- sidered reasonable for the company to pay as a tenant from year to year, whereas the company contended that they ought to be assessed according to the power involved in the actual pumping work performed during the year by the engines. The Court held that the manner in which they were assessed was correct. Cockburn, C.J., said : " You cannot give the whole canal or those who travel the whole length of the canal, and use parts of the canal, benefit at the expense of the parish. This parish is en- titled to a rate upon the property of the canal for what occurs in Birmingham, and for the profits which might be made in Birmingham, that is to say, not only in respect of the profits which the company do make, but in respect of the profits which the company might make, but which they are pleased to forego, from, no doubt, a very wise policy, namely, that by foregoing those profits in Birmingham they may make a greater profit upon the whole area of the canal. Therefore Mr. Keane's contention is right, that whatever might be the value of this property in Birmingham, the company that is to make the value that they might extract from it with respect to that — to that extent would be rated. I have expressed my opinion before, that as to the reservoir the rate is right. With regard to the engine-house, it has a certain value by reason of the land or the building erected upon it, and of the machinery attached to that building, all of which is necessary for the purpose of the canal. It is situated in Birmingham ; it is only made avail- able, and put to a particular use on certain occasions, or if you like in certain contingencies ; nevertheless it must always be there ; it has a certain value with respect to the land, and the Ratine/ of Railways. 129 buildings upon it, and the machinery permanently affixed to it ; and in that respect I think it ought to be rated whether it is used all the year or not." In London and North-Western Railway v. Wigan Union (o) £eductjon- the Court said, with reference to the annual value of railway stations : " To find the annual value of the stations, which are the part of the property we will take first, it is neces- sary to determine not only the mode in which the land in occupation, and the offices, sheds, platforms, sidings, and other appendages of a station shall be valued, but also carefully to exclude the lines of railway in a station which are separately assessed. In the case before us the mode of rating has been to take a percentage upon the present value of the stations, and the evidence did not show that land or structures had been over- valued." In practice the annual value of stations is taken at a per- centage on the present value, usually about five per cent. The question as to whether certain docks formed part of a what station was raised in 3Ianchester, Sheffield and Lincolnshire station. Railway Co. v. Caistor Union, (p) The Eailway Commissioners there held that the sidings, sheds, etc., constituted the station, but that the docks which they held must be rated apart from the station. It is difficult to wholly reconcile this case with Birmingham Canal Navigation v. Birmingham (q), for although the expenses of the docks exceeded the receipts, it cannot be doubted that the docks indirectly contributed to the profits of the railway. In a recent case, Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire Rail- way v. Grimsby (r), a similar question was raised with regard to the rating of Grimsby Docks. The House of Lords held that, although the expense of maintaining the docks exceeded the receipts, the docks must be rated at the amount the railway company, amongst other possible tenants, would give for the docks. The docks were therefore treated as indirectly con- tributing to the profits of the railway company. (o) 2 Nev. & Mac. Rail. Cases 240. ( p) 2 Nev. & Mac. Rail. Cases 53. (q) 19 L.T. 311. Ante p. 127. (r) Not reported. 130 A Code of the Law of Rating. assessed. -110 " ARTICLE 45.— In assessing a railway station to poor-rate all sidings must be included, and only the average quantity of land required for the main tracks, and the permanent way necessary to such tracks at any point in their length should be excluded. This was decided in London and North- Western Railway Co. v. Wigan Union (s) where the Court said : " No siding nor any other part of a station contributes otherwise than indirectly to the earnings of a railway, the gross earnings including receipts of every kind, and a siding which is used to give free passage to through traffic aids the receipts as effectually as one that is used for warehousing or for loading or unloading. The point to be kept in view is that a parish is entitled to benefit by the value of all the land occupied by the railway company, and if land is taken in parish A wide enough for the up and down traffic in its ordinary working, and in parish B of a width sufficient to give the same accommodation and other accom- modation besides, parish B will be unequally rated relatively to parish A, if the additional width counts for nothing in the valuation for poor-rate." Rate— how ascertained. ARTICLE 46.— In assessing a railway to poor- rate, the rate must be calculated upon the prospective value of the occupation ascertained from the latest evidence in their power as to ante- cedent value. So held in Reg. v. London, Brighton and South Coast Railway Co. (t) Coleridge, J., said : " The Sessions ought to avail themselves of every light that can be afforded them down to the latest period antecedent to the actual making of the rate, in order to bring it to the greatest possible accuracy. The (s) 2 Nev. & Mac. Rail. Cases 240. (0 15 Q.B. 313 ; 20 L.J.M.C. 124 ; 15 Jur. 372. valuation, Appendix, p. 494. Vide specimen Rating of Tramubays. 131 overseers in making a prospective rate are to make it on the supposed prospective value, ascertained by them as well as they can from the latest evidence in their power as to antecdent value." This is equivalent to saying that property must be rated in its existing- state, (u) ARTICLE 47.— On any rating appeal a railway f e r ° e f t ° s f r company may prove its receipts or profits by the profit- written statements or returns verified by the affi- davit or statutory declaration of the manager or responsible officer. This is enacted by section 48 of the Railway and Canal Applies to Traffic Act, 1888 (51 & 52 Vict., c. 25). Any person who makes the affidavit or statutory declaration must attend, if required, for cross-examination. This section also applies to Canal Companies. An Assessment Committee cannot compel a railway company Assessment Committee — to produce evidence before them at the hearing of an objection evidence. to the Valuation List. (.*■) ARTICLE 48.— A tramway company is rateable ^|° f s to the relief of the poor in respect of their occupa- tion of the road by their tramways. This was decided in the Pimlico, PecTiham and Greenwich Tramway Co. v. Greenwich. (//) The tramway company was formed under a special Act with which was incorporated the Tramways Act, 1870 (33 & 34 Vict., c. 78). Section 34 of the Tramways Act gave the tramway company " the exclusive use of the tramway for carriages with flange wheels, or other wheels suitable only to run on the prescribed rail." The company was held to be rateable in respect of their occupation of the road. Blackburn, J., said : " We have to see, taking the whole Act together and not any one particular part of it, O) Vide Article 7. Ante p. 32. (x) Beg. v. Essex JJ., 46 J.P. 724. Post p. 236. (y) L.R. 9 Q.B. 9 ; 43 L.J.M.C. 29 ; 22 W.R. 87. 9 A 132 A Code of the Law of Rating. whether the object and intention of what is carried out by the Act is not this, that the promoters, who have laid down the tramway for that purpose, are to have the occupation of that portion of the land upon which they lay the tramway, so as to make them occupiers of land and liable to be rated. It seems to me, looking at the whole Act, that they are clearly liable for that occupation, the value of which is enhanced not by the carnages which run upon it, or the horses that draw, or any- thing of that kind, but by the power of carrying on the traffic upon it. It seems to me that they are occupiers of land to the same extent and in the same manner as in the cases which are now perfectly well established and of every day occurrence, where a gas company or a waterworks company lay in the road their main pipes, and carry them along the road under the surface of the soil, instead of coming above it, in which, in respect of their pipes, which carry the water from the supply to the place where it is to be distributed, the company are held liable as occupiers of so much of the land as the pipes occupy for the purpose, the beneficial value of which occupation is to be got at, by consider- ing that it facilitates their carrying gas or water from the points of supply to the point of distribution. I am, therefore, of opinion that the promoters of the tramways are occupiers of the land in the same sense that the occupiers of the pipes are." Tramways are assessed to poor-rate in a similar manner to railways ; but land occupied by a tramway is not " used only as a railway." By the Public Health Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict., c. 55) s. 211, sub-s. 1, it is provided with respect to the assessment and levying of general district rates that "the occupier of any land . . . used only as a canal . . . or as a railway, constructed under the powers of any Act of Parliament, for public conveyance, shall be assessed in respect of the same in the proportion of one-fourth part only of the net annual value thereof." The Court held that the land occupied by a tramway was not " used only as a railway " within the meaning of the Act. [z) (s) Swansea Improvement and Tramway Co. v. Swansea (1892), 1 Q.B. 357 ; 61 L.J.M.C. 124 ; 66 L.T. 119 ; 40 W.R. 283 ; 56 J.P. 248. Eating of Tramways. 133 Tramways- parochial ARTICLE 49.— A tramway company which ex- tends into more than one parish must be assessed ****$*• to poor-rate on the parochial principle. So held in the London Tramways Co. v. Lambeth, (a) It was decided in this case that in assessing the rateable value of tramways the annual gross traffic receipts earned over the entire system must he taken as the basis of the estimate of the rent and the net receipts in each parish as the criterion of the rateable value in each parish. Where a tramway route begins and ends in the same parish, the net receipts of that route is the value upon which the tramway owners must be rated. Where a tramway route extends through two or more parishes the fairest practical mode of apportioning was held to be by dividing the receipts from each distinct service route in pro- portion to the lineal mileage of such route in each parish respectively. The deductions to be made in the case of tramways are Deductions same as m similar to those made in the case of railways and will be found 2*°* dealt with in the case just cited. 0) 31 L.T. ai9. 134 TITLE III. EATING OF CANALS. ARTICLE 50. —In addition to the Articles in this canaif. Title, Articles 29 to 47 of Title II. apply to the rating of canal companies as well as to the rating of railway companies. It was first decided that canal companies must be rated as panifsraTe'cias ordinary occupiers of land in the case of I?e.r\. Trustees of the °a C nd. piei Duke of Bridgewater (a), where Bayley, J., said: "We have no doubt that the trustees must be rated as occupiers of land, and that the same principle of rating must be adopted whether the party be owner or occupier, or occupier only The principle of our decision in this case is that the same rule is to be applied to all occupiers, and that the rent or sum at which the land will let is the criterion of the value of the occupation." This case was decided in 1829 before the Parochial Assess- ment Act was passed. Formerly the tolls received by canal companies were held rateable, and they were held rateable where payable, (b) The case in which it was decided for the first time that tolls, eo nomine, were not rateable was Rex v. Nicholson, (e) The principle there laid down was followed in (a) 9 B. & C. 68. (b) Rex v. Cardington, Cowp. 581 ; Rex v. Aire and Colder Navi- gation, 2 t.R. 660 ; Rex v. Page, 4 T.R. 543 ; Rex v. Stafford arul Worcester Coital, 8 T.R. 340 ; Rex v. Leeds and Liverpool Canal Co., 5 East 325. (c) 12 East 330 ; Rex v. Jo?ies, 8 East 451 : Rex v. Snawdon, 4 1>>. & Ad. 713 ; 2 L.J.M.C. 60. Former law. Rating of Canals. 135 Rex v. Milton (0 A Code of the Lair of Rating. company must be rated in respect of its occupation in each parish ; and if so, Ave are aware of no rule that can be laid down as to the amount, except that it must be proportioned to the quantity of apparatus situate in each parish." Mile End old The rule, however, which is enunciated in this Article, was Town Case. first laid down in Reg. v. Mile End Old Town, {x) In this case a water company possessed works in several different parishes, consisting partly of works directly productive of profit (as service-pipes which deliver water to the consumers) , and partly of works indirectly productive of profit (as buildings, mains, reservoirs, etc., which assist in bringing the water to the service-pipes) . The rateable value of the entire works having been ascertained, the question for the decision of the Court was upon what principle the rateable value was to be apportioned among the various parishes through which the apparatus extended. Lord Denman, C.J., who delivered the considered judgment of the Court (Lord Denman, C.J., Patteson, Wightman, and Erie, JJ.), said : " In this case the rateable subject, being the apparatus for supply of water situate in twenty-one parochial districts, and the rateable value (that is, £30,800), being the residue of the gross receipts, after making all the deductions to which the company are entitled, have been correctly ascertained by the award. The principle for dividing that sum among those districts is the matter to be decided. The company contend that the division should be according to the amount of fixed capital in each district. But the rule of law laid down by Act of Parliament for ascertaining the rateable value of any subject refers to an estimate of the rent it should yield. The outlay of capital might furnish no such criterion, since it may have been injudiciously expended, and what was costly may have become worthless by subsequent changes. . . . The first step in apportioning has been in effect to divide the whole apparatus, constituting the rateable subject, into two portions, of which one is directly productive of rateable value, being the service-pipes which deliver the water to the consumer ; the other indirectly conduces to such production, being the rest of the works, (.r) Supra. Rating of Gas, Electric Light and Water Companies. 151 bringing the water to the sendee-pipes. The second portion has been first rated in the ordinary way by valuing the land with the buildings and fixtures thereon, and the amount of rate so ascertained has been deducted from the sum of rateable value, and distributed to the districts in which the parts of this portion are situate. An analogous course appears to have been adopted for railways in Reg. v. London and South- Western Railway Co. (//), and Reg. v. Grand Junction Railway Co. (z), and for gas companies in Reg. v. Cambridge Gas Company, (a) Also the spring which indirectly conduced to the ultimate profit by water-rate, was held rateable in the parish in which it was situate in Rex v. New River Co. (b), the quantum of such rate being left for the Sessions. As this course was acquiesced in by both parties, and in the three latest cases, we may presume that it can be applied without practical difficulty and we see no objection to it. " The remaining step has been to apportion the residue of the rateable value among the districts in which the directly productive portion of the works is situate, in the ratio either of the net profits or of the gross receipts, or of the quantity of mains and pipes, and of the land occupied by them, in each district. Each ratio in the present case gives the same result. If they differed, it would be necessary to select between them, and that ratio should be preferred which would best show the rent to be expected, if the part of the works situate in the district was let separate. It is clear that the net profits in each parish would be the best criterion of such rent, and they would therefore give the proper ratio. It is also clear that the ratio of the gross receipts or earnings in the several districts to each other will be the same as the ratio of the net profits in those districts to each other, in all cases where the total of expense is taken to be common to the whole apparatus, and is deducted from the total of receipts in the process of ascertaining a rateable value. For in such case the net profits in each district (//) 1 Q.B. 558 ; 11 L.J.M.C. 93 ; 6 Jur. 686. (V) 4 Q.B. 18 ; 13 L.J.M.C. 94 ; 8 Jur. 508. (a) Ante p. 149. {b) 1 M. & S. 503. 152 A Code of the Law of Rating. would be ascertained by distributing the expense among the several districts, and it would be distributed in the ratio of the gross receipts in each ; and if a proportional deduction should be made from the gross receipts in each, the ratios of the remainders to each would be the same as the ratio of the gross receipts. As any attempt to ascertain the net profits in each district in any other way would lead to minute and inconvenient inquiries in practice, the ratio of the gross receipts should be adopted, as being an index of the net profits when the rateable value is ascertained in the way stated in the case. We think that an apportionment in this sense, according to the gross receipts, is in accordance with the decisions which have apportioned the sum of rateable value from a railway or canal according to the length of line in each parish — Rex v. Kingswinford (c) and Rex v. Woking (d) .... This appor- tionment is not at variance with Reg. v. Cambridge Gas Co. (e) There the Court decided that the parishes in which the profits are received are not entitled to the amount produced by the rate, but that the parishes in which parts of the apparatus indirectly conducing to produce profit are situate, are entitled to a proportion. The Court also declared that the principle upon which the sum of rateable value from the rates of all the parishes should be apportioned, is the same as that which had been applied to canals. By the method adopted in this case, the rateability of the portion of the apparatus indirectly conducing to produce profit is provided for, and the residue of the sum of rateable value is apportioned to those parts of the apparatus directly producing profit, in analogy to the mileage proportion for railways and canals. We have, therefore, endeavoured to show that the rule for ascertaining the value for separate rating ought to be applied, as far as practicable, to apportioning among separate districts a sum of rateable value arising partly in each." west Middlesex The decision in the last case was confirmed and explained ca a se . ' in Reg. v. West Middlesex Waterworks Co. (/) The West (c) 7 B. & C. 236 ; 6 L.J.M.C. 3. (d) 4 A. & E. 40 ; 5 L.J.M.C. 17. (e) Ante p. 140. (/) Supra. Rating of Gas, Electric Light and Water Companies. 153 Middlesex Waterworks Company were empowered by Act of Parliament to construct works and lay down mains and pipes under the highway, and to supply certain parishes with water. In the parish of Hampton, which was not included among these parishes, the company erected engine-houses and other buildings, containing apparatus for raising water from the Thames. They laid down a main under the highway which ran through Hampton, and conveyed the whole of the water supplied by the company to reservoirs in another parish, whence the water was distributed by other mains and pipes to the customers in the several parishes. The company derived no direct profit in Hampton. The company contended that they were rateable in respect of their works in Hampton as ordinary buildings without reference to the profit earned by the company ; the respondents contended that they were to be rated in reference to the profit derived in the parishes to which the water is conveyed by their agency. The Court decided in favour of the company, following the rule laid down in Reg. v. Mile End Old Town, (g) Wightman, J., who delivered the judgment of the Court, said: "To the second question, requiring the principle to be stated on which the company is to be rated in respect of the plant, engine-houses, cottages, buildings, wharfs, mains, land and premises, we answer in the words of the Mile End Old Town Case, that it is to be rated as Rule gtated> for ' mere land and buildwgs with fixtures and machinery attaehed, and deriving some additional value from their capacity of being applied to sach purposes as that of a water company '; and we add, such additional value is derived from an increase of demand beyond supply, according to the principle regulating exchangeable value, and not by reference to receipts earned in another parish, beyond assuming that they are sufficient to pay for all outgoings, including profits on capital. If an apparatus occupied by one occupier, consisting of several parts, lies in one parish, the rate is on the whole and is received by that parish. If such an apparatus lies in several parishes, the occupier is liable for the same amount of rateable value, and no more; but that amount is to be apportioned ({/) Supra. 154 A Code of the Lair of Eating. among the parishes in which it lies ; and the question then arises, as in the present case, what is the principle which regulates such apportionment ? It is clear that each parish must rate the part that lies within it ; such part becomes a separate rateable subject in that parish, and must be rated, according to the Parochial Assessment Act, upon an estimate of the rent which that part would yield after proper deductions. In practice a tenant of the parochial portion of a canal, railway, gasworks, waterworks, or the like, has rarely if ever Hypothetical been known. But an hypothetical tenant must be assumed : tenant must be assumed. an( j £} le terms of such a tenancy are not difficult to be conceived, if in the hypothesis some necessary incidents are also assumed to be involved : such as — First, that each part of the apparatus is to continue in joint co-operation, no one tenant of an essential part being able to stop his part ; secondly, that the title to the required land is permanent, so that there is no risk of being compelled to move fixed capital ; thirdly, that there is land in the required quantity, and capital to be invested therein, and occupants ready to take and work parts yielding profit, as tenants at rack-rent, and parts not yielding profit, as contractors for remuneration provided any greater profit can be obtained than is ordinary in such relations. If a tenanc} r of each parochial part be assumed according to this hypothesis, then, although each parish rates separately upon its own estimate of the value of the part lying within it, and the law gives no power of making all the parishes co-operate in rating the several parts lying in each, nevertheless this Court is bound to protect the occupier of such an apparatus from being rated beyond the rateable value of the whole taken together ; and it is in reference to this protection that the Court must take into its consideration at once all the separate rates, as so many claims upon one given fund, and must apportion that fund, bearing in mind that every addition to the rateable value assigned to one parish must be a subtraction from the rateable value which might be given to some other parish. Supposing, then, the apparatus to be apportioned to several tenants according to the parts in several parishes, the tenants of the parts directly earning net profits in a parish would be Hating of Gas, Electric Light and Water Companies. 155 rated by that parish for all the profits earned therein ; this being the parochial principle of apportionment which has been Parochial i • i •! principle. unanimously upheld hitherto m respect oi all canals, railways, water companies, gas companies, and bridges. But the tenants of the parts directly earning no profit would not be liable to be rated in respect of any rent in the ordinary sense — which is profit remaining after all deductions have been taken from the receipts. But as these parts of the apparatus, directly earning nothing but indirectly conducing to such earnings elsewhere, are assumed to continue in operation, the company, to whose interest such continued operation is essential, must be assumed to pay adequate remuneration to a contractor for land and fixed capital vested therein, together with the labour and skill requisite for the effective continuance of such operation, and this contractor with the company would stand in the relation of occupying tenant to the parish, and the part within the parish would be the rateable subject, and the local rateable value would be such sum as would pay the rent of the land and the profit on fixed capital therein. " It is said in the Mile End Case that the parts indirectly Principle m the x Mile Lnrt Case conducing to produce profit are to be rated as mere land, etc., exemplified. with some additional value from their capacity of being applied to such purpose as those of a water company. The meaning of those words would be exemplified in this case if it be supposed that the bank of the Thames and the underground of the highways in Hampton were heretofore of no rateable value, but that when a wharf on a bank was required to raise water from the Thames, and when the underground of the highway was required for laying the mains giving transit to such water, the owners of the soil of the bank and of the highway could get some payment for allowing the use of their soil. Thus, land which before produced nothing would produce something, and so have some rateable value, which would be an addition arising solely from its capacity for being used for a water company. Value is derived entirely from the relation of demand to supply, and if a water company comes into competition with a mere agriculturist for land for waterworks, an addition is made to the value of such land by the additional 156 A Code of the Law of Rating. competition. This principle might raise land worth nothing into being worth something, as above supposed, and land worth something into higher value, in the case of a site for a steam- engine with yard and shed and cottages attached, or a site for a reservoir or filtering bed, and the like. Upon the common principles regulating value, it is enhanced in proportion to the scarcity of the thing in demand ; so that, if a few levels only were suitable for the required transit, or a few sources of water alone were accessible, the price would be higher. In this sense the words cited above from the Mile End Case are applied to the mains in Hampton in their ordinary meaning, and in the meaning in which they are applied to stations, warehouses, yards, workshops, and the other premises appertaining to railways and canals, rated on the principle of indirectly conducing to the direct earnings of railways and canals. On this principle the company contended that the rateable value of the part of the apparatus in the parish of Hampton is to be ascertained ; and we are of opinion that the company is right." principle The rule laid down in these cases was followed in Reg. applied to gas- works. v. Sheffield Gas Co. (h), where Blackburn, J., said: "The principle on which the stations, works, buildings, etc., are to be valued, as laid down in Reg. v. Mile End Old Town (i) and Reg. v. West Middlesex Waterworks Co. (k) is that they are to be valued as fixed property deriving some additional value from their capacity of being used as part of the gasworks, a rule which, in practice, it is found not difficult to apply, though it is not theoretically very definite." works m excess ARTICLE 59.— In assessing a water, gas, or requirements, electric light company to poor-rate the works must be assessed in their existing state, even though in excess of the actual requirements. The question of " existing value " has already been dealt with. (I) It has, however, a special application to such (/t) 4 B. & S. 135 ; 32 L.J.M.C. 169 ; 9 Jur. N.S. G23. Ante p. 147. (i) Supra. (k) Supra. (I) Article 7, ante p. 32. Rating of Gas, Electric Light and Water Companies. 157 undertakings as gas and water companies that have to furnish a supply of gas or water to areas which are con- tinually increasing and expanding. The question came before the Courts in Reg. v. South Staffordshire Waterworks Co. (m) In that case the works were found by an arbitrator to be larger than were required for the water which was distributed, but every part of them was used for collecting and distributing the water which was distributed. Under these circumstances the Court held that the whole of the capital expenditure must be taken into account, and not merely so much as would have sufficed to provide the existing supply. Bowen, L.J., said: " If part of the undertaking were severable, and not used for the purpose of distributing water as a source of profit, and not likely to be so used within a reasonable period of time, then the principle might be different." This would also apply to works of an electric light company in excess of what the company actually required. ARTICLE 60- The rateable value of the works Non-parocMai i t -i i earnings. of a water company may be enhanced by non- parochial earnings. This subject has already been discussed in connection with g^gjj,^ rating generally, (n) The case of Rex v. New River Com- pany (o) is of such importance, however, that it has been thought right to make a special reference to it in this Title. The New River Company was formed for the purpose of conveying water from a spring rising in Chadwell Mead, in Little Amwell, to London and Westminster. This was done by means of a cut called the New River, leading from the spring to a reservoir at Islington, whence it was distributed by means of engines and pipes to the different parts of the O) 16 Q.B.D. 359 ; 55 L.J.M.C. 88 ; 54 L.T. 782 ; 34 W.R.242 50 J.P. 20. (n) Article 13, ante p. 52. (o) 1 M. & S. 503. 158 A Code of the Law of Rating. metropolis. The water of the New Eiver was derived from two sources, part from the River Lea, from which there was a cut communicating with the New River, near Chadwell Mead, and part from a spring rising and enclosed in a basin at Chadwell Mead, which was the freehold of the New River Company and in their occupation. That part of Chadwell Mead which was occupied by the company consisted of the basin in which the spring rose, and so much of the New River as was situate in Little Am well, where it joined the water taken from the River Lea. The said land alone, without the spring, and if it were not covered with water, was of the annual value of £5. No part of the profit of the company arose in Little Amwell ; but if the advantage which the company derived from the use of the spring were included in the rate upon the land, the land and the spring together were of the annual value of £300. The Court held that the annual value of the land was improved by the rising spring- within it, and must be rated at the higher figure, although the occupiers did not receive any of the profits derived from the spring, nor did any part become due in the parish where the land was situate. Lord Ellenborough said : " Here, then, is land, and water inclosed in a basin upon the land, which falls within the legal description of land ; and although a considerable portion of the profits of such water is derived from pipes, through which it is distributed to other places, yet it is found that the water has a certain ascertained value at the fountain-head ; and in cases of this kind it is enough to ascertain the local value of the property, without inquiring whether it yields a return on the spot. . . . The property is locally valuable in the parish where it is rated, although that value is derived from extrinsic circumstances, and although the profits are actually received elsewhere." The principle laid down in this case has been followed in connection with the rating of every class of property. ction to earning. Tinting of Gas, Electric Light and Water Companies. 159 ARTICLE 61.— The proprietors of water or gas St » t,it ^ ° restnctioi works who are prevented by statute from deriving the full profit from the land must be rated at the rent a tenant from year to year would pay subject to such statutory restriction. This was decided in Worcester v. Droit icicJt (p), and the rule of law has recently been affirmed by the House of Lords in Sculeoates Union v. Kingston-upon-Hull Dock Co. (q) Prior to the decision in these cases and in Mayor of Liverpool v. Warertree (r), some doubt had been expressed upon this rule by the judges in Reg. v. Longirood (s), where Coleridge, J., said that restrictions imposed by statute " could have no bearing on the question of the amount of the rate." This case must therefore be considered as overruled on this point by the cases cited above. The Droiticic/t Case and the Warertree Case were followed in Dew&bury and Heckmondwike Waterworks Board v. Penistone Union (t), where it was decided that in assessing a water company to poor-rate the amount collected (under powers conferred by a private Act of Parlia- ment) by means of a water-rate ought to be taken into account. ARTICLE 62.— In assessing a gas company to no deduction - , . . -,n • allowed for poor-rate no deduction is to be made for articles iirticles attached to attached to the freehold and essential to the gas- ****«&. works. It was decided in Reg. v. Lee (u) that no deductions ought to be allowed in respect of (1) Retorts, (2) Purifiers, (3) (p) L.R. 2. Ex. D. 49 ; 46 L.J.M.C. 241 ; 36 L.T. 186 ; 24 W.R. 336. Ante p. 42. (q) (1895) A.C. 136 ; 64 L.J.M.C. 49 ; 71 L.T. 642 ; 43 W.R. 623 ; 59 J.P. 605 ; 11 R. 74. Ante p. 43. Post p. 172. (r) L.R. 2 Ex. D. 55 (note) ; 39 J.P. 102. (s) 17 Q.B. 871 ; 21 L.J.M.C. 215. (0 17 Q.B.D. 384 ; 55 L.J.M.C. 121 ; 54 L.T. 592 ; 34 W.R. 622 ; 50 J.P. 644. (u) L.R. 1 Q.B. 241 ; 35 L.J.M.C. 105 ; 13 L.T. 704 ; 14 W.R. 311 ; 7 B. & S. 188 ; 12 Jur. N.S. 225. 160 A Code of the Laic of Rating. Deduction to be made for meters. Meters are ordinary chattels. Steam-engines, (4) Boilers, (5) Gasholders, and (6) Trade fixtures such as pumps and exhausters which are fixed to the freehold, but would be removeable as tenant's fixtures. The ground of the decision was that these things, though capable of being removed, were so far attached to the gasworks as to remain permanent appendages to them, being essential for the purpose for which the works were made. The Court also decided that a deduction must be made in respect of the meters which belong to the gas company, but are put up on the premises of the consumers, and connected with the company's mains by means of pipes. Cockburn, C. J., said : " Whatever doubt there might have been in the case at the commencement of this discussion has been removed by the arguments. In the first place I entirely agree that we are not to look at the position of the particular tenant — that he has had to pay so much money down for the machinery and fixtures, which are necessary for carrying on the works ; but we must look at what, as the whole concern stands, would be the rent that an imaginary tenant would give for it as a whole, excluding from consideration whatever would be mere chattels, and would, therefore, not pass under a demise from the actual to the imaginary tenant. The way being thus cleared, the case presents, I think, no real difficulty to our deciding in respect of which of the various items the company are entitled to have any deduction allowed in order to ascertain the rateable value of the premises. " First, I think Mr. White has altogether failed in shewing that the meters are anything more than ordinary chattels. The other things, it is plain, fall under one of two classes of articles which are to be taken into account as enhancing the value of the buildings. The retorts, I am satisfied, are so far fixed to the freehold as to be attached and secured to it, and to become part of it, and they must be treated, therefore, not as removeable fixtures, but as fixtures so connected with the free- hold as to have become parcel of it. With regard to them there is no difficulty; they are rateable as any part of the entire freehold would be. The other items seem to me, one and all, to fall within the principle of the cases referred to in the argument, Rating of Oa», Electric Light and Water Companies. 161 Reg. v. Southampton Dock Co. (#) and Reg. v. North Staffordshire Railway Co. (//) In the latter case the Court, after time taken to consider, laid down this rule : that when tilings which, though capable of being removed, are yet so far attached as that it is intended that they should remain permanently connected with the railway or other undertaking, or with the premises used with it, and remain permanent appendages to it, as essential to its working, these must be taken to be things increasing the rateable value of the land, and in respect of which the company are not entitled to have a deduction made. That principle applies directly to the present case. There can be no doubt that the purifiers and gasholders are parts of the works which are absolutely necessary for the manufacture of gas, which is the purpose of the undertaking. There can be no doubt that it was intended, when those things were erected, that they should remain permanently con- nected with the premises ; that they should remain permanent appendages to it as essential to its working. They therefore fall within the rule laid down by the Court in that case. If the company desired to abandon this undertaking, and to let the gasworks to another company or any individual, what the lessee would propose to take and pay rent for would not be land independent of all these articles, all of them essential to the manufacture, viz., gas. The retorts, purifier*, and gasholders are ail as essential to the using and occupying these premises as gasworks, as any other thing that can jioxxihly be -suggested, however permanently attached to the freehold. They seem, therefore, clearly to come within the principle laid down in that case." Blackburn and Lush, JJ., delivered judgment to the same effect. The principle involved in this Article properly belongs to the Article on the Rating of Machinery (z), to which the reader is referred for a complete list of cases on the subject. 0) 14 Q.B. 587 ; 20 L.J.M.C. 155 ; 15 Jur. 268. Ante p. 117. (y) 3 E. & E. 392 ; 30 L.J.M.C. 68 ; 3 L.T. 554 ; 9 W.B. 235 ; 7 Jur. N.S. 363. Ante p. 118. (z) Article 8, ante p. 36. 11 162 TITLE V. EATING OF DOCKS AND HARBOURS. Rent paid by yearly tenant for docks. Tenant's profits. ARTICLE 63.— To ascertain what a tenant from year to year would pay for docks or harbours, the same deductions from the gross receipts must be made as in the case of railways, canals, water- works, etc. These deductions have already been dealt with, (a) No deduction for tenant's profits is allowed where no profits may legally be made. In Mersey Docks v. Liverpool (jb) the Mersey Docks and Harbour Board, under special Acts, held docks and other property connected with the docks ; they were authorised to levy dock rates and duties from the owners of vessels and goods for the privilege of using the docks, and they were bound to apply the dock rates and all money received by them from the dock property according to the directions of the special Acts. There were no shareholders, and no person derived any personal advantage or emolument whatsoever from the money received by the Board. All the dock rates were appro- priated in payment of all expenses and charges of collecting the rates, and the several other purposes specified in the Acts, and the residue in paying money borrowed. The Court held that the Mersey Docks and Harbour Board were not entitled, in addition to the cost of collecting the rates, to a deduction for tenant's profits. Blackburn, J., said : " In the present case the value of the occupation depends entirely on the collection of the rates. Section 284 of the Mersey Docks Act, 1858, requires that all 147. Vide specimen valuation, Appendix, pp. (6) L.R. 9 Q.B. 84 ; 43 L.J.M.C. 33 ; 22 W.R. 184. (a) Ante pp. 90, 498-500. Rating of Docks and Harbours. 163 the rates shall be appropriated in payment of all expenses and charges of collecting the rates, and several other purposes therein specified. If the premises were let to a tenant, it must be to a tenant subject to this Act, bound to hand over the rates received, after deducting the expenses and charges of collecting the rates to those purposes ; and the persons paying the dock rates would have a right to object to any part of them being applied to pay tenant's profits, except in so far as an allowance for that might be included in the expenses and charges of collecting the rates. "But all the expenses and charges of collecting the rates actually incurred by the Mersey Docks Board, who are occu- piers, are allowed for and deducted, and the contention for the Board is that we are bound, contrary to the fact, to suppose that the premises are let to an actual tenant, who would, con- trary to the provisions of the Mersey Docks Act, levy in dock rates a sum, in addition to all the actual expenses of collection, for his own benefit. ... In such a case as the present, where an actual demise on any terms would be impracticable, and where a demise on the terms that the tenant should receive a profit beyond the expenses of collection, would, if practicable, be illegal, we think no deduction should be made on account of tenant's profits." In the same case it was decided that no deduction should be interest on debt. allowed for interest payable by the Mersey Docks and Harbour Board on their debt. ARTICLE 64— In assessing docks to poor-rate, Katggof the additional value which the land derives from being used as docks must be taken into account where the docks are the meritorious cause of such enhanced value. Prior to the decision in the Mersey Docks Cases (c) a question Trustees of arose as to whether docks, of which the occupiers were trustees exempt. for public purposes, and could make no profit beyond the working expenses, etc., were rateable. This case, however, (c) 11 H.L.C. 443 ; 35 L.J.M.C. 1 ; 20 C.B.N.S. 56 ; 12 L.T. 643 ; 13 W.R. 1069 ; 11 Jur. N.S. 746. . 11a 164 A Code of the Law of Rating. Mersey Docks Cases. Docks — how rated. decided that they were rateable on the ground that it is not necessary that the occupation should be beneficial to the occupier. This decision " marks an epoch in the law of rating" (//), and the only occupiers exempt from the operation of the 43 Elizabeth, e. 2, are the Sovereign, because he is not named in the statute, and the immediate servants of the Crown, whose occupation is the occupation of the Crown itself. Con- sequently, when it is sought to render property yielding a rent above what is required for its maintenance exempt from rating, on the ground that it is occupied by trustees for public purposes, the public purposes must be such as are required and created by the Government of the country. In delivering the opinion of the judges in the Mersey Doeks Cases, Blackburn, J., said : " Whichever may be the true mode of enunciating the position, it is clear that there can be no valid rate unless the occupation be such as to be of value ; and if the words ' beneficial occupation ' are to be understood as merely signifying that the occupation is of value (which is obviously the sense in which the phrase is used in many of the cases cited at the Bar) , it is clear that a beneficial occupation is essential as the foundation of the rate ; but it is equally clear that if the phrase be understood in this limited sense, the Mersey Docks and Harbour Board have a beneficial occupation, for they actually occupy land as docks, and, in virtue of that occupation, receive payments from the shipping using the docks, at present greatly in excess of what is necessary to maintain the docks." The Lord Chancellor said : " I can discover nothing, either in the words or the spirit of the Act, exempting from liability the occupier of valuable property, merely because the profits of the occupation are not to be enjoyed by him, or by any one on whose behalf he is occupying, but are to be devoted to the benefit of the public." Docks are now rated in a manner similar to that in which railways are rated. The gross receipts must be first ascertained, ( r> into account as enhancing the rateable value 01 land unless they are received in respect of the occupation of the land. This principle has been laid down in several cases, which have recently been reviewed and affirmed by the Court of Appeal, (o) (m) (1894) 2 Q.B. (375 ; 63 L.J.M.C. 274 ; 71 L.T. 34 ; 59 J.P. 4 ; 9 R. 618. O) Post?. 170. (o) Blyth Harbour Commissioners v. Tynemouih Union (18U4), 2 Q.B. 075 ; 63 L.J.M.C. 274 ; 71 L.T. 34 ; 59 J.P. 4 ; 9 R. 618. Post p. 170. Rating of Docks and Harbours. Hi!) In Lewis v. Overseers of Stoansea (p) the soil and freehold of the quays were vested in the Corporation of Swansea, with the exception of two which were vested in the Dnke of Beaufort as lord of the manor. Tolls and dues were payable to the cor- poration in respect of the landing and shipping of goml-, without any distinction being made between the Dukes quays and those leased to private individuals. The individual occu- piers of the quays were severally assessed to the poor-rate in respect of their occupation, without taking into account the tolls and dues. The Court held that the corporation were not liable to be rated in respect of the tolls and dues. Lord Camp- bell, (J. J., said : " I find the payment is equally due where the Duke of Beaufort is the owner and occupier of the land, and it is impossible at that point to connect it with the occupation of the soil. The payment, then, is not in respect of the use of the soil ; it is a town due. This being so, it shews the nature of the payment made throughout the whole range of the harbour wherever claimed by the corporation. It is wholly disconnected with the occupation of the soil. It is purely incorporeal, and therefore not the subject of a rate. Our answer to the first question then is, that the corporation are not rateable." Although the dues were payable to the corporation, they were not payable in respect of their occupation of the land, and consequently the corporation were held not rateable in respect of them. This case was followed in Reg. v. Earl of Durham (q), where Anchorage and beaconage tolls. anchorage and beaconage tolls were held rateable as being con- nected with the occupation and use of the soil. In JVe/r Shoreham Commissioners v. Lancing [r) commissioners were appointed for improving the harbour of New Shoreham. They accordingly enlarged the channel so as to make a new entrance in the harbour, and built new piers, as authorised by their special Act, and received duties on all merchandise brought into the harbour. The Court (Blackburn, Mellor, and Lush, J J.) held that the soil of the harbour was not vested by O) 5 E. & B. 508 ; 25 L.J.M.C. 33. 0y) 2 E. & E. 23 J ; 28 L.J.M.C. 232 ; 5 Jur. N.S. 1306. (r) L.li. 5 Q.B. 489 ; 39 L.J.M.C. 121 ; 22 L.T. 434. 170 A Code of the Law of Rating, the statute in the commissioners, and they were not the occu- piers so as to be rateable to the relief of the poor. They held further that the soil on which the piers were built was vested in them, and that they were the occupiers of the piers, but that their occupation was not sufficiently connected with the duties to make them rateable in respect of the piers. Blackburn, J., enunciates the principle of law as follows : " The question then is, whether the amount of tolls thus received are in any way to be taken into account in estimating the rateable value of the Toils not property ? It is very clear in law that tolls are not per se the subject of a rate. It is equally clear that, when parties occupy land, they are rateable for the value of that land, and that tolls, though not rateable, may be considered as enhancing the value of the occupation of the land, whenever it appears that the occupation of the land is so connected with them that it can be said that the tolls and rates are levied on account of the occupation of the land ; or, perhaps, though not levied on account of the occupation of the land, where they could not be received without an occupation of the land."' This principle has been recently confirmed by the Court of Appeal in Bhjth Harbour Commissioners v. Ti/uonouth Union, (s) There the commissioners for the improvement of the harbour were not the owners or in occupation of the soil of the harbour, but were in occupation of the quays adjoining the harbour. By their special Act they were empowered to demand and receive " harbour dues " for every vessel entering the harbour or departing therefrom or remaining therein, and " goods dues " in respect of all goods shipped or unshipped within the harbour. The facilities for berthing vessels alongside the quays, and for shipping and unshipping goods, caused a greater number of vessels to enter the harbour than would otherwise have entered it, and in consequence largely increased the amount of the dues payable to the commissioners ; but vessels could be berthed, and goods shipped and unshipped, in other places in the harbour not occupied by the commissioners, and the same dues were payable whether vessels entering the harbour used the com- missioners' quays or not. The Court held that the dues received (s) Ante p. 168. Rating of Docks and Harbours. 171 by the commissioners from vessels using their quays could not be taken into account as enhancing the rateable value of those quays. A. L. Smith, L.J., said : " It seems to me that the judgment of the Court below is absolutely right in deciding that, applying the true rule of law to this case, the occupation of the quays, or any of them, is not so connected with the dues that it can be said that the dues are levied on account of the occupation of the land." The same rule has been applied in respect of dues received occupation of wharves. for the occupation of a wharf. In Reg. v. Dotvlais Iron Com- pany (/), the company were in occupation of two wharves, at a yearly rent, under the trustees of the Bute Docks. In respect of goods shipped from or upon the wharves the appellants paid to the trustees a fixed sum, which by the Dock Act was autho- rised to be received in respect of all goods landed or loaded upon or from the wharf, in addition to the tonnage rates paid by the ships passing into or out of the dock. No dues were charged upon goods brought upon the wharves and not shipped into the dock. The Court held that the dues were paid in respect of the use of the wharves ; that in assessing the wharves to the poor-rate they were to be taken into account in ascertaining the rateable value, and that the company were liable to be rated in respect of them. ARTICLE 6 G. -Where no rent can be earned by statutory a dock company because of a statutory prohibition, pr0 the rent which could have been earned but for that prohibition ought not to be taken into consideration in ascertaining the rateable value of the dock com- pany's property. This principle was confirmed by the House of Lords in Sculcoates Union v. Eingston-upon-Eull Dock Co. (u), where Lord Herschell, L.C., said : " If the Legislature have said they shall not earn these suggested further profits because they shall not charge tolls, how can it be established as a matter of (t) 10 B. & S. 208. (u) (1895) A.C. 136 ; 64 L.J.M.C. 49 ; 71 L.T. 642 ; 43 W.R. 623 ; 59 J.P. 605 ; 11 R. 74. Parochial Principle. 172 A Code of the Law of Rating. fact that they could earn more ? It appears to nie that if you are to disregard such statutory restrictions as these, you might just as well say that a railway company ought not to be rated only according to the tolls which it receives — ought not to be rated even according to the tolls which it could by law receive within its maximum, but that you ought to disregard its statu- tory maximum, and ask what a tenant from year to year would give for the railway if he could charge any tolls which he pleased." In this case a dock company was prohibited from charging tolls for running powers over railway and tramway lines belonging to it. The House of Lords held that they were not rateable in respect of the rent which a hypothetical tenant would give in respect of the lines if there were no such statu- tory restriction. (,r) ARTICLE 67.— In assessing to the poor-rate docks which extend over more than one parish, the rateable value should, wherever possible, be ascertained by attributing to each parish the re- ceipts earned and the expenses incurred in that parish. This has now been decided by the House of Lords in the recent case of Sculcoates Union v. Kingston-upon-Hull Dock Company. (//) Lord Herschell, L.C., said : " The appellants maintain that the proper method of ascertaining the rateable value of the docks in their union is to ascertain what are the earnings in the whole dock system, what is the expenditure necessary to produce those earnings ; then, having arrived in that way at the profits earned by the dock company upon the whole of their system, to distribute those profits among the different docks in proportion to the water area in the particular parishes. The respondents assert that this is not the proper mode of arriving at the rateable value ; that the proper mode (.*-) For earlier decisions as to " statutory prohibition," vide Art. 9, ante p. 42. O) (1895) A.C. 136 ; 64 L.J.M.C. 49 ; 71 L.T. 642 ; 43 W.R. 623 ; 59 J.P. 605 ; 11 E. 74. Rating of Bocks and Harbours. 173 is to ascertain what are in fact the profits earned by each part of the system, by the particular hereditament in each parish, and that the profits thus earned by the hereditament in the particular parish enable you to arrive at the rateable value. . . What has to be determined is what a tenant from year to year would give for these particular docks ; and the parishes are no doubt entitled to insist that in making that inquiry you are dealing with a subject-matter which has an enhanced value by reason of its adaptation to a commercial purpose ; that you are not merely to rate it as so many square feet of water or land, but that you are to rate a dock, and the question is, what a tenant from year to year would give for that dock ? Now, I cannot think that where you have a system of docks of different dimensions, adapted to different purposes, in different local situations (although the distance between them may not be great), they are to be regarded as a homogeneous whole, so that the earnings of the whole if distributed according to the water area will properly give the earnings of every part. It does not follow that the larger the dock the greater would be its profit, because you cannot consider the matter independently of all the other considerations to which I have alluded — its adaptability to a particular trade, its local situation, and other circumstances. It seems to me, therefore, that the method contended for by the appellants is the wrong one. I quite feel the force of the arguments they have addressed to your lordships — very able arguments — with a view of showing that, although it may not be theoretically accurate, it is the best practical measure of the value of a dock in a particular parish. That was the conclusion arrived at by the Court in Reg. v. Hull Dock Co. (z) ; but there all the judges admitted that it was not the plan which ought to be adopted if you were able to ascertain what were the earnings of the docks in the particular parishes ; that you only resorted to it from necessity because it was not possible to ascertain the earn- ings of the particular docks, and so arrive at their rateable value. "At a later date the case of Mersey Docks v. Liverpool (a) came before the Courts, and the Court of Queen's Bench, 0) 18 Q.B. 325 ; 21 L.J.M.C. 153 ; 16 Jur. 543. (a) L.R. 7 Q.B. 643 ; 41 L.J.M.C. 161 ; 26 L.T. 868 ; 20 W.R. 827. 174 A Code of the Laic of Rating. differently constituted no doubt from the Court which decided the Hull Case (b), held that the method which had been sanc- tioned in that case was not to be applied in the case of the Liverpool and Birkenhead Docks. The learned judges there came to the conclusion that the method which the Queen's Bench indeed had pronounced theoretically incorrect, and had only practically employed because it was impossible otherwise to arrive at the rateable value, was a wrong one ; and they con- sidered that there was no real difficulty in arriving at the true result by looking to see what proportion of the dock earn- ings was attributable to a particular part of the dock system, dependent as that would be upon the amount of traffic which went to one set of docks as compared with another. . . . Between the Mersey Docks Case (c) and the case now before your lordships I am unable to see the slightest distinction. If we decide this case as the appellants ask us to do, we inevitably overrule the Mersey Docks Case. My lords, I am not prepared to do so. I think the decision in the Mersey Docks Case was right, and I am quite ready myself to adhere to it in all respects." nocks coin- It had been held in Reg. v. Hull Docks Co. (d), to which municatincr with each other, Lord Hersehell referred, that the earning of docks, communi- but situate m ° d an ? shes eating with each other, but situate in several parishes, were to be apportioned among the several parishes in proportion to the areas of the docks, etc., respectively within such parishes. Lord Campbell, C.J., said : " The tolls are paid in respect of the use of the land in all the parishes. They may be received in any one of the parishes, but the land in all is equally the meritorious source of the profit. The case entirely differs from a railway, where the toll is paid for the power of travelling over a parti- cular portion of the whole line ; whereas in these docks a person who has paid the toll has the right of taking his ship to any other of the docks just as much as he has to take it to that in which the ship has entered. There is, therefore, only one single meritorious cause of the toll, and that being situate in different (6) Supra. (c) Supra. (d) 18 Q.B. 325 ; 21 L.J.M.C. 153 ; 16 Jur. 543. Rating of Docks and Harbours. 175 parishes, the parochial earnings principle cannot be applied. We must see how much of the docks lies in each parish." The principle here laid down was restricted by the decision in Mersey Docks v. Liverpool (e), which was approved by the House of Lords in Sculcoates Union v. Kingston-upon-Hull Docks. (/) In the Mersey Docks Case the docks were not all close together, but the river Mersey divided the two sets of docks. They were, however, under one management, and con- stituted one estate. Certain rates were charged to the vessels entering any one of the docks ; and a vessel, having paid for entering one of the docks, could use any of the docks of the same class on either side of the river, or of a higher class by paying the difference. The Court held, that in rating to the poor the docks on the Liverpool side of the Mersey, they were not to be treated as one system of docks with those on the Birkenhead side ; but the earnings and outgoings of each set of docks must be kept distinct, and the Liverpool docks rated according to the net earnings on that side. Cockburn, C.J., said : " The Hull Docks Case (g) undoubtedly establishes this, that where there is a series of docks all lying contiguous to one another, and forming part of one entire concern, and toll is taken for the right to enter into and have the benefit of any of that series or general system of docks and dock accommodation, you cannot apply the parochial system of rating, but you must have recourse to the acreage principle. But the language of all the judges in that case, I think, goes entirely to this, that you are not to resort to the acreage principle except ex necessi- tate, where you really cannot apply the other. If this case were on all fours with the Hull Dock Case, I do not know, as it has stood for eighteen years, that it would be right to overrule it, certainly not without further consideration. But this case appears to me to be plainly distinguishable, as the docks on the one side and the other of the Mersey do not appear to me to come within the designation of one series or system of docks. It is true that by the Act of Parliament these docks, which are (e) L.R. 7 Q.B. 643 ; 41 L.J.M.C. 161 ; 26 L.T. 868 ; 20 W.B. 827. if) Supra. (g) Supra. 176 A Code of the Laic of Eating. essentially distinct and separate, are to be treated as one for the purpose of general management and for the financial operations connected with this property. Bnt that does not appear to me to alter that which, in the yery nature of things, is separate and distinct. Although for certain purposes they may be treated as one estate, in truth they are two estates, and the docks on the Cheshire side of the water can no more be said to be the same estate as the docks on the Liverpool side than two private estates, though under one management, can be said to be one estate. The people in Liverpool have a perfect right to the contribution to the local burdens of this property according to the value of the property on the Liverpool side. The docks extend into more than one parish on the Liverpool side ; and so far as the docks on the Liverpool side are concerned, the principle in the Hull Dock Case may apply. But it seems to me we are not in the present case called upon to resort to the Acreage acreage system, which is an objectionable one, and only to be objectionable- resor ted to in case of necessity. There is no occasion to apply only to be J rr J If^tfsi'f'ate. it here. Although there might be some difficulty in detail, yet there is no insuperable difficulty in ascertaining what proportion of the earnings of these two docks is due to the docks on the one side of the river, or due to the docks on the other side of the river. Therefore there is no necessity to have recourse to the acreage principle." Deduction for floating capital, ARTICLE 68. -In assessing a dock company to poor-rate, a deduction must be made for all things in the nature of floating capital. steam-tug Expenses of This question was raised in Reg. v. Southampton. Dock Co. {h), where a deduction was made for the expenses of a steam-tug used in connection with the docks. The Court held that such deduction was rightly made. Lord Campbell, C.J., said : " The case finds that the company, being empowered by their Act of Parliament to provide out of their income steam-tugs for the purpose of towing any vessels into or out of the docks .... did employ for this purpose the steam-tug in question, ' which {h) U Q.B. 587 ; 20 L.J.M.C. 155 ; 15 Jur. 268. Bating of Docks and Harbours. 177 offers considerable advantage to those who use the docks, and may be fairly considered as an useful appendage to the docks, and conducive to the general profits of the concern, although it was not indispensably necessary, inasmuch as the duty might have been done by hiring the steamboats at Southampton for each occasion, but at less advantage and convenience both to the company and the public using the docks.' We think that upon this statement the steam-tug must be taken to be ancillary to the docks, and part of the floating capital used in carrying on this concern." The question of deduction under the head of floating capital has already been dealt with in connection with the rating of railways. (/*) ARTICLE 69.— Where premises are used in con- premises used _ _ . . in connection nection with docks, and are capable of a beneficial with docks rateable apart occupation, they are rateable separately and apart from them. from the docks, and as enhanced in value by reason of their proximity to and connection with the docks. This question arose in the case of Mersey Docks and Harbour Wheredock8 Board v. Birkenhead (k), where the docks themselves produced ^fit* 06 3 no profit. The Dock and Harbour Board were the owners and occupiers of docks, and of warehouses, workshops, sheds, etc., connected with the docks. They were compelled by their special Act to keep up the docks ; the working expenses of the subject of the rate, taken as a whole, necessary to maintain the property in a condition to produce the income derived from it, exceeded the income, the chief expense being the keeping up the docks and basin. The premises connected with the docks were each capable of separate beneficial occupation apart from their connection with the docks ; but each was enhanced in value by reason of its proximity to and connection with the docks. The Court held that, as each subject was capable of beneficial occupation, it was therefore rateable, notwithstanding (*) Ante p. 116. (/.•) L.R. 8 Q.B. 445 : 42 L.J.M.C. 141 ; 29 L.T. 454 ; 21 W.R. 913. 12 178 A Code of the Late of Mating. its connection with the docks, which, as a whole, produced no profit ; and that they ought to be rated at the enhanced value, which was what a tenant from year to year would be expected to give for them. value of ware- Blackburn, J., said: "The Act of Parliament does not say house enhanced todocte mity t na t * ne warehouses and docks are all to be occupied together. The words of the Act do not put it in that way at all ; and the nature of the thing does not do so, because it is quite obvious to any one who considers it for a moment that a warehouse may be, and in fact in many cases is, let to a tenant who occupies it, wholly irrespective of keeping up the docks at all." Further on the same learned judge said : " If you were letting one of the warehouses (supposing the docks to be already let) to the highest bidder, the person who offered the highest rent would take into account the proximity of the warehouse to the docks, and would not ask how the docks were to be managed, or whether the rates to be received were more than the rent of the docks or less ; he would not inquire into that at all ; he would say, ' I agree to give such a rent for the warehouse because it is close to the docks, and I expect to make a trade from it.' " Machinery attached to dock. ARTICLE 70.— In assessing a dock company to poor-rate, machinery attached to the freehold and essential to the business of the company must be taken into account. So held in Reg. v. Southampton Dock Co. (/) has already been fully dealt with. (»>) This subject Exclusive occupation. ARTICLE 71.— Where a dock or harbour com- pany has parted with the exclusive occupation of part of its property, it is not liable to be rated in respect of such part. The subject of " exclusive occupation " has already been thoroughly discussed, (h) (0 4 Q.B. 587 ; 20 L.J.M.C. 155 ; 15 Jur. 268. (m) Article 8, ante p. 36. (//) Article 6, ante p. 20 and p. 22. Bating of Bocks and Harbours. 179 Questions have, however, arisen in connection with the rating ^,^^ av of tramways used to connect docks with railways. In Sutton Jggjjf Harbour Improvement Co. v. Plymouth (o) a claim was made by the Guardians of the Toor of Plymouth to take into account, in ascertaining the rateable value of Sutton Pool, the rent received by the Sutton Harbour Improvement Company from the London and South- Western Railway Company for the use of certain tramways constructed by the harbour company, but worked, managed, and maintained exclusively by the railway company, subject to the berthing, loading, and unloading of ships by the harbour company alongside the cmay and the lawful duties of the harbour master for the time being. The Court held that the South- Western Pi-ailway Company, and not the harbour company, were the proper persons to be rated. (o) 63 L.T. 772 ; 55 J.P. 232. 12 a 180 TITLE VI. RATING OF MOORINGS, FLOATING PIERS, FERRIES, NAVIGABLE RIVERS, AND BRIDGES. Moorings- ARTICLE 72.— An occupier of moorings is when rateable. j_ i -i ■ ,1 n rateable in respect thereof when such occupier must be treated as being in occupation of a part of the soil and bed of the river. The question of the rateability of moorings has been before the Court on several occasions and the law must be considered to have been finally settled by the House of Lords in the case of Cory v. Bristow. (a) The Conservators of the River Thames, in exercise of the powers vested in them, gave permission to the appellants, to lay down moorings, attached to which they might place a derrick hulk, on condition that the accommodation be assessed and the rent paid thereon, and that the hulk be not used for the purpose of storing coals. The Conservators reserved to themselves, under clause 91 of their special Act, power to remove the hulk at a week's notice. The derrick hulk was held in its position by chain cables from anchors set in large stones placed in a hole in the river. The hole was filled up, to the level of the bed of the river, with ballast, which was made to lie all round and over the anchor, the chain cables from the anchors being led up through the ballast. The derricks could not weigh the moorings as ships weigh anchors, but could only move from them by casting off the cables and leaving the anchors and («) 2 A.C. 262 ; 46 L.J.M.C. 273 ; 36 L.T. 595 ; 25 W.R. 383. Rating of Moorings. 181 stones behind. The House of Lords held that the appellants were liable to be rated to the relief of the poor of the parish (within which lay that part of the river where the derrick hulk was moored) in respect of the profit derived by them from its employment, as they must be treated as persons in occupation of a part of the soil and bed of the river. The Lord Chancellor said : " Putting aside the words and looking at the real substance of the transaction, I cannot look upon it as otherwise than an exercise on the part of the Conservators of their Parliamentary powers, by giving to the appellants a right to lay down these moorings, and also a right, after the moorings are laid down, to occupy them through the instrumentality of this derrick, until, in the exercise of the same Parliamentary powers, and upon a week's notice being given, the Conservators shall remove them from their occupation. " Therefore it seems to me that your lordships have here a fixed property found in the occupation of the appellants, to an occupation of which fixed property no person else can set up any claim, and that done under an exercise by the Conservators of powers which appear to me to provide for and to authorize, if it were necessary to find authority for it, an occupation of that particular kind." In an earlier case, Wathins v. MiUon-next-Qravesend{b), the where occupier only has a Conservators of the Thames, who were the owners of the j™ *» is not soil and bed of the river and of the moorings fixed to the soil of the river, granted the appellant " liberty and licence to fasten, and thenceforth keep fastened, his coal hulk to the moorings placed by the Conservators in the river, until either party shall have given to the other one calender month's notice in writing." In consideration whereof the appellant agreed "to pay towards the expenses of placing and maintaining and repairing the moorings the annual sum of £30." The Court held that the above document did not constitute a demise, but only granted the appellant a licence to use the moorings, and that he was therefore not the occupier and not liable to be rated. (6) L.R. 3 Q.B. 350 ; 37 L.J.M.C. 73 ; 18 L.T. 601 ; 16 W.E. 1059. Floating piers, barg-es, docks. 182 A Code of the Law of Rating. This case was followed in Cory v. Greenwich (c), where the appellants were possessed of a derrick for loading and unloading coals. The derrick was moored, under a licence from the Conservators of the Thames, by two single-fluked anchors on the side nearest the shore, by two stones on the channel side, and by two stream-anchors, one at the head and the other at the stern. The anchors and stones (which • could be hauled on board by the machinery of the derrick) were merely dropped into the river, no force being used for the purpose of fastening them. The derrick was always afloat and could be moved to any part of the river at the instance of the Conservators. The Court again held as a fact that the appellants were not the occupiers and therefore not liable to be rated. ARTICLE 73. — Occupiers of floating piers, barges, or floating docks, are rateable where there is a permanent occupation of the soil. Landing pier. So held in Reg. v. Forrest, (d) The appellants were rated for land occupied by the platform, etc., used as a pier for landing and embarking steamboat passengers. The pier consisted of two barges kept in their places by iron chain cables fastened to iron anchors placed in the bed of the river, and by an iron chain from one of the barges to a staple fixed in the stonework of certain stairs used as a public shipping and landing place. The barge which was nearest to the stairs floated at high water, but at low water rested on blocks fixed in the bed of the river for that purpose ; the other barge was always afloat. A moveable platform extended from the stairs to the first barge, and another moveable platform connected the two barges together. The whole had been used as a pier since 1843, and the stairs and the land over which the barges and platforms were placed were in the parish that rated the appellants. Lord Campbell, C.J., held that (c) L.E. 7 C.P. 499 ; 41 L.J.M.C. 142 ; 27 L.T. 150. (d) 8 E. & B. 890 ; 27 L.J.M.C. 96 ; 4 Jur. N.S. 480. Rating of Floating Piers, etc. 183 there was a permanent and profitable occupation of the soil, and that the appellants were rateable. It is always a question of fact whether there is an occupation Floating x • • barges. oi the soil. In Beg. v. Leith (e) a company were rated in respect of their floating pier or landing-place. The pier consisted of three floating barges, boarded over and kept in their places by chain cables fastened to anchors sunk in the bed of the river ; the barges were connected by wooden bridges, the first bridge resting on the first barge at one end, and at the other end being fastened to a platform resting upon an abutment attached and made fast to the wall of a building on the shore. Both bridges and barges rose and fell with the tide. The Court held that the floating barges were properly included in a rate upon the landing-place and premises, by which the occupation of the land was rendered more profitable. In this case the Court did not decide that the barges, by themselves, were rateable. In Reg. v. Morrison (f) it was decided that a floating dock Floating dock, connected with a shipbuilding yard by mooring chains, but which could be easily separated from it, did not enhance the value of the yard. Lord Campbell, C.J., said : " This floating dock exactly resembles a ship at anchor, which occasionally grounds when the tide ebbs, and which may be approached either by a boat or a plank. It has no necessary connection Avith the yard. The two might easily be in the separate occupation of different shipwrights, carrying on business separately, and the accidental proximity of the one to the other is for this purpose immaterial. . . . This does not appear to us to come within any of the cases in which it has been held that the rateable value of real property may be enhanced by circumstances which increase its profitable value to the occupier. The decisions respecting machinery and other fixtures of course can have no application." The question of the rateability of floating barges again came oxford before the Court in Grant v. Oxford Local Board, (g) The barge. (Y) 1 E. & B. 121 ; '21 L.J.M.C. 119. (/) 1 E. & B. 150 ; 22 L.J.M.C. 14. (g) L.R. 4 Q.B 9 ; 33 L.J.M.C. 39 ; 19 L.T. 378 ; 17 W.R. 7G. 18-1 A Code of the Lair of Reding. Oxford University Boat Club possessed a barge which was moored to two posts fixed to the soil of the river by means of two iron rings attached to the barge, and which passed loosely round the posts so as to allow the barge to rise and fall with the water of the river ; when the water was very low the barge rested on the soil, which was owned by the corporation. The posts were driven into the soil twenty years before this case arose, and had always been so used by the boat club, but without the licence of the corporation or of any one else. There was no evidence by whom or by whose authority the posts had been first placed in the river, and no rent had ever been paid by any one for their use. The Court held that the University Boat Club were not rateable as there was no proof of occupation by them, as of right. Cockburn, C.J., said : " It appears to me in this case the proof of occupation altogether fails ; and it is, therefore, unnecessary to consider whether, if it had been established that the boat club were occupiers, it would follow that this particular description of landing-place and means of access from the shore to the barge, and the barge with it, were rateable or not ; it is unnecessary to decide that. It seems to me that there is nothing to shew that the posts are not at the present moment in the occupation of the owners of the soil. . . . There does not seem to be any exclusive occupation in the club, and inasmuch as exclusive occupation must necessarily be the foundation of their rateability, it seems to me it would be wrong in this case to say that this property in their hands is capable of being rated." This question came recently before the Court of Appeal pontoon. j n C0nnec tj 0n w ith the rating of a pontoon which was used as a landing stage. (A) The railway company owned a pontoon which they used for a landing stage for a steam ferry across a tidal river. The pontoon floated, except at low tide when it rested upon the mud of the foreshore. It was moored to a pier by the licence of the corporation, by means of mooring chains. In order to protect the piles of (//) Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire Railway v. Kingston- iqjon-Hull, 75 L.T. 127 ; W.N., 18%, p. 71 : 60 J.P. 789. Floating Bating of Floating Piers, etc. 185 the pier from being damaged by the movement of the chains the railway company had driven a pile into the bed of the river. This pile was bolted to the pier, but was the property of the railway company. The chain from the pontoon passed round this pile to reach the pile of the pier. The Court of Appeal held that the company were not in occupation of land so as to make them rateable to the poor. Lord Esher, M.1L, said : " There is merely a temporary use of the water by the pontoon in the same way as ships use the space in the water which they happen to occupy. Neither is their any occupation of the land by means of the chains. The pontoon is moored in front of the pier, not under any binding agreement, but merely at the licence of the Coloration of Hull. The corporation may at any moment order the pontoon to let go the chains by which she is moored to the pier. I am therefore of opinion that as a matter of fad there is no occupation by the railway company of any portion of land by any of the means suggested which renders them liable to be rated." From this judgment it is clear that in every case it is a Question of fact question of fact. Is there or is there not an occupation of the soil of the river ? If there is the floating pier or barge is rateable. ARTICLE 74.— Piers which extend into the sea piers beyond below low water-mark are not rateable to the ™rk. a e poor for the part beyond low water-mark. This was decided in Blackpool Pier Co. v. Fyhle Union («), in which case it was sought to rate a pier company for the part of the pier below low water-mark on the ground that it was extra-parochial, and therefore rateable within 31 & 32 Vict., c. 122, section 27. The Court decided that the section did not apply as the part of the pier below low water-mark was not extra-parochial within the said section, nor was it an accretion from the sea. 0) 46 L.J.M.C. 189 ; 3G L.T. 251. in every case. 186 A Code of the Law of Rating. pier between Where a parish seeks to rate a portion of a pier between water-mark. high and low water-mark, such parish must give evidence Midstream of ° _ ...,.,., river is that such portion of the pier lies within the parish, (k) In boundary or x *■ i. \ / parish. ^he case of a river, midstream is prima facie the boundary of the parish. (/) eating of ferry. ARTICLE 75.— The landing-place of a ferry must be rated according to its value as enhanced by being available for the purpose of earning tolls. In Reg. v. North and South Shields Ferry Co. (m), a company was empowered by Act of Parliament to establish a ferry over the river Tyne, where it is public, tidal, and navigable, and to make landing-places on each side of the river, and to take certain tolls from persons passing over the ferry. The bed of the river below low water mark is in the parish of St. Nicholas, and the landing-places in the respective town- ships of North Shields and South Shields. The ferry boats, worked by steam, did not always pursue the same track in crossing, and were, while afloat, in the parish of St. Nicholas. The tolls were collected at the landing-place in South Shields. The company were rated as occupiers of " a ferry, landing, and tolls " in North Shields at half the net annual profit of the tolls, after making proper deductions. The Court held that the tolls could not be rated directly as appurtenant to the landing-places, or indirectly as profit earned by the use of the landing-places ; further, that the rate ought properly to be laid on the landing-place in North Shields according to its value as enhanced by being available for the purpose of Mileage earning tolls ; that the mileage principle was not applicable, applicable! 011 and that a proportion of the profits could not be assessed on the two landing-places according to the proportion which their dimensions bore to the length of the transit over the river. Lord Campbell, C. J., said : " We think that in the present case, in rating the landing-place, the profit of the (Jc) Reg. v. Musscm, 8 E. & B. 900 ; 27 L.J.M.C. 100. (I) McCarmon v. Sinclair, 2 E. & E. 53 ; 28 L.J.M.C. 247 ; 5 Jur. N.S. 1302. (m) 1 E. & B. 140 ; 22 L.J.M.C. 9 ; 17 Jur. 181. Rating of Ferric*. 187 tolls cannot properly be brought into the calculation as the profits of the occupation of the landing-place, which is, in effect, done by the rate. On the other hand, the existence of the tolls cannot be wholly excluded from consideration ; but the land should be rated, not, as land in that situation, without reference to the tolls at all, but according to the principle relied on by the respondents in the second branch of their argument ; and the value should be taken, not as the value of the land merely, but as the value of the land as enhanced by being available for the purpose of earning Enhanced value . . . . of the land. the tolls. This appears to be the true principle according to the test laid down in the Parochial Assessment Act, as it would be the rent that could be obtained, and which the company would have to pay for the land, for the purpose for which it is available under the circumstances." The question of the rating the tolls of ferries had been Toils of femes - 1 ° not rateable. before the Court as long ago as 1810 in Rex v. Nicholson. (•») In that case it was held that the lessee and occupier of an ancient and exclusive ferry, not being an inhabitant resident within the township in which one of the termini of the ferry is situated, was not liable to be rated there for any share of the tolls of such ferry. In giving judgment Lord Ellenborough, C.J., said : " There is no case where tolls detached altogether from real property have been held to be rateable per se. When, therefore, we are called upon to decide such a question for the first time, I am always disposed to go to the fountain- head, which is the Act of the 43 Elizabeth ; and looking at the words of that Act, I do not find any of them which extend to rate any person not being an inhabitant of the place, nor the occupier of any of the specific kinds of property mentioned in the Act. And not finding any description in the statute which applies to the case of this appellant, I cannot hold him to be rateable for these tolls." The case of Williams v. Jones (o) was governed by the judgment in the previous case. In that case it was decided that the owner of a ferry residing in a different parish, but 0) 12 East 330. (o) 12 East 34G. rivers. 188 A Code of the Law of Reding. taking the profits of the ferry on the spot by his servants and agents, was not rateable for snch tolls in the parish where they were so collected, and where one of the termini of the ferry was situated, although the ferry-boats were secured by means of a post in the soil. Navigable ARTICLE 76.— Persons authorised to render a river navigable are not liable to be rated to the poor for land taken for the purpose of the naviga- tion unless they are the exclusive occupiers of the bed of the river. The subject of " exclusive occupation " has already been dealt with, (p) The principle holds good generally that no person can be rated in respect of an easement ; and this is all that is conferred on river navigation companies by their special Acts of Parliament. It would be otherwise if they had the exclusive occupation of the bed of the river, (e/) The leading case is Rex v. Mersey and Incell Navigation Co. (r) This was followed in Rex v. Thomas (s), and Rex v. The Aire aitd ('aider Navigation Co. (t), and quite recently by the House of Lords in Doncaster Union v. Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire Radical/ Co. (u) In the last-named case the predecessors in title of the railway company were empowered by statute to scour, enlarge and deepen, and otherwise improve the navigation of the river Dun, and to make a towing-path. The House of Lords decided that the company were not in occupation of the bed of the river, but had merely an easement ; further, that the ownership or exclusive occupation of the towing-path was not vested in them ; and that they were consequently not rateable in respect either of the bed of the river or of the towing-path. Lord Herschell, L.C., said : " My lords, the Court of King's Bench as long (p) Article 6, ante p. 20. (q) Bruce v. Willis, 11 A. & E. 463 ; 9 L.J.M.C. 43. (;■) 9 B. & C. 95. Ante p. 28. (s) 9 B. & C. 114. (/) 9 B. & C. 820. (w) (1895) A.C. 133 (note) ; 71 L.T. 585 ; 6 1!. 280. Rating of Navigable Rivers. 189 ago as the year 1829, in respect of the rivers Mersey and Irwell, which there was power to cleanse and improve in a similar manner to the river Dim, held (x) that the Mersey and Irwell Navigation Company, in whom the powers and duties relating to those rivers were vested, were not liable in respect of the natural bed of the river — that they were not the occupiers of it, but were only possessed of an easement. That decision was followed in a variety of cases relating to persons having similar powers of improving the navigation of natural rivers to those which are possessed by the respondents in the present case and were possessed by their predecessors, and I see no reason to doubt the correctness of those decisions. The Act which gave these powers of improving the river did not vest the natural bed of the river in the undertakers so as to make them occupiers of the same." In Rex v. Aire and Colder Navigation (y) it was decided Dam not rateable. that persons in whom the navigation of the river is vested, but who have no interest in the soil, are not rateable to the poor for a dam which upholds the water of such river, and renders it navigable. In a third case of Rex v. Aire and Colder Naviqation (z) compensation ^ v ' for loss ot the owners of mills in the township of Hunslet, in the water - borough of Leeds, in compensation for the loss of water occasioned to them within the township by an adjoining navigation, were allowed, by Act of Parliament, to take certain tolls at a lock, situate on the line of navigation, bat in a different township. Lord Tenterden, C.J., held that they could not be rated in respect of the tolls so received. ARTICLE 77.— Proprietors of bridges are rate- R atir, g0 f able in respect of the tolls received by them. bridges. They are rated in a manner similar to that in which railway companies are rated (a), by taking the gross receipts (x) Rex. v. Mersey and Irwell Navigation. Supra. \y) 3 B. & Ad. 139. (s) 3 B. & Ad. 533. (a) Ante p. 90. Owner of hind 190 A Code of the Law of Rating. as the basis of the rate, and making similar deductions for working expenses, tenant's profits, repairs, etc. It was decided in Rex v. Eyre (b) that the lessee of the tolls of a bridge was not rateable. The reasons given were unsatisfactory and the case has not been followed. In Rex v. Barnes (c) a bridge was erected over a navigable SSdritaTtof 8 river pursuant to the provisions of an Act of Parliament. - The proprietors purchased on each side of the river, in the parishes of Fulham and Barnes, land on which they erected a pier and an abutment. They were authorised to erect toll-gates, and to take certain tolls before any foot passengers, etc., should be permitted to pass or return over or through the bridge. The proprietors took tolls on one side of the bridge only, in the parish of Fulham. The Court held that they were rateable to the relief of the poor for land occupied by them in the parish of Barnes. Bayley, J., said: "This is a very clear case. The proprietor of land is liable to be rated to the relief of the poor in the parish where the land lies. The Hammersmith Company have, in the parish of Barnes, land used by them for the purpose of facilitating the passage over the Thames, and they are entitled to receive from all persons passing over their bridge certain tolls. Then what is the character of their occupation occupation of that land ? It is a valuable occupation in valuable. r respect of the money which the land produces to the company, by being appropriated to the purpose of facilitating the passage over the Thames, for which passage they receive tolls. The quantum is a question for the Sessions. All that we decide is, that the land is rateable property in the place where it is situate. There the profit is earned, though the money may be actually received elsewhere." This case was followed in Reg. v. Salisbury (d), and Reg. v. Paynter. (e) (b) 12 East 416. (c) 1 B. & Ad. 113. Id) 8 A. & E. 71(3. (e) 7 Q.B. 255 ; 14 L.J.M.C. 179 ; 9 Jur. 877. Rating of Bridges. 191 In Reg. v. Blackfriars Bridge Co.(f), where the tolls raised where toils ar were absorbed by the working expenses and the payment of working expenses and interest to mortgagees, the company was nevertheless held interest to ° ° A " mortgagees. rateable to the relief of the poor in respect of the bridge and land occupied by it. Littledale, J., said : " The case is not distinguishable from that of a private person, who builds a bridge on his land for the public benefit, and, in order to reimburse himself the expense of the work, procures an Act of Parliament to enable him to take toll for that purpose ; there land would be occupied, and, so long as the toll was taken, beneficially occupied ; and, after the party was re- imbursed, the toll would cease and the bridge become public and free ; yet the land would no doubt be rateable so long as the toll was received ; and it would be no answer that the owner was only repaying himself, or receiving interest on his outlay." Proprietors of a bridge would not be rateable if the Bridge open bridge were open free, for there would then be no beneficial rateaSe. occupation, (g) ARTICLE 78.— Where a bridge is situate hi Apportionment. more than one parish the rateable value of the bridge must be apportioned according to the length of the bridge in each parish. So decided in Beg. v. Hammersmith Bridge Co. (h) The Hammersmith Bridge Company were empowered to erect a bridge across the Thames from the parish of Fulham to the parish of Barnes and to make proper roads and approaches thereto, communicating with the high roads on each side of the river, and to take certain tolls for the bridge and approaches. It was also enacted that the half of the bridge adjoining the parish of Fulham should be deemed to be in the parish of Fulham, and the other half in the parish of Barnes. The company received the tolls at one gate, in the (/) 9 A. & E. 828. (g) Hare v. Putney, 7 Q.B.D. 223 ; 50 L.J.M.C. 81 ; 45 L.T. 337 ; 29 W.R. 721 ; 46 J.P. 100. (//) 15 Q.B. 369 ; 18 L.J.M.C. 85 ; 13 Jur. 190. 192 A Code of the Lair of Rating. parish of Fulham. The length of the approaches in Fnlhani was 678 yards, and of those in Barnes 5,328 yards. It was held that the net rateable value ought to be apportioned between the two parishes in the ratio of the value produced by the bridge in eacli parish, i.e., according to the length of the bridge in each parish, which was in this case in equal moieties. Lord Dennian, C.J., said : " The bridge itself is the direct source of the rateable value, the passage over the bridge being that which is paid for : the approaches indirectly conduce to that production and would probably be valueless if the bridge was taken away. The bridge, then, being the direct source of rateable value, and the net rateable value being duly ascertained, such net value is to be divided between the two parishes in which the bridge is situate in the ratio of the value produced in each parish. Now, as the value arises from the transit afforded by the bridge, and as every portion of the line of the bridge contributes equally to produce this value, the rateable value must therefore he- apportioned among the parishes according to the length of the bridge in each parish, which is here in equal moieties. The approaches stand in the same relation to the bridge as stations and warehouses to railways, reservoirs and wharfs to canals, aqueducts and mains to water supplies, gasometers and mains to gas burners. And the principle for dividing the direct and indirect sources and for apportioning the residuary net rateable value among the districts in which the direct source was situate was explained in Reg. v. Mile End Old To/en. (i) We would add that this judgment is confined to the apportionment of the net rateable value, which is assumed to be correctly obtained, and has no reference to any question as to the rateability of the approaches themselves." (h) (0 10 Q.B. 208; 1 i L.J.M.C. 184: 11 Jur. 9«8 ; Article 58, ante p. 150. (/■•) Compare judgment of Bayley, J., in Rex v. Lower Mitton, 9 B. & C. 810 ; Article 53, ante p. 142. 193 TITLE VIL RATING OF MINES, QUARRIES, PITS AND CEMETERIES. ARTICLE 79.— Occupiers of mines, quarries, ^* le pits, etc., are rateable to the relief of the poor. By the 43 Eliz., c. 2 (a), only coal mines were made rateable Mines. to the poor, but by the Rating Act, 1874 (37 & 38 Vict,, c. 54) (h) all mines are now rateable. Before the passing of the Rating Act, 1874, the question of the exemption of mines, other than coal mines, from rating, came before the House of Lords in the case of. Morgan v. Crawshay. (c) It was there held that as the Statute of Elizabeth only mentioned coal mines as liable to be rated, other mines were excluded by the rule expressio unius est exclusio altering. This was the view expressed in all the pre- ceding cases. Quarries, etc., were always held rateable though mines were Q ,iarries - not. (d) Whether the subject-matter be a mine or quarry is a question of fact for the Sessions ; in Rex v. Dumsford (e) the Court sent the case back to the Sessions to find whether the excavation was a mine or not. In Rex v. 8edgMy(f) Lord Tenterden, C.J., said that the distinction between a mine and a quarry was in the way they were worked. («) Appendix, p. 287. (b) Appendix, p. 440. (c) 5 H.L. E. & I. App. 304 ; 40 L.J.M.C. 202 ; 24 L.T. 889 : 20 W.E. 554. Vide also Lead Smelting Co. v. Richardson, 3 Burr. 1341. (d) Rex v. Woodland, 2 East 1G4 ; Rex v. Alderbury, 1 East 534. (e) 2 A. & E. 568. (/) 2 B. & Ad. 65. Vide also Rex v. Brettell, 3 B. & Ad. 424. 13 194 A Code of the Law of Rating. Coal mines rateable where no profit marie. Flooded mine. Deduction for repairs and renewals. Deductions for tenant's profits. Land and buildings used in connection with mines rateable. Coal mines are rateable at the rent at which they will let from year to year. The profits will be the basis of such rent as in the case of properties hereinbefore considered. Royalties payable must be taken into account (g), but the amount so paid is not conclusive, as the machinery, etc., already on the mine might induce a tenant to pay yearly more than the amount of the royalties. Coal mines are rateable even though no profit be made. This was decided in Rex v. Parroft (//), where Lord Kenyon, C.J., said : " Their objection is that they have made an unprofitable bargain with the lessor, but we cannot examine into that, it being sufficient to make them liable that they are occupiers of rateable property." In a later case, Re.r v. Bedicorth (?'), where a coal mine had ceased to be worked the lessee was held not rateable, although he had still to pay rent under his covenant. In the case of a coal mine which has been drowned out Lord Coleridge, C.J., and Grove, J., held that the occupiers were rateable for the surface lands occupied, but not in respect of the buildings, boilers, engine, railway, etc., which were only part of a valueless colliery, and were not shown to have any value apart from the colliery, (k) No deductions will be allowed for repairs and renewals in the case of coal mines, quarries, etc., because they become gradually exhausted and cannot be renewed. (7) Allowance should, however, be made for repairs and insurance of the plant used in connection with mines. In consequence of coal mines becoming gradually exhausted, a liberal deduction is made under the head of tenant's profits. Although mines, other than coal mines, were not rateable before the passing of the Eating Act, 1874, land, buildings, etc., accessory to or used in connection with mines were rateable. In the earliest case upon the subject, Rex v. BUston (m), an (g) Post p. 201. (h) 5 T.R. 593. (i) 8 East 387. (Jc) Tyne Coal Co. v. Wallsend, 46 L.J.M.C. 185 ; 35 L.T. 854. Ante p. 34. (J) Compare Coltness Iron Co. v. Black, 6 App. Cases 315 ; 51 L.J. Q.B. 626 ; 46 L.T. 145 ; 29 W.R. 717 ; 46 J.P. 20. (m) 5 B. & C. 851. Rating of Mine®, Quarries and Pits. 195 engine used to pump ont a mine was held not rateable, but this case was not followed. In Talargoch Mining Co. v. St, Asaph (»), where the mining company, for the purpose of working the machinery connected with a lead mine, diverted a stream from its natural course, paying the owners for such diversion, and paying certain small sums for the occupation of the land by the watercourse, the Court held that they were rightly rated in respect of the occupation of the watercourse at the value of the land enhanced by its capability of conveying water ; and that it was not exempt from rateability by reason of its connection with a lead mine. Later, in Kittow v. Liskeard Union (o), a mining company were held rateable in respect of buildings, machinery, tramways, etc., used in connection with a licence to dig for minerals. Lush, J., in the course of the argument, said: " The doctrine supposed to have been enunciated in Rex v. Bitston (p) as to the non-rateability of anything on the surface connected with a mine has long been repudiated." The ground of the decision of the Court (Blackburn, Mellor, and Lush, JJ.) was that there was an exclusive occupation of the buildings, engines, etc., and that the company were rateable in respect of such occupa- tion. In this case the decision in Guest v. East Dean (q) , which up to that time appears to have been misunderstood, was explained. It was decided in Thursby v. Brierelijfe and Enticistle (r) that coalmine is coal mines are not " land," but are " property (other than land) '^ff thaa rateable to the relief of the poor" within the meaning of section 33 of the Lighting and Watching Act, 1833, and are, therefore, liable to be rated under that section at the higher rate. Section 33 of the Lighting and Watching Act, 1833 (3 & 4 Will IV., c. 90) provides as follows : " The overseers aforesaid shall, for the purpose of collecting, raising and levying the rate necessary for the purposes of this Act, proceed in the same manner, and have the same powers, remedies and privileges, as for levying money for the relief of the poor in the said (n) L.R. 3 Q.B. 478 ; 9 B. & S. 210 ; 37 L.J.M.C. 149 ; 18 L.T. 711 ; 16 W.R. 860. (o) L.R. 10 Q.B. 7 ; 44 L.J.M.C. 23 ; 31 L.T. 601 ; 23 W.R. 72. (p) Supra. (?) L.R. 7 Q.B. 334 ; 41 L.J.M.C. 129 ; 26 L.T. 422 ; 20 W.R. 332. (r) (1895) A.C. 32 ; 64 L.J.M.C. 66 ; 71 L.T. 849 ; 59 J.P. 180 ; 11 R. 38. 13 a 196 A Code of the Law of Eating. parish ; provided always that owners and occupiers of houses, buildings, and property (other than land) rateable to the relief of the poor in any such parish, shall be rated at and pay a rate in the pound three times greater than that at which the owners and occupiers of land shall be rated at, and pay for the pur- poses of this Act." Tin, lead and copper mines. Section 7. Deductions from gross value. Gross and rateable value ARTICLE 80.— The gross and rateable value of tin, lead, and copper mines are calculated in accordance with sections 7 and 8 of the Rating Act, 1874 (37 & 38 Vict., c. 54). Section 7 enacts that " where a tin, lead, or copper mine is occupied under a lease or leases granted without fine, on a reservation wholly or partly of dues or rent, the gross value of the mine shall be taken to be the annual amount of the whole of the dues payable in respect thereof during the year ending December 81st, preceding the date at which the valuation list is made, in addition to the annual amount of any fixed rent reserved for the same which may not be paid or satisfied by such dues. The rateable annual value of such mine shall be the same as the gross value thereof, except that where the person receiving the dues or rent is liable for repairs, insurance, or other expenses necessary to maintain the mine in a state to command the annual amount of dues or rent, the average annual cost of repairs, insurance, and other expenses- for which he is so liable shall be deducted from the gross value for the purpose of calculating the rateable value. In the following cases, namely — ( 1 ) Where any mine is occupied under a lease granted wholly or partly on a fine ; and (2) Where any such mine is occupied and worked by the owner ; and (3) In the case of any other such mine which is not ex- cepted from the provisions of this Act, and to which the foregoing provisions of this section do not apply : the gross and rateable annual value of the mine shall be taken to be the annual amount of the dues or dues and rent at which Rating of Mines, Quarries and Pit*. 197 thf mine might be reasonably expected to let without fine on a lease of the ordinary duration according to the usage of the country, if the tenant undertook to pay all tenant's rates and taxes and tithe rent-charge, and also the repairs, insurance, and other expenses necessary to maintain the mine in a state to command such annual amount of dues or dues and rent." («) The term " mine " in section 7 includes " the underground Meaning of ° Mine. workings and the engines, machinery, workshops, tramways, and other plant, buildings (not being dwelling-houses), and works and surface of land occupied in connection with, and for the purposes of, the mine and situate within the boundaries of the land comprised in the lease or leases under which the dues or dues and rent are payable and reserved." Shortly after the Eating Act, 1874, came into operation, a works in case arose under the above definition. In Snailbeaeh Mine Co. union from mine. v. For den (t) the mining company occupied a tramway and smelting works in connection with the mine. The latter were in a different union from the mine. The Court decided that the tramway and smelting works were part of the mine within the above definition ; but that a deduction must be made from the gross dues in respect of the rateable premises which were situate out of the union, in order that the rateable value of the mine in the union in which it was rated might be ascertained. Section 8 enacts that "where any poor or other local rate Deduction by which, at the commencement of this Act any lessee, licensee, or one-naif of rate. grantee of a mine is exempt from being rated to in respect of such mine, becomes payable by him in respect of such mine during the continuance of his lease, grant, or license, or before the arrival of the period at which the amount of rent, royalty or dues is liable to revision or re-adjustment, he may (unless he has specifically contracted to pay such rate in the event of the abolition of the said exemption) deduct from any rent, royalty, or dues payable by him one-half of any such rate paid by him : provided that he shall not deduct any sum exceeding what one-half of the rate in the pound of such poor (s) Appendix, p. 442. (0 35L.T. 514. 198 A Code of the Law of Rating. General covenant to pay rates, taxes, etc. or other local rate would amount to if calculated upon the rent, royalty, or dues so payable by him." In Duke of Devonshire v. Barrow Hematite Steel Co. (a) it was decided that a covenant, in a lease of iron mines, to pay a certain rent " free of all rates, taxes, and deductions whatsoever, parliamentary, parochial, or of any other nature," is not " a specific contract to pay the poor-rate, in the event of the abolition of the exemption" within section 8 of the Rating Act, 1874. The lessee was therefore entitled under that section to deduct half the poor-rate from the rent. Cockburn, C.J., said : " I think that in order to exempt the lessor from the deduction of one-half the rate, the contract of demise must contain some specific reference to the possible abolition of the exemption by Parliament, and that where no such reference is inserted, and the language is general, as in the lease before us, it cannot be said that a specific contract exists within the meaning of the 8th section." Another case under the same section, Chaloner v. Botekou-{x), went to the House of Lords. A lease of an iron mine, made in 1855, and consequently exempt from poor-rate, contained covenants for the payment of certain rents and royalties ; and these payments were to be made free and clear of all rates and taxes imposed by Parliament or otherwise .... " free from all deductions whatsoever." There was also a covenant to pay " all manner of taxes, etc., which now are or which shall at any time hereafter, during the continuance of this demise, be im- posed," landlord's property tax excepted. It was held that under section 8 of the Rating Act, 1874, the tenant might deduct half of the rate from his rent, on the ground that he had not, within the words of the section, " specifically contracted " to pay such rate. Lord Hatherley said : " My lords, looking to the Act of Parliament, it is perfectly clear that you cannot find, in a general covenant to pay all rates and taxes, whether future or past, what the Legislature meant by the words ' specifically contracted ' to pay this particular tax. The strongest words in (u) 2 Q.B.D. 286 ; 46 L.J. Q.B. 435 ; 36 L.T. 355 ; 25 W.R. 469. (x) 3 App. Cases 933 ; 47 L.J. C.P. 562 ; 39 L.T. 134 ; 26 W.R. 541. Rating of Mines, Quarries and Pits. 199 the deed before us are these, ' will pay or cause to be paid all manner of taxes, rates, assessments, charges, and impositions whatsoever, parliamentary or parochial, which now are or which shall at any time or times hereafter during the continuance of this demise be taxed, rated, charged, assessed, or imposed upon the said demised mines and premises, the landlord's property tax only excepted.' Now I conceive it to be quite impossible reading through that clause to apply the word ' specifically ' to any part of it. ' Specific ' is ordinarily used in the common parlance of language as meaning distinct from general ; and when you find a general covenant to pay all rates I should think it is almost the opposite to a specific covenant to pay a particidar rate. And when the Legislature says, as it does here, that the case is intended to be excepted when it comes within these words, ' unless he has specifically contracted to pay such rate in the event of the abolition of the said exemption,' you cannot (I agree with Lord Justice Brett in this) find in these general words to pay ' all manner of taxes, rates, assessments,' and so on, anything that will correspond with the expression ' specifically contracted to pay such rate.' I leave out purposely for the moment ' in the event of the abolition of the said exemption ' ; but in reality that makes it somewhat stronger in favour of the construction which I feel myself bound to adopt of the words ' specifically contracted to pay such rate.' ' ARTICLE 81.— Where coal mines, quarries, etc., Conlmine have been improved by the addition of machinery, improved' etc., they are rateable at such improved value. This question was raised in Rex . v. Attirood. (>/) The lessee No allowance to he made for and occupier of a colliery had expended upwards of £10,000 in expenses planting the mine and setting it to work. The mine had been » mme - at work one year and a quarter. The value of the whole of the coal which had been raised from the mine did not exceed £5000. The full value of the annual produce of the mine, after (y) 6 B. & C. 277. 200 A Code of the Law of Eating. deducting the current expenses of working the same, amounted to the sum of £428 9s. It was contended that an allowance should have heen made for the amount expended in planting the mine. The Court decided that no such allowance should he made. Abbott, C J., said : " The other argument was, that the rate could not be imposed until the expense of planting the mine had been recouped. But I cannot discover any distinction between expenses incurred in bringing a mine to a productive state and in building a house. The attempt to distinguish them is perfectly novel, and if a house is to be rated as soon as built and occupied, it must follow that a coal mine is rateable as soon as it is set at work and produces coal, although it may happen that the expense of sinking it may never be recovered. If a tenant of a mine expends money in making it more productive, that is the same as expending money in improving a farm, or a house, in which case the tenant is rateable for the improved value." This case was followed by Rex v. Granville, (s) There the lessee of a coal mine, who was the occupier, had erected a steam-engine for working the mine, and a railway. He was held rightly rated at the improved annual value of the mine. Bayley, J., said : "I have no doubt that the defendant ought to be rated for his engines and railway. Whether the Sessions have made proper deductions we have not to decide. . . . If the owner had occupied the mine he would have been liable to be rated according to the improved value of the property ; and where the owner of a mine fixes an engine, or otherwise by expenditure of his capital, raises the value of his property, he will be rateable for the value of that property so improved by his expenditure. If it be leased to a tenant who is to incur the same expenditure of erecting an engine, the owner will receive a less royalty ; but as a greater quantity of coal will be raised, the tenant will be thereby remunerated for his expend- iture, and I think the tenant, being the occupier, is liable to be rated for such improved value." 0) 9 B. & C. 188. Bating of Mines, Quarries and Pits. 201 ARTICLE 82.~In estimating the rent which B o ya ity part a tenant from year to year would pay for a mine ofrent " or quarry the royalty must be taken into account as part of the rent. This question came before the Court, in connection with the Brickfield. rating of a brickfield, in Reg. v. Westbrook and Reg. v. Everest (a) which were heard together. It was held that in calculating the rateable value of a brickfield in any particular year, with reference to the Parochial Assessment Act (6 & 7 Will. IV., c. 96) (b), the royalty payable in respect of the number of bricks made, as well as the rent, must be taken into account, and neither the circumstance of the rapid exhaustion of the material, nor the casualties to which the article is subject in the process of manufacture, can affect the principle of the calculation. But if the sum for which it might be expected to let from year to year as a brickfield can be ascertained, such sum will be the true estimate of the annual value. The facts in Westbrook's case were as follows : One, Westbrook, rented a brickfield of ten acres at £2 per acre (without reference to the use made of the land), and was liable to pay to his landlord, a royalty of Is. 6d. Rate calculated per 1000 bricks moulded on such land. The Sessions confirmed royalty. a rate at a rateable value of £159 which they calculated on the amount of rent and royalty, making all proper deductions. They also found that the rent per acre which a tenant from year to year might be expected to give for the same field, with the liberty Of taking the brick earth, and without any liability to pay any royalty in respect of the number of bricks made, would be £10 per acre or £100. The Court held that the latter sum was the true criterion of the rate. In the second case, one, Everest, had rented a brickfield of 26 acres, under an agreement to pay 2s. 3d. per 1000 bricks made. It was admitted, that if the sum paid under the agreement was to be considered as a rent, £550 did not exceed the rateable value. In this case no statement was made as to (a) 10 Q.B. 178 ; 16 L.J.M.C. 87 ; 11 Jur. 515. (b) Appendix, p. 31 5. 202 A Code of the Law of Eating. what sum a tenant might be expected to give. The rateable value of ordinary agricultural land in the parish was £1 10s. per acre, and of garden ground £3 10s. per acre. The Court decided that none of these amounts gave the true rateable value ; but that the case must go back to the Sessions to ascertain from evidence,- upon the principles laid down, what a tenant would give within the meaning of the Parochial Assessment Act. In the course of a long considered judgment for both cases, Lord Denman, C. J., said : " But the next objection is a more important one : that it is altogether wrong in principle to consider the royalty as rent; and this appears to be founded mainly on this, that it is a sum paid not in respect of the renewing produce of the land, but of a portion of the land itself, and that not consumed by slow degrees, and to be exhausted at the end of a long period, as is the case with a coal mine, — under which circumstances it was admitted that it might be treated as produce, — but in such large proportions that the whole would in a few years be exhausted. It does not appear to us that the circunistance of a more or less rapid consumption can make any difference in the principle. The rate is always imposed with reference to the existing value, whether temporary or enduring is immaterial. A case was supposed of a brick- field worked out in less than a year, to meet the demand of some enormous contract for a public work ; the consequence would be that the land would have a very much increased value for the year, and it would be only reasonable that it should bear an increased rate for that year; in the following year its value might sink almost to nothing, and the rate ought to fall proportionately, even to nothing, if, the brick earth being exhausted, the land, like an exhausted coal mine, should become entirely unproductive. If this were not so an obvious injustice would be done to the ratepayers. Suppose two brickfields of the same size, which if worked so as to be consumed in ten years, and by equal working in each year, would produce £1000 each, on which the rate should be £10 ; in ten years each will contribute £ 100 to the parochial authorities : let one be ex- hausted in the first year, the produce will have been £10,000, but the rate only £10 for that year, according to the appellant's Rating of Mines, Quarries and Pits. 203 argument, and it may be nothing afterwards ; but, whatever it be afterwards, it is clear that there will have been a valuable occupation in one year escaping as to nine-tenths the rate entirely. But no injustice would be done if in every year the occupier could be assessed according to the actual value in that year, and it is the duty of the overseers to arrive as nearly at this as they can. The case of Hex v. Mirfield (e) was mentioned in the course of the argument ; the facts of that case are wholly unlike those of the present : the saleable underwoods there produced no profit, except in the twenty-first year : here there is nothing to show that equal profits may not arise in every year of the tenancy ; long or short, the term of tenancy is fixed on that assumption : the principle, however, of that decision is in accordance with what will be our conclusion. " We come, then, to the bare objection that the royalty is paid, not for the renewing produce of the land, but for severed portions of the land itself, mixed up with foreign matter. The expense, however, must of course have been cast off before the royalty itself was fixed ; that was a sum which, after all such expenses paid, the occupier could afford to render to the land- lord. When the case is thus laid bare there is no distinction between it and that of the lessee of coal mines, of clay pits, of slate quarries ; in all these the occupation is only valuable by removal of portions of the soil ; and whether the occupation is paid for in money or in kind — is fixed beforehand by contract, or measured afterwards by the actual produce — it is equally in substance a rent ; it is the compensation which the occupier pays the landlord for that species of occupation which the contract between them allows. This would not admit of an argument in an agricultural lease, where the tenant was to pay a certain portion of the produce : that would be admitted to be in all respects a rent-service with every incident to such a rent ; and in Daniel v. Grade (d) we held the same with regard to a marl pit and brick mine as the parties termed it, where the render was of so much per cubic yard of the marl dug, and so much per thousand of the bricks made. We are brought then to the (c) 10 East. 219. Post p. 214. (f/) 6 Q.B. 145 ; 13 L.J. Q.B. 309 ; 8 Jur. 708. 204 A Code of the Law of Rating. conclusion, that the parish officers have done right in considering Royalty a the royalty as a portion of the rent; and we see no objection to portion of rent. the mode by which they arrive prima facie at the conclusion, that the amount of royalty reckoned in the rate will be paid in the year for which the rate is made." Royalties or ARTICLE 83.~An owner or occupier of a rateWe? x mine who receives royalties or dues "in kind" is liable to be rated in respect thereof. This was the law before the Rating Act, 1874 (e) was passed, and section 13 of that Act preserves the old law by excepting from the statute mines of which the rent is payable " in kind." The most important of the old cases is Hex\. St. Austell (f), in which the earlier cases were reviewed. There the owner of the soil granted to adventurers full and free liberty to dig, mine, and search for tin, tin ore, etc., and to take and convert the same to their own use subject to their paying to him one full eighth share of all such tin, tin ore, etc. There was power to pay in ore, or the amount thereof in money. The owner had received payment in money. It was held that the owner was liable to be rated as an occupier of land in respect of his one- eighth share, as it was not in the nature of rent. The Court followed the decision in Hoick v. Gel Is (g), in which case it was held that the lessee (under the Crown) of lead mines was rateable to the poor for the profits arising from lot and cope, which were duties paid him by the adventurers. Lord Mansfield said: " The poor's rate is not a tax on the land, but a personal charge in respect of the land. The present is a personal charge by reason of the annual profits which the lessee of the Crown receives out of the land, and which is not charged at all before to the poor." Rent and ore AVhere rent and ore were reserved to the landlords under the lease it was sought to make them rateable on the authority of Howls v. Gclls. This question was raised in Hex v. Bishop of reserved. (e) Appendix, p. 440. (/") 5 B. & Aid. 6U3. Vide also Rex v. Baptistc Mill Co., 1 M. & S. 612 ; Rex v. St. Agnes, 3 T.R. 480. (g) Cowp. 451. Rating of Mines, Quarries and Pits. 205 Rochester (h) where certain lead mines and other minerals were leased subject to an animal rent and to certain proportions of the ore raised. No ore was actually raised, and as the rent was not rateable, it was held that the landlords could not be assessed to poor-rate. Lord Ellenborough said : " If hereafter the tenants should open the ground and raise ore, the trustee will then be entitled to certain proportions, and such profits may come within a different rule, as lot and cope ; upon which no question at present arises." Where ore in a manufactured state was reserved to the land- lord it was said to be rent and not rateable. (?) The case was distinguished from Rotrls v. Gells (k) as the lead, the mineral reserved, had to be smelted ; the Court held that the case came substantially within the decision in Rex v. Bishop of Roches ter.(J) Rex v. St. Austell (m) was followed in Reg. v. Todd (n) where One-fifth part of ore one-fifth part of the ore raised was reserved. It was stipulated raised reserved L j- — rateable. that the ore reserved should be well and sufficiently cleansed, dressed, and made merchantable and fit for the smelting mill. The case found that the ore, previous to being delivered to the owner, had to undergo a very laborious and expensive process in being dressed and made merchantable and fit for smelting, by which all foreign substances were separated from the ore, but the character of the ore was not otherwise altered. The Court held that the landlord was rateable in respect of his one-fifth as an occupier of land. The same question came before the Exchequer Chamber, in 1842, in the case of Crease v. Sawle (o), where it was held that tin ore payable by custom to the Duke of Cornwall by the mining adventurers was rateable to the relief of the poor in the hands of his lessee, although such lessee did not reside within the parish in which the mine was situate. In delivering the (h) 12 East 353. Vide also Rex v. Welbank, 4 M. & S. 222 ; Rex v. Cunningham, 5 East 478. (i) Rex v. Earl I of Pomfret, 5 M. & S. 139; Vide also Rex v. Tremayne, 4 B. & Ad. 162. (k) Supra. (I) Supra. (m) Supra. (n) 12 A. & E. 81G ; 10 L.J.M.C. 14 ; 5 Jur. 407. (o) 2 Q.B. 862 ; 11 L.J.M.C. 62. 206 . A Code of the Law of Rating. judgment of the Court, Tindal, C.J., said : " The Court of Queen's Bench, in giving judgment in favor of his [_i.e, the lessee's] liability, referring to the cases of Bowls v. Gells± Rex v. St. Agnes, Rev v. Baptiste Mill Co. and Bex v. St. Austell, expressed their opinion, that they were hound by the authority of cases so often and so deliberately considered, so long as they remained unreversed by a court of error. We feel that we are equally bound by the same authorities ; and important as it is in all branches of the law to abide by previous decisions, in none is it more important than in these cases." (p ) In Roads v. Trumpington (q), Blackburn, J., said, with reference to Bex v. St. Austell (r) : "The doctrine that the produce of mines can be rated, although mines cannot, is very peculiar, and rests upon authority alone." Decision since Since the Rating Act, 1874, the question has been again 1874. = raised in the case of the Van Mining Company v. Llanidloes (s), and Bex v. St. Austell (f) has been followed. A mining com- pany occupied a lead mine under a lease from the Marquis of Londonderry, who was to receive a royalty of a share of the minerals obtained, which at his option was payable in money. The company also occupied two other pieces of land, under separate leases from a different landlord, under one of which the royalty was payable wholly in money, and in the other partly in money and partly " in kind." The pieces of land in these two leases were not worked as mines. The Court (Bramwell, Mellor, and Denman, JJ.) held that Lord Londonderry was rightly rated in respect of the royalty reserved to him on the ground that the property occupied under the lease was of itself a mine within the meaning of section 13 of the Rating Act, 1874 ; and that as Lord Londonderry would have been chargeable before that statute in respect of the royalty " in kind," although he had the option to receive it in money, his (p) The judgment of the Queen's Bench will be found reported in 11 A. & E. 677 ; 9 L.J.M.C. 38. (q) L.R. 6 Q.B. 56 ; 40 L.J.M.C. 35 ; '23 L.T. 821. (r) 5 B. & Aid. 693. " (s) L.R. 1 Ex. D. 310 ; 45 L.J.M.C. 138 ; 34 L.T. 642. (0 5 B. & Aid. 693. Rating of Mines, Quarries and Pits. 207 liability was preserved by that clause. With respect to Rex nex v. st. . Auttell v. St. Austell, Mellor, J., said: "It is unnecessary to say followed, whether Rex v. St. Austell was at the time correctly decided, for it has been accepted as a binding authority and has firmly established a proposition of law adverse to the contention on behalf of the appellants ; and I have no doubt that the Legis- lature intended to except from the operation of the Act those mines where the royalty is paid wholly in kind, either without or with an option to the lessor to receive its value in money." ARTICLE 84.— Where a mine, quarry, or pit Mine, etc., m lies in several parishes it is rateable to the relief ™° e r parish. of the poor in each of those parishes although the pit, engines, and fixed machinery are in one parish only. This was decided in Rex v. Foleshill (u) when Lord Denman, C.J., said : " The argument is much too refined which says that the mine can only be in the parish in which the coal is brought to the surface. Suppose a coal mine extended into twenty parishes, and was being worked in one only, and the pit was in one of the parishes where no work was going on — could it be rated only in the parish where the pit was situate ? As to the difficulty of ascertaining the value in each parish, there is none here stated. The Sessions have ascertained it." Where by an inclosure Act it was declared that all the allotments to be set out to the several persons having right of common upon a moor, should be deemed to be situate within the same townships and places respectively, wherein the lands lay in respect of which such allotments should be made ; and where it was provided that nothing in the Act should affect the right of one Pitt, to certain coal mines under the said moor, the Court held that the coal mines under the allotments were rate- able to the relief of the poor in the parish in which they were actually situate, as they were before the Act passed, notwith- standing that the allotments became rateable elsewhere, (x) (u) 4 N. & M. 360 ; 2 A. & E. 593. Or) Rex v. Pitt, 5 B. & Ad. 565. 208 A Code of the Law of Mating. Smeltm; works in In a more recent case (//) where the smelting works forming different union part of the mine, and connected with it by a tramway, were from mine. L j j 1 situate in a different union from the mine, the Court held that a deduction must be made from the gross dues in respect of the rateable premises out of the union in which the mine was situate, in order to obtain the rateable value of the mine. Coprolites. Occupier held rateable for the whole although only in occupation of part at any- one time. ARTICLE 85.— A person who has the exclusive occupation of land for the purpose of digging for coprolites is rateable to the poor in respect thereof. This was decided in Roach v. Trumpington (z). It was agreed between A and B that A should forthwith enter upon B's land, and there dig for coprolites in a specified manner, and should effectually fence the excavations and complete them by a given time, and should reinstate the land, and then " yield and deliver up " the land to B. Blackburn, J., said : " These two para- graphs \j.e. of the agreement], by the words ' enter upon ' and i deliver up,' clearly show an intention by the trustees to give the right of occupation to the appellant from the time of entry upon the land until the time it was delivered up. The context does not cut down these words, but on the contrary, it fortifies the view that the agreement gives a right of exclusive occupa- tion." The appellant was held rateable. In another case, Reg. v. Wharf don (a), the occupier of land which he worked for coprolites was held rateable for the whole although he was never in occupation of more than a portion at any one time. The facts of the case were as follows : A, the owner of lands having coprolites in them, authorised B, to the exclusion of all other persons, to enter upon, hold, and use such lands for the purpose of digging and raising the coprolites. B consented to pay £115 for every acre, and to dig sufficient land to realise and pay A £1000 a year at the least, payable quarterly ; in case of not digging sufficient, B was nevertheless to pay £1000 (//) Snailbeach Mining Co. v. Forden, 35 L.T. 514. (z) L.R. 6 Q.B. 56 ; 40 L.J.M.C. 35 ; 23 L.T. 821. («) L.R. 10 Q.B. 230 ; 44 L.J.M.C. 33 ; 32 L.T. 633 ; 23 W.R. 653. Bating of Cemeteries. 209 per annum. B undertook to restore the surface soil and Wei the land after the coprolites had been dug out. In accordance with the agreement B dug ten acres in every year, at an average of two and a half acres per quarter. He was in possession of the ten acres during at least one whole year, but of these ten acres only about one-fourth was dug over and exhausted in each quarter, and one acre at least was always occupied by him for mills and tramways. Three acres and a half was the greatest quantity used by him at any one time for coprolite purposes, in- cluding mills, etc., and of the ten acres, six and a half, from which the coprolites had been raised, were unproductive. He was not necessarily in occupation of the same ten acres during all the year, nor during the whole of any quarter, as his occupation was perpetually shifting, and he was taking, from time to time, and yard by yard, fresh land at one end of his occupation and relinquishing it, as and when levelled at the other end. The value of the occupation by B of each acre of land for the purpose of raising coprolites was £115, and a hypothetical yearly tenant would give that for it. The value was only realisable once. The period from the time the coprolites were raised from any land until the land was levelled and restored by B to the agricultural tenant varied from one to two years, but was never less than one year. The rates in Whaddon were made quarterly. The Court (Mellor, Lush, Archibald, JJ. ; Cockburn, C.J., dissenting) held that B ought to be rated in each quarterly rate in respect of ten acres at their enhanced or coprolite value. .'emeteries- ARTICLE 86.— Cemeteries are rateable and the Ce profits must be taken into account in assessing iathlgof - the rateable value. This question arose shortly after the Parochial Assessment cemetery a l • n . /7\t assessed upon Act was passed m Meg. v. St. Mary Abbots, (b) A company, the whole of the profits. incorporated by special Act, had power to purchase land for the purpose of a cemetery, to make vaults and catacombs in it, and (4) 12 A. & E. 824 ; 10 L.J.M.C. 25 ; 5 Jur. 170. 14 210 A Code of the Law of Rating. to sell, in perpetuity or for a term, the exclusive right of burial therein, subject to the rules and regulations of the company, and to payment of burial fees to them. They were bound to keep the buildings, external walls, and every part of the cemetery in repair. The Court held that the company were liable to be rated to the relief of the poor as occupiers of the whole cemetery, although they had, in fact, sold in perpetuity the exclusive right of burial in the vaults, catacombs, etc., made by them ; had ceased to exercise any act of ownership over them after the sale ; and had delivered the keys to the pur- chasers. It was also decided that the profits, arising from such sales, ought to be included in the rateable value of the cemetery. Lord Denman, C. J., said : " The company are occupiers of the whole premises. The cemetery is under their control and superintendence, and they are bound to keep the whole in repair. They must be assessed upon the whole of their profits." This case was followed in Reg. v. Abney Park Cemetery Co. (c) The appellants were a company that purchased lands and laid them out as a cemetery. They received fees for interments and conveyed plots of ground to be used as graves. In one year £2333 was received by the company as purchase-money for such plots of ground. Each plot was conveyed by indenture purport- ing to grant it in fee simple upon trust that the grantee might use it as a place of burial, subject to the regulations of the company, and, subject to such trusts, in trust for the company as part of their property. The appellants were rated as the occupiers of the lands, and upon the principle that the sum of £2333 was to be treated as part of the annual value of the occupation of the lands by the appellants in that year. The Court, following the decision in Reg. v. St. Mary Abbots (d), held that the appellants were in occupation of the plots of ground which had been sold, and that the principle upon which they had been rated was correct. Blackburn, J., said : " The plots of land which have been sold must be taken into account in ascertaining the rateable value ; and I think (c) L.E. 8 Q.B. 515 ; 42 L.J.M.C. 124 ; 29 L.T. 174. (rf) Sujira. Rating of Cemeteries. 211 that this was decided in Reg. v. St. Mary Abbots ; that case was determined many years ago, and does not appear to have been ever questioned. Mr. Poland argued that the value was to be spread over many years ; that will be an alteration of the principle laid down in the Parochial Assessment Act, and is at variance with Reg. v. Westbrook. (e) A similar argument was unsuccessfully urged in that case. Rex v. Mirfield (f) is quite an exceptional case. No injustice will be done ;'/' the company conV'.a'.,'- are rated in every year according to the value which a hypo- According to thetical tenant would give for the occupation in the preceding year, preceding and according to this rule the company's receipts in one year will govern the rateable value of the cemetery in the next. In Reg. v. St. Giles, Camber /cell (a), expenses of general Exposes of •"■ ° manugemeiit. management were not allowed as a deduction, as such expend- iture was collateral to the occupation of the cemetery, and an outlay of part of the revenue. (//) (e) 10 Q.B. 178 ; 16 L.J.M.C. 87 ; 11 Jur. 515. (/) 10 East 219. (g) 14 Q.B. 571 ; 19 L.J.M.C. 122 ; 14 Jur. 519. (h) Vide Eeg. v. Southampton Dock Co., 14 Q.B. 587 ; 20 L.J.M.C. 155; 15 Jur. 268. 14 a 212 TITLE VIII. EATING OF WOODS, PLANTATIONS, SALEABLE UNDERWOOD, SPORTING RIGHTS, AND ADVERTISING STATIONS. pfantauon/ 01 ' ARTICLE 87.— The occupier of land used for a J-owtho/saie- plantation, or a wood, or for the growth of saleable -fu,rr'a < ter od underwood, and not subject to any right of common, is rateable to the poor in accordance with sections 3, 4, and 5 of the Rating Act, 1874 (37 and 38 Vict., c. 54). SZndSfor Before th e passing of the Rating Act, 1874(a), only the woods, orfor occupiers of saleable underwoods were rateable on the ground saleable under- that they were expressly mentioned in the 43 Eliz., e. 2. This wood are . rateable. Act, in so far as it relates to the rating of occupiers of saleable underwoods, is repealed, and all occupiers of land used for plantations, woods, or for the growth of saleable underwood, are now rateable as follows : (A) If the land is used for a plantation or a wood, the value shall be estimated as if the land, instead of being a j)lantation or a wood, were let and occupied in its natural and unimproved state. (B) If the land is used for the growth of saleable under- wood, the value shall be estimated as if the land were let for that purpose. (C) If the land is used both for a plantation or a wood and for the growth of saleable underwood, the value shall be estimated, either as if the land were used only for a plantation or a wood, or as if the land were used only for the growth of the saleable underwood growing thereon, as the Assessment Committee may determine. (a) Appendix, p. 440. Bating of Woods, Plantations, etc. 213 Where the rateable value of any land used for a plantation h.'.iuni.,., ^ •"■ u here rateable or a wood, or both for a plantation or wood and for the growth jg^SStSt? of saleable underwood, is increased by reason of the same being 1874 - estimated in accordance with the Eating Act, 1874, the occupier of that land under any lease or agreement made before the commencement of the Act, may, during the con- tinuance of the lease or agreement, deduct from his rent any poor or other local rate, or any portion thereof, which is paid in respect of such increase of rateable value, and every assessment committee, on the application of such occupier, shall certify in the valuation list or otherwise the fact and amount of such increase. As to what are saleable underwoods there have been a few what are decisions. In Aubrey v. Fisher (b) the test applied was whether underwoods, the trees in question were timber, in which case they were held not rateable. In Rex v. Ferrybridge (c) it was held that firs and larches planted with oaks for the purpose of sheltering the latter, and cut from time to time as the oaks grew larger and required more space, but not replanted when once cut, were not saleable underwoods. The ground of the decision was that they were planted to protect the oaks, and not that a profit might be derived from the sale of them. In Reg. v. Narberth North (d) it was decided that whether Ques tioiiof woods are saleable underwoods is a question of fact for the Sessions, and that the Court would not interfere with their finding, unless it were evidently wrong. The most recent case on the subject is Lord Fitzhardinge v. Prifchett.{e) This case, like all the preceding, was heard before the Eating Act, 1874, was passed. It was held that the question whether woods are " saleable underwoods " depends on the mode and object of their cultivation. If these be to produce a succession of profitable crops from the same stools (&) 10 East 446. Vide also Rex v. Minchin Hampton, 3 Burr. 1309. (c) 1 B. & C. 375. (d) 9 A. & E. 815. (e) L.R. 2 Q.B. 135 ; 8 B. & S. 216 ; 36 L.J.M.C. 49 ; 15 L.T. 502 ; 15 W.R. 640. 214 A Code of the Lair of Rating. and roots, the woods so treated are " saleable underwoods "; and it is immaterial at what intervals the successive crops are cut, and of what species of tree the woods consist. Lush, J., said : " No doubt some species of tree, such as hazel, are only valuable as underwood ; but there are others, as oak, which are timber, and so may be parcel of the inheritance, but yet may be so treated, as, instead of making timber, to supply a succession of renewable crops ; and it appears to me, that all woods that are so treated as to produce periodical profits from the same stools and roots, are saleable underwoods." node of rating T} ie ru i e l a id down in the Eating- Act, 1874, that the rateable saleable ° ' underwoods. va ;[ ue f saleable underwoods is to be estimated as if the land were to be let for that purpose, follows the decision in Rex v. MirfieM. (/) It was held in that case that saleable underwoods were rateable to the relief of the poor within 43 Eliz., c. 2, in proportion to their value, though not cut down more than once in twenty-one years ; and that their annual value might be estimated according to the value they are worth to rent for a lease of the duration of their intended growth. Lord Ellenborough said : " The objection is that the property ought not to be rated until the produce of it has been severed from the land, and until it has supplied the occupier with the means of paying. But we are of opinion that it is not necessary that any of the profits should have been actually reaped or taken from the property during the period for which the rate is made ; but that the property is at all times rateable according to the improvement in its value, or in the rent which might fairly be expected from it." cases since Since the Eating Act, 1874, was passed there have been two 18-4. " decisions as to the rating of land used for a wood or plantation. wood not to be I n Earl of Westmoreland v. Southmck and Oundle(g) the rated on w ' aeration i'n° f appellant's woodlands were assessed at their rateable value if occupied in their natural and unimproved state, but it was found as a fact that they might be rendered worth a much larger sum to a tenant from year to year if a certain expenditure were incurred for grubbing up woods, draining, (/) 10 East 219. \g) 36 L.T. 108. Matin;/ of Sporting Rights. 215 and road making. The Court held they were rightly rated and that under the Eating Act, 1874, section 4, woods were not to be rated on any assumption of their improved value upon alteration into land of a different description. In Eyton v. Mold (h) the appellant was the owner and ^Sofs^fc? occupier of certain woodlands in respect of which he was JjgiEum" be rated to the poor. He used the lands in question as planta- enhanced value tions and woods and exercised the right of sporting over them. In the case of each piece of land a certain amount per acre was added to the rateable value of the land in respect of such right of sporting. The Court held that the right of sporting was properly taken into account in estimating the rateable value of the land in its natural and unimproved state. Field, J., said : " The subject of the rate is land upon which trees are growing. We are not told by the case that the land is in any other than its natural state. All we are told is that it is woodland, and the occupier exercises the right of sporting over it. Before the passing of the Eating Act, 1874 (•), the state of the law with reference to the rating of land with game upon it was well settled. It was settled law — and it does not appear to me that the Legislature proposed by the Eating Act, 1874, to interfere with that state of the law — that, if the occupier of the land had not severed the right of taking game, the land ivas to be assessed at the amount for which it would let to a yearly tenant, its value being enhanced by its capacity for sporting purposes. But, if the right of sporting were severed from the occupation of the land, it could not be rated in the hands of the licensee, for the reason, not that it had no value, but that it was not rateable, being an incorporeal hereditament. It was also the law that land used merely as woodland was not rateable. The statute of Elizabeth expressly mentioning saleable underwoods, it was held that growing timber was excluded ; and, secondly, independently of the statute, there was a difficulty in the nature of things in rating growing timber, because the rate is made for short periods, and to rate a man in respect of (h) 6 Q.B.D. 13 ; 50 L.J.M.C. 30 ; 43 L.T. 472 ; 29 W.K. 122 ; 45 J.P. 54. CO Appendix, p. 44(1. 216 A Code of the Late of Rating. timber which might not be fit to cut till his grandson's time might fairly be thought inequitable. Saleable underwoods were in a different position, because they were cut from time to time and produced a profit at short intervals. Such being the law the Legislature came to the conclusion that land used for growing timber ought not to be entirely exempt. Accordingly they provided by the Eating Act, 1874, section 3, that the Poor Eate Acts should extend to land used for a plantation or wood. This land is so used ; therefore, clearly it is to be assessed. Prima facie, and so far as not expressly provided otherwise, it must be rated as other land with all its advantages according to the principle laid down in Reg. v. Williams, (k) If it is land with trees on it forming good cover for game, prima facie, the existence of the game would form an element of its value for the purposes of assessment. The counsel for the appellant relies on the fourth section as showing that the natural ordinary principle of rating is not to be applied, and that, although if the right of sporting were severed from the occupation of the land it must admittedly be rated under the Act, yet if the occupier retains such right it must not be rated. This seems unreasonable, but if the words compel us to come to this conclusion we must do so. But do the words compel us to come to this very strong conclusion ? Sub-section (A) is the one relied upon. [His Lordship read the sub-section.] The appellant's counsel contended that the word ' only ' did not exclude the case of a woodland used for sporting purposes, but it does not seem necessary to express any opinion as to this. For, when we look at the concluding words of the sub-section, we see that the land, assuming it to be within the sub-section, is to be treated as being in its natural and unimproved state. I do not see how the existence of game is inconsistent with the natural state of the land, seeing that the country in the original state of nature would be probably more or less covered with game. Land in its natural state may or may not be enhanced in value by game, but in this case it appears that there is game upon the land, and I (h) 23 L.T. (0.8.) 76. Post p. 220. Rating of Sporting Rights. 217 think we must take it upon the case as stated that the land in its natural state would have game upon it. That being so, it appears to me that the value of the sporting right was properly taken into account in estimating the rateable value." ARTICLE 88— A right of fowling, of shooting, 1 ' 1 " ' i" " °' °' ing rateable. of taking or killing game or rabbits, or of fishing, is rateable to the relief of the poor in accordance with section 6 of the Rating Act, 1874 (37 and 38 Vict., c. 54). Section 6 of the Eating Act, 1874 (/), enacts as follows : — where right of sporting is " (1) Where any right of fowling, or of shooting, or of occupation of . .,, . li- • land and is not taking or killing game or rabbits, or of fishing let - (hereinafter referred to as a right of sporting) is severed from the occupation of the land and is not let, and the owner of such right receives rent for the land, the said right shall not be separately valued or rated, but the gross and rateable value of the land shall be estimated as if the said right were not severed ; and in such case if the rateable value is increased by reason of its being so estimated, but not otherwise, the occupier of the land may, unless he has specifically contracted to pay such rate in the event of an increase, deduct from his rent such por- tion of any poor or other local rate as is paid by him in respect of such increase ; and every assessment committee, on the application of the occupier, shall certify in the valuation list or otherwise the fact and amount of such increase. " (2) Where any right of sporting, when severed from where let. the occupation of the land, is let, either the owner or the lessee thereof, according as the persons making the rate determine, may be rated as the occupier thereof. (/) Appendix, p. 442. 218 A Code of the Lair of Rating. where right of "(3) Subject to the foregoing provisions of this section, sporting is , severed. the owner of any right of sporting, when severed from the occupation of the land, may he rated as the occupier thereof. owner of right. u^ -pox the purposes of this section, the person who, if the right of sporting is not let, is entitled to exercise the right, or who, if the right is let, is entitled to receive the rent for the same, shall be deemed to be the owner of the right." tag revered 01 *" ^ c l ues ti°n arose in Rogers v. St. Germans (m) whether fromoccupation the right ^ of sporting was severed from the land. The appellant was the owner of a tenement with dwelling-house and other buildings, containing about 19 acres, which he had leased to a person occupying the same, excepting plantations and all timber, and all mines, etc., " and also excepting all manner of game, hares, rabbits, and wildfowl, with liberty of hunting, fowling, and fishing over and through the said premises at all times during the said term." The Court decided that the lease containing the clause aforesaid, reserved to the appellant a right of sporting which was severed from the occupation of the land, and therefore rateable within section 6 of the Eating Act, 1874. wi.ei-e owner I n Kenrick v. Guihfield (n) it was held that under section 6, right'of sport- 6 sub-section 2, of the Eating Act, 1874, where the owner of ing but remains 1 , , , , , •i J _n • n i i i 1 ■ 1 1 in occupation, land lets tne right of sjwrtmg over part of the land which he retains in his own occupation the lessee may be rated in respect of the right of sporting. Lord Coleridge, C.J., said : " Before the passing of that Act [i.e., Eating Act, 1874] according to the decision of the Court of Queen's Bench in Reg. v. Battle Union (o) the right of sporting was not the subject of a separate rating, not being a hereditament within 43 Eliz., c. 2, and thus persons who ought to have been rated escape rating, or the rate was imposed upon the wrong persons. Parliament has now O) 35 L.T. 332. («) L.R. 5 C.P.D. 41 ; 49 L.J.M.C. 27 ; 41 L.T. 624 ; 28 W.R. 372. (o) L.R. 2 Q.B. 8 ; 36 L.J.M.C. 1 : 15 L.T. 180 ; 15 W.R. 57 : 8 B. & S. 12. Rating of Sporting Rights. 219 by this Act enacted that this valuable right may, when severed from the occupation of the land, be the subject of a separate rating. When the occupation of the land and the right of taking the game were joined before, the occupier of the land was rated in respect of the value of his occupation as enhanced by the value of the sporting right ; and so the right of taking game was indirectly rated. It was only where the occupation of the land and the right to take the game were severed that the law required amendment. The Act, therefore, made the right of sporting so severed rateable property. Prima facie, the owner of the land is to be rated ; but, if the right of sporting is severed from the occupation of the land, the person having that right may be rated in respect thereof. The right of sporting belonged to Mrs. Curling ; she has severed that right from her occupation of the land, and has let it to another. The Act says that the overseers may at their option rate either the owner of the right of sporting or the lessee thereof." A right of sporting is to be taken into account as enhancing the value of land used for a wood or plantation, (p) In Req. v. Battle Union (a), which was decided before the Decisions before J Kln % Rating Act, Rating Act, 1874, it was held that an owner of land, who is 187i - himself the occupier, but lets the right to take game to another, is assessable to the poor-rate in respect of his occupation as enhanced by the right to take game. This case was dis- tinguished from Reg. v. Thar/stone. (>•) In the latter case a tenant occupied land under a parol demise to him from year to year, the right to the game and of entering for the purpose of taking and killing it being reserved to the landlord. The rateable value of the occupation of the land without the right was £11 5s. 8d., and with the right £26 19s. 8d. He was held only liable to be rated at the lower figure. With regard to this case Lush, J., in Reg. v. Battle Union, said : " I am not prepared to say, if the point in Reg. v. Thurlstone were now to O) Eyton v. Mold, 6 Q.B.D. 13 ; 50 L.J.M.C. 39 ; 43 L.T. 472 ; 29 W.R. 122 ; 45 J.P. 54. Ante p. 215. {q) Supra. (r) 1 E. & E. 502 ; 28 L.J.M.C. 106 ; 5 Jur. N.S. 820. 220 A Code of the Laic of Rating. Eight of sport- ing enhances value of land. occur for the first time, that I should concur in the judgment given in that case, or that I am now prepared to follow it out to all its consequences." In the case of Reg. v. Williams (s) it was decided that where an occupier of land enjoyed the right of sporting, or the owner of the land was himself the occupier, and let the right to take the game, the value of such right was to he taken into consideration as enhancing the value of the occupation of the land. It was decided* in Hilton v. Bowes (t) that where the right of sporting was severed from the soil, it was not rateable. Fishery— deduction. Deduction for rate levied under a local Act. ARTICLE 89.— In estimating the rateable value of a fishery the amount of a rate levied under a local Act for the regulation of the fishery must be deducted from the gross estimated rental. This point was raised in Reg. v. Smith, (u) The Court there held that in estimating the rateable value at which the owners of salmon fisheries in the Tweed ought to be assessed to the poor-rate in respect thereof, the rate levied by the com- missioners under section 79 of the Tweed Fisheries Act, 1857 (20 & 21 Vict., c. 148) must be deducted from the gross estimated rental as "an expense necessary to maintain them in a state to command such rent," within the meaning of section 1 of the Parochial Assessment Act, 1836 (6 & 7 Will. IV., c. 96). Cave, J., said : " The question is whether the rate levied under the 79th section of the Tweed Fisheries Act, 1857, is an expense within the language of section 1 of the Parochial Assessment Act, 1836 (6 & 7 Will. IV., c. 96), which says that a poor-rate is to be made ' upon an estimate of the net annual value of the several hereditaments rated thereunto, that is to say, of the rent at which the same might reasonably be 0) 23 L.T. O.S. 76. (0 L.K. 1 Q.B. 359 ; 35 L.J.M.C. 137 ; 13 L.T. 512 ; 14 W.R. 365. Vide Rex v. Ellis, 1 M. & S. 652. (w) 55 L.J.M.C. 49 ; 54 L.T. 431 ; 50 J.P. 215. Hating of a Fishery. 221 expected to let from year to year, free of all usual tenant's rates and taxes and tithe commutation rent-charge, if any, and deducting therefrom the probable average annual cost of the repairs, insurance, and other expenses, if any, necessary to maintain them in a state to command such rent.' Is this rate, then, an expense necessary to maintain the rateable subject in a state to command the rent ? The 79th section under which the rate is levied says that ' the rate is to be paid by the whole owners of salmon fisheries in the river, in proportion to the rents or yearly value of their several fisheries as such rents or yearly value shall be ascertained and fixed by the commissioners '; so that not only is the Act directed to the improvement of the fisheries, but the owners of the fisheries are directed to pay the expenses incurred under it in proportion to the yearly value of their fisheries. If the case rested here without authority I should say it was clear ; but in the case of Reg. v. Gainsborough Union (x) a rate was imposed on the respondent's land, under a local Act, for embanking and draining a district, and it was held that, in assessing the respondent to the poor-rate, a deduction was to be made in respect of the drainage rate as an expense necessary to maintain the land in a state to command the rent. There the facts were that without the drainage works the land would have been under water at certain seasons, and the annual value would have been considerably diminished. So here the whole scope and intention of the Act is to increase the value of the fisheries by increasing that which is the only foundation of the value of a fishery, namely, the number of fish ; and it cannot be doubted that but for provisions of the nature of those contained in the Act, the fisheries would have become less productive and would have consequently decreased in value. . . . Here the real point is that the rate is paid for the preservation of the salmon, which is better accomplished by concerted action under an Act of Parliament than by leaving each owner to protect his own property." 0) L.R. 7 Q.B. 64 ; 41 L.J.M.C. 1 ; 20 W.R. 250. 222 A Code of the Law of Rating. Advertisement ARTICLE 90.— Land used for the exhibition of stations rateable. advertisements, or for the erection of any hoarding, frame, post, wall or structure used for the exhibi- tion of advertisements, is rateable to the relief of the poor. Advertising Advertisement stations were not rateable until the Adver- htations ifs a 9. illg> Act ' tisin g Stations (Eating) Act, 1889 (//), was passed, on the ground that they did not constitute " an occupation of a permanent character," but " a merely permissive licence to use the premises in the nature of an easement." (s) In a later case (a), however, where an owner agreed to allow an adver- tising agent the privilege of erecting an advertising hoarding at a yearly rent, the Court held that there was an exclusive occupation and not a mere licence. Person rateable. J3y section 3 of the Advertising Stations (Rating Act), 1889, the person rateable for an advertising station is "the person who shall permit the same to be so used, or (if he cannot be ascertained) the owner thereof." Land occupied J3y section 4 it is provided that where land or an heredita- tor other J *- aciverusiif^ d a3 men t occupied f or other purposes, and rateable in respect thereof, is used temporarily or permanently for the exhibition of advertisements the gross and rateable value of such land or hereditaments shall be estimated so as to include the increased value from such use. A question was raised in Chappell v. St. Botolph (b) whether the proper person was rated. A contractor for the erection of buildings upon land vested in the Postmaster- General erected a hoarding round the land, and permitted the use of the hoarding for advertising purposes. The hoarding was erected upon the public street under a licence granted by the Com- missioners of Sewers. It was held that the contractor was the person who had permitted the land to be used for the exhibition of advertisements within the meaning of section 3 of the Advertising Stations (Eating) Act, and was therefore the person to be rated in respect thereof. (y) Appendix, p. 448. (z) Per Mellor, J., in Reg. v. St. Pnnrras Assessment Committee, 2 Q.B.D. 581 ; 46 L.J.M.C. 243 ; 37 L.T. 126 ; 25 W.R. 827. (a) Taylor v. Pendleton, 19 Q.B.D. 288 ; 56 L.J.M.C. 146 ; 57 L.T. 530 ; 35 W.R. 762 ; 51 J J. 613. (b) (1892) 1 Q.B. 561 ; 65 L.T. 581 ; 40 W.R. 192 ; 56 J. P. 310. 228 TITLE IX. RATING OF TITHE RENT-CHARGE. ARTICLE 91.— The owner of tithe commutation Tithe rent rent-charge is rateable to the relief of the poor in raKe. m the same way as an occupier of land. Tithes were made rateable to the relief of the poor by the statute of Elizabeth (43 Eliz., c. 2). (a) By the Tithe Commutation Act (6 & 7 Will. IV., c. 71) a tithe rent-charge was substituted for the payment of tithes, and this tithe rent- charge is made rateable to the relief of the poor. Since the decision in Reg. v. Capel(b), any person in receipt of a tithe rent-charge is rateable to the relief of the poor in accordance with the rule laid down in section 1 of the Parochial Assess- ment Act (6 & 7 Will. IV., c. 96 (c) ; that is on the sum for which the same would let to a tenant from year to year, free from rates, taxes, etc. In that case the appellant, the vicar of the parish, had been rated for his tithes. The gross annual amount of the compositions was £660 ; out of which average annual payments of £82 15s. had to be made by the vicar for tenant's rates and ecclesiastical dues. The vicar was rated on a sum of £540, being such a rent or yearly sum as the said tithes might reasonably be expected to let for from year to year, free of all usual tenants' rates and taxes, and deducting from such rent the amount of the ecclesiastical dues. Lord Denman, C.J., said : " Upon this state of facts the argument before us (a) Appendix, p. 287. (5) 12 A. & E. 382 ; 9 L.J.M.C. 65 : 4 Jur. 886. (c) Appendix, p. 315. 224 * A Code of the Law of Rating. extended over a very wide range, comprehending an examina- tion of almost all the cases, ancient and modern, touching the rateability of property. In our view, however, it is neither necessary nor useful to pursue the same course, because this rate strictly complies with the enacting part of 6 & 7 Will. IV., c. 96, section 1 ; and, if that embraces tithes as well as land, and if the proviso at the end does not interfere, that rate will be good, even though it could not be sustained on the principles laid down in former decisions." Lord Denman then decided that there was no difference between the rating of the tithe owner Tithe owner and the occupier of land, and said : " Rex v. Joddrell (d) does rateable as an • j.1 1 1 occupier of n0 { convince . us that there was any difference in tne legal land. * . t liabilities of the tithe owner and the occupier of land. In conclusion, he added, with respect to the proviso to section 1 proviso to of the Parochial Assessment Act, "It was suggested that, in the Parochial this view of the case, the proviso will have no operation. We Assessment Act has no are no t quite sure that it will; as the attempt to apply it to operation. ^ L special modes of rating prescribed by some local statutes did not appear very successful. But this doubt grows out of the language of the proviso itself, which expressly avoids to state affirmatively that there are any cases to which the proviso can apply. Certainly something much more decisive was requisite to defeat an enactment so simple, practical, and useful." ™C rtol,e B y tne Titlie Act > 1891 ( 54 Yict -> c - 8 )' tithe i>ent - cnar g e is now payable by the owner of land, and not by the occupier. Eates to which tithe rent-charge is subject are payable by the owner of the tithe rent-charge. Section 6 of the Tithe Act, 1891, enacts that: (1) Any rate to which tithe rent-charge is subject shall be assessed on and may be recovered from the owner of the tithe rent-charge, in the like manner and by the like process as on and from any occupying ratepayer ; and so much of any Act as authorises any rate on tithe rent-charge to be assessed on or recovered from the occupier of any lands out of which the tithe rent- charge issues is hereby repealed. (d) 1 B & Ad. 403 ; 9 L.J. (O.S.) 26. Rating of Tithe Rent-Charge. - 225 (2) If the collector of the rate satisfies the County Court JJ^JJ"™ that lie is unable to recover in manner aforesaid rate - any rate assessed on the owner of any tithe rent- charge, the Court may, after such service on the owners^of the tithe rent-charge, and of the lands out of which the tithe rent-charge issues, as may be prescribed, and after hearing such owners, if they appear and desire to be heard, order the owner of the lands to pay such tithe rent-charge to the collector until the amount of the rate, and any costs allowed by the Court, are fully paid ; and the order may be executed as if it were an order under this Act for the payment of a sum due on. account of the tithe rent- charge. (3) The Court may, if satisfied that the circumstances justify order as to future rate. it, make such order as aforesaid in respect of any future rate, either generally or during the time limited by the order. (4) The expression "rate " in this section means a poor rate, Meaning of highway rate, general district rate, borough rate, and every other rate assessed on an owner of tithe rent- charge by a public authority for public purposes ; and the expression " collector " means the overseer, sur- veyor of highways, rate-collector, or other person authorised, for the time being, to collect the rate. Prior to this Act it had been decided that a poor-rate assessed upon the owner of tithe rent-charge under 1 Vict., c. 69, section 8, was not recoverable by distress warrant against such owner, (e) It was probably to remedy the difficulty of recovery of tithe rent-charge that section 6 was inserted in the Tithe Act, 1891. In early times the owners of tithes were not rated as 01d law - occupiers. (/) It was first decided that a clergyman was liable (e) Lamplugh v. Norton, 22 Q.B.D. 452 ; 58 L.J.Q.B. 279 ; 37 W.R. 422 ; 53 J.P. 389. (/) Rex v. Canterbury J J., 4 Burr. 2290 ; Rex v. Ringwood, ( lowp. 326 ; Rex v. Hopkins, 3 Keb. 255. 15 - 226 A Code of the Laic of Hating. Exemption in Inclosure Act. Annual pay- ments to Rector. Corn-rent— deductions. to be rated as the occupier of his tithes in Hex v. Shingle, (g) Tithes were specially excepted from 3 & 4 Yict., c. 89 (h), which exempted personal property from rating. In Chanter v. Glubb (i) it was decided that a lessee was an occupier of tithes and liable to be rated as such. In Mitchell v. Fordham (k) where, by an Inclosure Act it was provided that a certain corn rent " free from all taxes and deductions whatsoever, except land-tax," should be issuing out of the lands to be enclosed, and other lands in the parish, and be paid to the rector in lieu of all great and small tithes, etc., the Court held that this corn-rent was not liable to be assessed to the relief of the poor. In Hex v. Boldero (I), however, the rector was held liable to be rated to the poor in respect of this rent or annual payment, the Act not having expressly exempted it from that burthen. In Rex v. Joddrell (m) it was held that the rector and not the occupier of the land was rateable for the tithe. There can be no question as to this now. (n) Annual payments to rectors are not always in lieu of tithes, although often called tithes. When not paid in lieu of tithes they are not rateable to the poor, (o) Where a vicar received, in lieu of tithes, thirty acres of land and a corn-rent " clear of all parochial taxes, rates, dues, and assessments whatsoever," the Court held that the occupiers of land charged with the payment of the corn-rent were not entitled to have the amount of such corn-rent deducted in estimating the net annual value of their property liable to poor-rate under the Union Assessment Act, 1862 (25 & 26 O) 1 Strange 100. (h) Appendix, p. 324. (0 9 B. & C. 479. Vide also Rex v. Wilson, 5 N. & M. 119. (A-) 6 B. & C. 274. Vide also Rex v. Toms, Douglas 401 ; Lowndes v. Home, 2 Bl. Rep. 1252 ; Ream v. Picking, Cald. 196 ; Rex v. Wistow, 5 A. & E. 250 ; Chatfield v. Ruston, 3 B. & C. 863 ; Reg. v. Shaw, 12Q.B.419 ; 17 L.J.M.C. 137 ; 12 Jur. 651. (7) 4 B. & C. 467. (m) 1 B. & Ad. 403. («) Vide p. 224. (o) Reg. v. Christopher son, 16 Q.B.D. 7 ; 55 L.J.M.C. 1 ; 53 L.T. 804. Esduille v. City of London Union, 19 Q.B.D. 431 ; 56 L.J.M.C. 149 ; 57 L.T. 749. Rating of Tithe Rent-Charge. 227 Vict., c. 103, section 15) (p) and the Parochial Assessment Act (6 & 7 Will. IV., c. 96, section 1) (q). Erie, C.J., said: " It is clearly unjust for the Legislature, where a large sum is to be made up by contribution of the parishioners to exempt any one from his share. It may seem to be an act of benevolence, but it is nothing of the kind, as the deficiency must be made up by the remainder of those who are liable to contribute." ARTICLE 92.— The rent which a tenant from Rent a tenant from year to year to year would give for tithe rent-charge is ^fyS™!?" calculated by deducting from the gross income of char « e - the tithe rent-charge an allowance for ecclesiastical dues, tenths, tenant's profit, tenant's property tax, cost of collection, law expenses, bad debts, poor and other tenant's rates, annual cost of repairs, insurance, and renewal. In order to find the rateable value of tithe rent-charge it is Deduction for tenant's profits necessary to ascertain what a tenant from year to year would may, but is not " necessarily to pay for it in accordance with section 1 of the Parochial Assess- be made - ment Act (6 & 7 Will. IV., c. 96). For this purpose the above deductions from the gross income of the tithe rent-charge have been allowed. All these deductions were discussed at length in the leading case of Reg. v. Goodchild. if) With regard to the deduction claimed for tenant's profits, Crompton, J., said : " The principle on which we think the assessment should be made is, that the rent-charge is to be assessed like all other property, according to what it might reasonably be expected to let for from year to year ; and in deciding upon such amount, the nature of the property is to be regarded, and it is to be considered whether a profit can be looked to or expected, as in the case of farms ; and whether in each particular case anything, over the expenses for collecting, and the allowances for bad debts and law expenses, would be necessary to induce a tenant to take. In each particular case of the kind, this (p) Appendix, p. 359. (?) Hachett v. Andrews, 16 . C.B.N.S. 38 ; 33 L.J.M.C. 137 ; 9 L.T. 769 ; 12 W.R. 433. Appendix, p. 315. (r) E. B. & E. 1 ; 27 L.J.M.C. 233 ; 22 J.P. 144 ; 4 Jur. N.S. 1050. 15 a 228 A Code of the Law of Bating. question must be for the persons making the rate and for the Sessions on appeal. It may be that a tenant might willingly take in some cases far less than the amount which, in addition to an allowance for collection, would secure him positively against all risk of bad debts and law expenses ; as the profit of collection itself might be sufficiently remunerative to the party taking, and the other losses might be treated as contingent. It may be that in other cases persons would hesitate to take with the allowances referred to, without something additional in the way of profits. And we think that this is a question of fact to be determined according to the circumstances of each particular case ; the rule in every case being that the amount must be ascertained as that at which a tenant might reasonably be expected to take from year to year." Thus it appears that a deduction for tenant's profits may, but is not necessarily to be made. General rate— General rate and lighting rate are to be deducted as rates lighting rate. ° ° payable by the tenant. no deduction ARTICLE 93.— In assessing tithe rent-charge to for voluntary allowances poor-rate no deduction is to be made in respect minister of new parish. of an allowance made to the minister of a new district and charged upon such tithe rent-charge. where allow- A claim for a deduction of this kind was made in Laurence ance charged . on tithe rent- v . Tollcshunt Knights, {s) In that case it was decided that the rector of a parish, who, pursuant to the statutes in that behalf, has charged the tithe rent-charge with the perpetual payment of an annual sum towards the stipend of the incumbent for the time being of a new ecclesiastical district, formed under the statutes, partly of part of the parish, was not entitled to have the sum so charged deducted in assessing the tithe rent- charge to the poor-rate. Cockburn, C. J., said : " Prima facie, tithe rent-charge, like any other real property in a parish, is to contribute to the poor- rate. But if the contention of the present appellant were to prevail, so much of the tithe rent-charge as has been charged (s) 2 B. & S. 533 ; 31 L.J.M.C. 148 ; 10 W.R. 620. Bating of Tithe Rent-Charge. 229 for the endowment of the new parish is not assessable in his hands ; no portion of the tithe rent-charge itself has been conveyed to him ; a charge only on the tithe rent-charge has been created by the grant. If, therefore, the amount of the charge in favour of the new minister is not assessable in the hands of the appellant, it ceases to be assessable at all ; a state of things of the injustice and inconvenience of which the parish would certainly have a right to complain." Prior to the decision in the above case an attempt had been New minister not rateable for made by the parish officers to assess the new minister to poor- such allowance. rate in respect of the endowment he enjoyed and which was charged on the tithe rent-charge of the rector of the old parish. It was decided in Freud v. Tolleshunt Knights [f) that he was not liable to be assessed. Lord Campbell said : " He is not the vicar or parson of the parish making the rate, nor is he an inhabitant of that parish ; but then it is said that he is rateable, because this is an assignment of a portion of the tithes. I think it is impossible to say that it is such an assign- ment. It is rather a grant of an annuity ; it does not issue out of the tithes and is not an assignment of them. If the appellant [i.e., the new minister] had entered and distrained upon the rectory or parsonage glebe land and hereditaments under the power given by the deed, and had possessed himself of the tithes, he would be rateable. But here he has not done so." ARTICLE 94.— In assessing tithe rent-charge No deduction for cura salary. to poor-rate no deduction must be made on account f0 of curate's salary. This was decided in Meg. v. Sherford. (u) The contrary had been decided in the Hackney Case (%), but the Court overruled (0 1 E. & E. 753 ; 28 L.J.M.C 169. O) L.E. 2 Q.B. 503 ; 8 B. & S. 596 ; 36 L.J.M.C. 113 ; 16 L.T. 663 ; 15 W.R, 1035. Vide also Scriven v. Fawcett, 32 L.J.M.C. 161. Williams v. Llangeinwen, 1 B. & S. 699 ; 31 L.J.M.C. 54 ; Wheeler v. Burmington, 1 B. & S. 709 ; 31 L.J.M.C. 57 ; 8 Jur. N.S. 304. O) Reg. v. Goodchild, E. B. & E. 1 ; 27 L.J.M.C. 233 ; 22 J.P. 144 ; 4 Jur. N.S. 1050. 230 A Code of the Law of Rating. No deduction for yearly payment to curate. this part of the decision, considering the law altered by the Mersey Docks Cases. (//) Mellor, J., said : " Under these circumstances, although we might have thought that the Hackney Case had not been based upon a sound application of the true principles of the law of rating, we should have thought it unwise to depart from it, after it had been followed in so many subsequent cases. Since then, however, the case of the Mersey Docks has been decided by the House of Lords, which, as it appears to us, has not only set us free from the authority of the Hackney Case, but has in effect overruled it, by placing the law of rating property to the poor-rate upon principles entirely inconsistent with it." Where a yearly payment to curates was charged upon a tithe rent-charge, the Court held that the occupier of the tithe rent-charge was not entitled to any deduction in respect thereof, (s) Deductions not allowed. Money borrowed from Governors of Queen Anne's Bounty. ARTICLE 95.— In assessing tithe rent-charge to poor-rate no deduction is to be made on account of landlord's property tax, land tax, or money borrowed from the Governors of Queen Anne's Bounty, or on account of the personal services of the incumbent. So held in the Hackney Case, (a) With regard to the money borrowed from the Governors of Queen Anne's Bounty for the rebuilding of the parsonage-house, Coleridge, J., said : " If a landowner rebuilds his mansion, the expense may swallow up more than the whole income of the estate for the year ; but his estate does not thereby become not rateable, and the estate is not the less productive, nor does he the less receive the income because he expends that and more in building a new house on it. And so, if before these statutes passed, the incumbent rebuilt, as many did, his parsonage out of his own {y) 11 H.L.C. 443 ; 35 L.J.M.C. 1 ; 20 C.B. N.S. 56 643; 13 W.R. 1069 ; 11 Jur. N.S. 746. 0) Reg. v 434 Groves, 2 E. & E. 793 ; 29 L.J.M.C. 179 24 J.P. 341 ; 6 Jur. N.S. 1014. («) Reg. v. Goodchild, E. B. & E. 1 ; 27 L.J.M.C. 233 144 ; 4 Jur. N.S. 1050. 12 L.T. 8 W.R. 22 J.P. Rating of Tithe Rent-Charge. 231 means, he must still have been rateable for his tithes. So, again, if a landowner had borrowed the money on the security of his estate, he could not have claimed to deduct the interest, or any portion of the principal which he might repay under agreement, from his poor-rate, even if he were tenant for life only. The incumbent who borrows from Queen Anne's Bounty and mortgages his tithes under the statute is in exactly the same position. The claim clearly must be disallowed." "With regard to the claim for personal services by the incumbent, Coleridge, J., said : " The personal labours of the incumbent are not a charge on the tithes, but on his personal conscience, and in a matter of poor-rate are simply out of the question." 232 TITLE X. PROCEDURE ON APPEAL AGAINST A RATE. Section (i) — Outside the Metropolis. Section (ii) — In the Metropolis. Section (i) — Outside the Metropolis. objection^ ARTICLE 96. — Any overseer or overseers of -Notice? 1S any parish in any union who shall think such parish aggrieved, or any person who feels himself aggrieved, by any valuation list on the ground of unfairness or incorrectness in the valuation of any hereditament included therein, or on the ground of the omission of any rateable hereditament from such list, may at any time give written notice of such objection to the Assessment Committee, and to the overseers; and where the ground of any objection shall be unfairness or incorrectness in the valuation of any hereditament belonging to a person other than the objector, or the omission of such hereditament, notice of objection must also be given to such other person. This was so enacted by section 18 of the Union Assessment Act, 1862 (25 & 26 Vict., c. 103), and 27 & 28 Vict., c. 39, s. 1. {a) Form of notice. The following is a form of the notice necessary : — To the Assessment Committee of the Union, in the County of To the Overseers of the Parish of in the Union, in the County of To A. B., a ratepayer in the said parish. [This notice wed only be given if the valuation or omission of A . B.^s property is objected to.] Take Notice that I, C. D., being a person aggrieved by the valuation list of the said parish, object to the valuation list of the said parish on the following grounds : — (1) That the hereditament occupied by me is improperly assessed at the sum of £ gross, and £ net. And (2) That rateable property [specifying what property'] which should have been included in such list, has been omitted therefrom. [Set out all the grounds of appeal.] Dated day of , 189 . (Signed) CD. (a) Appendix, pp. 360, 375. Outside the Metropolis. 233 The notice must specify all the grounds of appeal. An objector • 1 ^ specify all the will not be allowed to raise any ground of appeal before the j^",' 1 !;, justices on appeal to Special or Quarter Sessions which has nol previously been raised in the preliminary notice of objection to the Assessment Committee, (b) On receipt of the notice the Clerk to the Assessment Committee gives notice to the appel- lant of the day when the meeting of the Assessment Committee of the Union for the hearing of appeals will be held. He also gives a similar notice to the overseers and gives them the names of all appellants and the grounds of appeal. In view of section 6 of the Local Government Act, 1894, in Local Govern- rural parishes it is advisable to serve the notice on the clerk to (56 & 57 Vict., ... . c. 73). the parish council, in which case the above form of notice must be altered accordingly. Although by 27 & 28 Vict., c. 39, s. 1(c), a notice of "At any time.' objection may be given " at any time," it must not be forgotten that if an objector fails to obtain the relief he desires from the Assessment Committee he must appeal to the next practicable Special or Quarter Sessions (d) after the rate comes into force. There should, therefore, be no delay in giving notice of objection, or an objector who fails to obtain relief may lose his right of appeal altogether. In Ilea. v. Biggleswade (e) a poor-rate was published 011 May where appei- ' '' \ 1 1 J lant cannot 30th. On the following June 11 notice of objection was given appeal to jo nex t, Quarter to the Assessment Committee. The next meeting of the Sessions - Assessment Committee took place on June 30th, when they refused relief. The next Midsummer Quarter Sessions for the county were held on the same day as the meeting of the Assessment Committee. The person aggrieved by the decision of the Assessment Committee appealed to the following Michael- mas Sessions, and the justices allowed the appeal. On a motion for a prohibition the Court refused the application on the ground that the appellant could not be said to have failed to obtain relief; and that as under the circumstances the (6) Williams v. Bedmimter Union, 30 L.T. 710 ; 22 W.R. 943. (c) Appendix, p. 375. \d) Post p. 239. (e) 21 L.T. 4'. 4 ; 18 W.R. 293 ; Vide also Reg. v. Hammond, 4 New. Sess. Cases 316. 234 Procedure on Appeal. appellant was prevented by the provisions of the Union Assessment Act (./) from appealing to the Midsummer Sessions, it was not too late for him to appeal to the Michaelmas Sessions. Condition In Reg. v. Lancashire J J. (g) it was held to he a condition precedent. . . . . precedent to any appeal against a rate made m conformity with the valuation list approved by the Assessment Committee, that the appellant should have given to the Assessment Committee notice of the objection against the list and shall have failed to obtain relief ; even although the Assessment Committee may have been unable to give the relief desired. No necessity In Reg. v. Wiltshire (h) it was held that an appellant who for fresh notice # # t after rate made. nas given notice of objection to a valuation list under 27 & 28 Vict., c. 39, s. 1, and failed to obtain relief before a rate is made in conformity with the list, is not bound to give a fresh notice of objection to the list after the rate is made in order to be entitled to appeal. This case practically overrules Reg. v. Great Western Railway Co. (i) where Assess- In Reg. v. Derbyshire J J. (/.•) the appellant gave a notice of ment Committee ' . . „ . amend vaiua- objection to a valuation list. A rate was made in conformity tion list it is not J necessary to with the list, and subsequently the objection of the appellant give fresh notice " * •> « *■ *■ agatnsT 11011 was heard by the Assessment Committee, who made a deduction anienc e ib . f rom ^ ne am ount at which the property of the appellants was valued, and altered the valuation list accordingly. The rate was amended in conformity with the amended list. The appellants, being dissatisfied with the deduction, gave the requisite notice of appeal against the original rate, but did not give the Assessment Committee any further notice of objection to the valuation list or any notice of appeal against the rate founded upon it. The Court held that the appellants had done all that was contemplated by the statute, and that it was not a condition precedent to their right of appeal that they should give fresh notice of objection to the amended list, or notice of appeal against the amended rate. (/) 27 & 28 Vict., c. 39, s. 1. Appendix, p. 375. (g) 43 L.J.M.C. 116 ; 29 L.T. 403 ; 22 W.R. 648. (h) 4 Q.B.D. 326 ; 48 L.J.M.C. 142 ; 40 L.T. 681. (i) L.R. 4 Q.B. 323 ; 10 B. & S. 318 ; 38 L.J.M.C. 89 ; 20 L.T. 481 ; 17 W.R. 670. (/.-) 25 L.T. 43 ; 19 W.R. 934. Outside the Metropolis. 235 These two cases were followed in Re) Appeal to Special Sessions. Special Sessions — when held. Failure to obtain relief. Notice must contain all grounds of appeal. ARTICLE 101.— A ratepayer who has failed to obtain relief from the Assessment Committee may- appeal to the Justices at Special Sessions. This is provided by 6 & 7 Will. IV., c. 96, s. 6, and the Union Assessment Act, 186-1 (27 & 28 Vict., c. 39), s. 1. (c) The Special Sessions for hearing appeals against rates are held four times a year, and twenty-eight days' notice must be given by the justices before the holding of such Sessions in accordance with the sixth section of 6 & 7 Will. IV., c. 96. (') An action against overseers to recover back excess of a rate paid under protest cannot be maintained where no notice of appeal has been given to the overseers as is required by 41 Geo. III., c. 23, s. 2. (s) Where a rate has been erroneously made and paid, an action to recover back the amount must be commenced within six months. I? 1 ) Otherwise a different set of ratepayers would be affected. By 16 Geo. II., c. 18, justices may act in rating appeals otherwise than in relation to rates to which they are themselves chargeable. In Reg. v. Great Yarmouth J J. (a), at a Special (///) 41 Geo. III., c 23. s. 2. Appendix, p. 304. (,i) Post p. 264. (o) Reg. v. Parker, 7 E. & B. 155; 2(5 L.J.M.C. 199 ; 3 Jur. N.S. 771. ( ;) ) 4 B. & Ad. 342. (q) Peg. v. Kingston-on- Thames J J. and Wedd, E. B. & E. 259 ; 27 L.J.M.C. 201 ; 4 Jur. X.S. 759. (;•) Peg. v. Fouch, 2 Q.B. 308 ; 11 L.J.M.C. 1. (s) Priestley v. Watson, 2 C. & M. 691. (0 Burland v. Kingston-upon-Hull, 3 B. & S. 271 ; 32 L.J.Q.B. 17 ; 7 L.T. 316 ; 11 W.R. 33 ; 9 Jur. N.S. 275. (u) 8 Q.B.D. 525 ; 51 L.J.M.C. 39 ; 30 W.R. 460. Vide Peg. v. Cumberland JJ., 58 L.T. 491 ; 52 J.P. 502. Outside the Metropolis. 241 Sessions for appeals against a poor-rate, the chairman of the magistrates, who was himself appellant in one of the cases for hearing, took part in the decision of all the cases except his own. When his own case was called on he left the bench and went to the body of the court and conducted the case himself. On a rule for a certiorari to bring up all the orders for the purpose of quashing them, the Court held that the chairman, being a litigant in a matter similar to the other matters before the Court, was disqualified from acting as a justice, and that the orders were bad. The above Act is not repealed by section 6 of the Union Assessment Act, 1864. (x) Justices in Special Sessions can, therefore, hear appeals against rates made by a parish, though they are themselves ratepayers in the same parish. ARTICLE 102.— In case of appeal to Special A PP eai to . _,,.. ... , Special Sessions Sessions seven clear days notice in writing must -notice necessary. be given by the appellant before the day appointed for the Sessions to the collector, overseer, or other persons by whom the rate was made; twenty-one clear days' notice in writing previous to the Special Sessions to which the appeal is to be made of the intention to appeal and all the grounds thereof, to the Assessment Committee of the Union ; and where the appeal asks that the rate may be altered with respect to any other person, notice must also be given to such other person. This Article is framed from section 6 of the Parochial Assessment Act (6 & 7 Will. IV., c. 96) (y) ; 27 & 28 Vict., c. 39, s. 1 (2) ; and 41 Geo. III., c. 23, s. 6. («) 0) Reg. v. Bolingbrohe (1893) 2 Q.B. 347 ; 62 L.J.M.C. 180 ; 69 L.T. 717 ; 42 W.R. 128.; 5 R. 536 ; 58 J.P. 118. Ex parte Workington (1894) 1 Q.B. 416 ; 70 L.T. 143 ; 42 W.R, 177 ; 58 J.P. 381 ; 9 R. 135. Appendix, p. 379. (>/) Appendix, p. 320. (z) Appendix, p. 375. (a) Appendix, p. 307. 16 242 Procedure on Appeal. Form of notice. ]s^ particular form is provided for notice of an appeal to Special Sessions. It may be as follows : To the Churchwardens and Overseers of the Poor (b) of the Parish of in the County of To the Assessment Committee of the Union in the said County of To A. B. \if the appeal is against the rating of an hereditament belonging to A. B.~\ Take Notice that I, C. D., having been rated as an occupier of , an hereditament in the aforesaid parish of in a certain rate or assessment entitled, " An assessment for the relief of the poor," etc. [set out heading of rate'], do intend, at the next Special Sessions for hearing Appeals against Poor Rates to be holden for the Petty Sessions Division of , at , in the aforesaid county, to appeal against the said rate or assessment. The following are the grounds of such appeal : (1) That I am overrated in the said rate or assessment in respect of the hereditament occupied by me in the said parish aforesaid. \_All the grounds of appeal must be set out.] Dated this the day of 189 (Signed) C. D. (Address) How served. This notice must be served personally on the churchwardens, overseers, or persons who made the rate, and on any other person whose rate is the subject of appeal. It may be served on the Assessment Committee by being left at the office of the Clerk to the Board of Guardians, or sent through the post addressed to the committee at their clerk's office, or by being delivered personally to the clerk, or at his usual place of abode, in accordance with section 42 of the Union Assessment Act, 1862. (c) In rural parishes notice should also be given to the clerk of the Parish Council. Where no notice Where a party has appealed against a poor-rate on the served on party r j rr o r objected to. ground that other persons are omitted or under-rated, and has served the notice of appeal on the parish officers, but not on the persons objected to, as required by 41 Geo. III., c. 23, s. 6 (d), the next Sessions are bound to enter and respite the appeal under 17 Geo. II., c. 38, s. 4. This was decided in Reg. v. (b) By the Local Government Act, 1894, in rural parishes, the churchwardens are replaced by additional overseers. (c) Appendix p. 372. (d) Appendix, p. 307. Outside the Metropolis. 243 Eyre (e), where Lord Campbell, C.J., said : " Whatever hesita- tion I might have felt if this had been res Integra, it has been decided over and over again, and it must have been considered as settled when the 41 Geo. III., c. 23, was passed, which puts the parties interested in the same situation, as to notice, as the parish officers ; they are made respondents, and the notice must be served on them, and the notice required to be served on them stands just on the same footing as the notice to the parish officers. If no notice be given to them, it is therefore the same as if no notice were given to the parish officers." In the second case, Req. v. E)/rr(f), it was held that the sessions the " ' v proper judg Sessions were the proper judges as to whether reasonable notice ^i".'' 1 '' 1 ' of the appeal had been given under 17 Greo. II., c. 38, s. 4, and that they were not bound to enter and respite the appeal if they were of opinion that there had been reasonable notice. After an appeal has been respited at Sessions, the appellant cannot be called upon to prove his notice of appeal, (g) It is provided by 41 Greo. III., c. 23, s. 5 (A), that the Justices justices may , , , ,. , r .p ,, ,. hear appeals l>y may hear appeals where no notice nas been given it the parties consent where .no notice has consent. And by consent they may hear and decide upon been given- grounds of appeal not stated or mis-stated in the written notice, where a notice in writing has been given. Persons having a joint grievance may give a joint notice of joint notice. appeal. (?) Where there is an appeal on the ground that some person is Notice must he i ii i given to part y omitted who ought to be rated, the justices cannot hear the omitted. appeal unless notice of it has been given to the party said to have been improperly omitted. (/»•) Where a party appeals on the ground that he is rated in Notice to an respect of his lands in a higher proportion than all the other necessary.' inhabitants mentioned in the rate, it was held not to be neces- sary to give notice of appeal to all the inhabitants named in the rate. (/) 0) 6 E. & B. 992 ; 26 L.J.M.C. 14. (/) 7 E. & B. 609 ; 26 L.J.M.C. 121. (g) Rex v. Hertfordshire, 4 B. & Ad. 561. (/«) Appendix, p. 306. (0 Rex v. Sussex J J., 15 East 206. (/>•) Rex v. Brooke, 9 B. & C. 915. (/) Rex v. Sufolk, 1 B. & A. 640. 16 A 244 Procedure on Appeal. Abandonment of grounds of appeal. Overseers need not obtain consent of vestry to pro- ceed with an appeal. Onus of proof where rateable property has been omitted. Where person appeals on ground that he has no rateable property. The notice of appeal must state all the grounds of appeal. It was held in Reg. v. Kent J J. (m) that an appellant may abandon some of his grounds of appeal, and proceed with others. This decision overruled Beg. v. Cambridgeshire J J. (»), where the Court had decided otherwise. Cockburn, C.J., in his judgment in the former case, suggests that the decision in the earlier case " arose from a misconception." In Reg. v. Street (o) it was held that it was not necessary for the overseers to obtain the consent of the vestry to proceed with an appeal, and that the auditors were wrong in disallowing the cost of the appeal, it not being alleged that the overseers had acted mala fide or improvidently. Overseers are not bound to support a rate which is manifestly bad. (p) In Rex v. Hull Dock Co. (q) it was held that if the ground of appeal is that certain rateable property has been altogether omitted, the onus does not lie upon the appellant to give the Sessions the means of amending the rate, it being the duty of the parish officers to include all rateable property in the rate, and take what means they can to ascertain its value. If a party appeals on the ground that he has no rateable property in the parish, the respondents must first establish their case, (r) Assessment ARTICLE 103.— An Assessment Committee may, Committee as respondents, with the consent of the Guardians, appear as If no consent — no costs. respondents to an appeal. In West Ham v. Essex Justices and the London County Council (s) it was held by the House of Lords that where the Assessment Committee of a Union receive notice of a poor-rate appeal under section 1 of the Union Assessment Act Amend- ment Act, 1864 (27 & 28 Vict., c. 39), they have no authority to appear as respondents to the appeal unless they obtain the (m) L.R. 6 Q.B. 132 ; 40 L.J.M.C. 76 ; 19 W.R. 205. (n) 1 L.M. & P. 47 ; 19 L.J.M.C. 130 ; 4 New Sess. Cas. 87. (o) 18 Q.B. 682 ; 22 L.J.M.C. 29. (p) Beg. v. Fouch, 2 Q.B. 308 ; 11 L.J.M.C. 1. (?) 3 B. & C. 516, 526. (/) Rex v. Newbury, 4 T.R. 475. (s) (1896) A.C. 443 ; 65 L.J.M.C. 231 ; 75 L.T. 1 : 60 J.P. 756. may Outside the Metropolis. 245 consent of the Guardians after sending notice to every guardian as required by the above section. If they do appear without such consent and the appeal is dismissed " with costs to the respondents," they are not entitled to costs, although, through- out the proceedings, they receive notices to attend from the appellants and are treated by them as respondents. An Assessment Committee who appear as respondents to an ^2S' appeal are entitled to appeal to Quarter Sessions against the appeaL decision of the Special Sessions, (t) An order for costs cannot be made against an Assessment Committee who do not appear, (tf) ARTICLE 104.— Before Special Sessions a party |Ei s _ right may appear by counsel or solicitor. of ftU(lience -° There is nothing to prevent an appellant or respondent appearing in person. A corporate body, however, can only appear by counsel or solicitor. At Quarter Sessions counsel j£££. only have the right of audience, (u) Power of Justices at ARTICLE 105.— The Justices at Special Sessions may amend or quash the rate, and may award such !? c e S. Set costs as they think proper. This is provided by 6 & 7 Will. IV., c. 96, ss. 6 and 7. (x) The Justices at Special Sessions have the same power as the Justices at Quarter Sessions, (y) When a person is overcharged the Sessions may relieve him J^dEuge*. on appeal, and amend the rate by reducing the sum at which he is assessed under 17 Geo. II., c. 38, s. 6 (s) This was decided before 6 & 7 Will. IV., c. 96, was passed. When the subject-matter of a rate is improperly described in jj*gf- : the rate-book, the rate is not to be quashed by striking out the ^BlaL name of the person rated, but amended by altering the descrip- rate " 1 tion of the property rated, (a) (0 Reg. v. Montgomeryshire J J., 50 L.J.M.C. 52 ; 44 L.T. 310 ; 29 W.R. 806 ; 45 J.P. 407. («) Reg. v. Salop J J., 60 J.P. 552. (u) Post p. 253. (x) Appendix, p. 320. (y) Porf p. 254. (a) Rex v. Cheshunt, 2 T.E. 623. la) Reg. v. Bedmhister Union, 1 Q.B.D. 503 ; 45 L.J.M.C. 117 ; 34 L.T. 795 ; 40 J.P. 743. ,-mattei' 246 Procedure on Appeal. Appeal to ARTICLE 106.— The decision of the Justices at Quarter Ses- . . sionsfrom Special Sessions is binding and conclusive on the decision ot ■•■ . . .... Jnsfci? Tse8sioiia P ar * ies unless the person impugning such decision -recog^fzan'ce? shall, within fourteen days after the same shall have been given, give notice in writing of his intention of appealing against such decision, and of the grounds of such appeal, to the person in whose favour the decision was given, and, within five days after giving such notice, enter into a recognizance before some Justice of the Peace, with sufficient sureties to try such appeal at the next Quarter Sessions. This is provided by section 6 of the Parochial Assessment Act (6&7 Will. IV., c. 96). (6) The form of the notice will be similar to that given in Article 108. aeknowiedg- It was held in Reg. v. St. A/bans (e) that it is sufficient if the ment sufficient. rec0 g n i zanee [ s verbally acknowledged. It may be perfected afterwards. 4Te e -aite e rati°on ^ tne Justices at Special Sessions amend the rate, the Assess- f v-ahumon ii> t . men t Committee must alter the valuation list of the parish in conformity with the alteration made. (d) special sessions The Justices at Special Sessions have no power to state a case 1hm "n^point for the opinion of the Court upon a point of law raised on an appeal. The case should be stated under 12 & 13 Vict., c. 45, s. 11. (e) Appeal to ARTICLE 107.— Any person aggrieved by any Son r S fiom rate made for the relief of the poor who has failed commiuee! to obtain relief from the Assessment Committee may appeal to the next Quarter Sessions. Kextpinc- So enacted by 17 Geo. II., c. 38, s. 4. (/) The next Quarter sessions. uarter Sessions means next practicable Quarter Sessions. («) 25 & 26 Vict., c. 103, s. 42. Appendix, p. 372. («) 41 Geo. III., c. 23, ss. 4, 6. Appendix, pp. 306, 307. (o) Reg. v. Eyre, 6 E. & B. 992 ; 26 L.J.M.C. 14. Ante p. 242. (p) Reg. v. Eyre, 7 E. & B. 609 ; 26 L.J.M.C. 121. Ante p. 243. (?) 15 East 206. Outside the Metropolis. 249 The notice of objection to the Assessment Committee must Notice muei contain all the grounds of appeal, for the appellant cannot rely of appeal, upon any ground of appeal that was not raised in the -notice of objection before the Assessment Committee. (■>•) By 41 Geo. III., c. 23, s. 4 (s), the notice of appeal must set out Appellant may all the grounds of appeal. The appellant, however, may of grounds of appeal, abandon some of his grounds of appeal and proceed on others, (t) The Quarter Sessions has no power to quash a rate for a sessions cannot *■ x quash a rate for defect not pointed out in the notice of appeal, even though pointed out'™ apparent on the face of the rate, (u) appeal. 106 It was held in Rex v. Suffolk (x) that one appeal might be brought against four rates. The question of interested justices has been already dealt ^stices?* 1 with, [y) ARTICLE 109.— At any time after notice given \ case may be stated tor of appeal to Quarter Sessions the parties may, by °p inion of consent, and by order of a judge of the Court of afteri Queen's Bench after notice given of appeal Queen's Bench, state the facts of the case in the geSSf form of a special case for the opinion of such Court, and may agree that a judgment in con- formity with the decision of such Court, and for such costs as such Court shall adjudge, may be entered on motion by either party at the Sessions next or next but one after such decision shall have been given. This is provided by s. 11 of Baines's Act (12 & 13 Vict., c. 45). («) The Court of Queen's Bench will only entertain cases from case stated the Sessions under this section which raise a question, the dispose of ' decision of which will decide the appeal. The Court will not (»■) Williams v. Bedminster Union, 30 L.T. 710 ; 22 W.R. 943. (s) Appendix, p. 306. (0 Reg. v. Kent JJ., L.R. 6 Q.B. 132 ; 40 L.J.M.C. 76 ; 19 W.R. 205. Ante p. 244. (w) Rex v. Bromyard, 8 B. & C. 240. (x) 1 B. & A. 640. (y) Article 101. Ante p. 240. (») Appendix, p. 348. 250 Procedure on Appeal. act on a direction by the Sessions that in a particular event the case is to be sent back to them to be re-heard, (a) Decision of In Peterborough v. Thurlby(b) it was decided that it was a must be entered condition precedent of the right to state a case under this the J sessions, section that the parties should agree that the decision of the High Court be entered as a judgment of the Sessions. costs between In Clarendon v. St. James's, Westminster (c), it was held that pany. an ' when a case is stated under this section the practice is to give costs as between party and party. Appeal from In Walsall v. London and North-Western Railway Co. id) the Queen's Bench. ^^ ^ -^^ decided fl^rf Rn appeal lie§ to the Court of Appeal, and thence to the House of Lords, on a ease stated by Quarter Sessions, the jurisdiction of the Queen's Bench being judicial, and not merely consultative. It is not necessary that the appellant shoidd have leave to appeal, (e) This only applies to cases stated by Quarter Sessions under Baines's Act, Effect of which is excepted from s. 2 of the Judicature Act, 1894. By Judicature Act, *- . „ , that Act there is no appeal, except by leave, from the Queen s Bench, unless the case is stated by Quarter Sessions, under 11 & 12 Vict., c. 78, and Baines's Act (12 & 13 Vict., c. 45). (./') Arbitration ARTICLE 110. — At any time after notice of aSSve'nto appeal given to Quarter Sessions the parties may, sessions "by themselves or their attornies, and by order of a judge of the Court of Queen's Bench, submit the matter or matters of such appeal to arbitra- tion, and the award of such arbitrator is as binding and effectual as a regular judgment of the Court of Quarter Sessions. This is provided by s. 12 of Baines's Act (12 & 13 Vict., c. 40 . .SY. Mary Abbotts Kensington (I), the Court of Agent of v objector. Appeal decided that an agent of the objector may appear, as there is no provision in the Union Assessment Act, 1862 (i/i), prohibiting an objector from appearing by an agent. ARTICLE 122. — An objector is not bound to Evidence. produce the evidence required by the Assessment Committee. This was decided in Reg. v. Essex J J. (ji) (h) Appendix, p. 401. (i) Williams v. Bedminster Union, 30 L.T. 710 ; 22 W.R. l>43. (ii) Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869, s. 65. Pod p. 428. (k) 3 New Sessions Cases 96. Vide also Rex v. Warwickshire, 6 L.J.M.C. 113. (0 (1891) 1 Q.B. 378 ; GO L.J.M.C. 52 ; 64 L.T. 240 ; 39 W.R. 278 ; 55 J.P. 502. (???) Appendix, p. 354. (n) 46 J.P. 724. Ante p. 236. 262 Procedure on Appeal. Objections to alterations in valuation list. Re-deposit — when unneces ARTICLE 123.— Where the Assessment Com- mittee have made alterations in the valuation list they must send it to be re-deposited within three days after it has been approved by them, and must appoint a day not less than fourteen nor more than twenty-eight days after such re-deposit for hearing objections to the alterations, of which objections seven days' notice shall be given by the objector. This is provided by the Union Assessment Act, 1862, s. 21 (o) and the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869, s. 42, sub-s. 7. (p) If the valuation list is not re-deposited it is invalid, (q) It is not necessary to re-deposit the list if the alterations are . made on appeal. (>•) It is the duty of the overseers to re-deposit the valuation list, (s) Objections to supplemental list. How rateable value in supplemental list is to be ascertained. ARTICLE 124.— The same proceedings shall be taken with respect to objections and appeals against a supplemental list as against a quin- quennial valuation list. This is so provided by the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 186!) (32 & 33 Vict., c. 67), s. 46, sub-s. 3. (*) In Reg. v. Poplar (u) it was decided that where a diminution in income has been established, and the property has therefore to be entered in a supplemental list, the rateable value of the hereditament must be ascertained, not by opening up the value in the previous quinquennial or supplemental list, but by assuming the value of the list then in force to be the correct value at the commencement of the twelve months preceding, and by deducting from it the diminution in value during that period. (o) Appendix, p. 362. (p) Appendix, p. 414. (q) Reg. v. Charlton Union, L.R. 8 Q.B. 5 ; 42 L.J.M.C. 34. (r) Reg. v. Edmonds, L.R. 9 Q.B. 598 ; 43 L.J.M.C. 156 ; 31 L.T. 237 ; 22 W.R. 924 ; 30 J.P. 727. (s) Reg. v. Chorlton-on-Medlock, 35 L.J.M.C. 56 ; 12 L.T. 581. Ante p. 238. (t) Appendix, p. 418. (m) 13 Q.B.D.364 ; 53 L.J.M.C. 97 ; 51 L.T. 97 ; 48 J.P. 564. In the Metropolis. 263 ARTICLE 125— An objection may be made to Pr™nani8t a provisional list by the occupier of any heredita- ment contained in such list ^ by the surveyor of taxes by notice thereof in writing being served on the clerk of the Assessment Committee, on the overseers, on the surveyor of taxes, and on the occupier. This is provided by the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869 Form of notice* (32 & 33 Vict., c. 67), s. 47, sub-s. 4. (x) The notice may be in the form contained in Article 120. (//) On receipt of notice of objection the clerk of the Assessment Committee shall summon a meeting of the committee, and give notice of the time and place of such meeting to the overseers, the surveyor of taxes, and to the occupier, as required by s. 47, sub-s. 5 of the Act. (s) The committee shall hear and determine the objection in Hearing of the same manner as if it were an objection to a valuation list, (re) There is no appeal from the decision of an Assessment Com- No a PP eal - mittee on an objection to a provisional list, (h) Any ratepayer, therefore, who has failed to obtain relief from the Assessment Committet- must wait for his opportunity of appealing against the next supplemental or quinquennial list. In Beg. v. St. Man/, Bermondsey (c), it was held that the £Sdtota2rt overseers are not bound to comply with a requisition to insert j^^ionai property in a provisional list, if they are of opinion that no hst - such alteration in value has taken place ; and a mandamus will not be granted to compel them to do so. In Boa. r. St. Mary. Islington (d), it was held that where a Assessment •' . . ■ a -, ,1 Committee prima facie case of diminution m profits was made out t.ne bound to make r out provisional Assessment Committee is bound, in default of the overseers, to list in default , of overseers. appoint a person to make out a provisional list ; and that a mandamus will be granted to compel them to do so. (a;) Appendix, p. 420. (y) Ante p. 2G0. (s) Appendix, p. 420. (a) Appendix, p. 420. (6) Fulham Union v. Wells, 20 Q.B.D. 749 ; 57 L.J.M.C. 112 ; 59 L.T. 103 ; 36 W.R. 858 ; 52 J.P. 663. (c) 14 Q.B.D. 351 ; 54 L.J.M.C. 68 ; 33 W.R. 414 ; 49 J.P. 38. (d) 19 Q.B.D. 529 ; 56 L.J.Q.B. 597 ; 57 L.T. 270 ; 35 W.R. 664; 51 J.P. 789. 264 Procedure on Appeal. Appeal to Special Sessions. Time for hold- ing Special Sessions. " Failure to obtain relief." Justices can onlv inquire into the value of property. Effect of a pending appeal, ARTICLE 126.™ Any ratepayer and any over- seers of a parish, so far as respects the valuation list of such parish, and any surveyor of taxes, so far as respects the valuation list of any parish in the petty sessional division, may, if he or they feel aggrieved by any decision of the Assessment Com- mittee on an objection made with respect to the unfairness or incorrectness of the valuation of any hereditament included in such list, but not other- wise, appeal against such decision to Special Sessions. This is enacted by the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict., c 67), s. 19. (e) Special Sessions may be held at any time after November 30, which will enable the justices to determine all appeals before the ensuing January 1. It was decided in Beg. v. Bedminster Union (/) that a person has not " failed to obtain relief " until the committee have adjudicated upon the objection. By s. 20 of the Valuation (Metropolis) Act the Justices at Special Sessions may only inquire into the value of an heredita- ment, and they cannot hear any appeal touching any other part, or alter any other part of the valuation list. Notwithstanding that an appeal may be pending against an assessment all rates and taxes must be paid by the appellant in accordance with the assessment of his property in the valuation list. If on appeal the assessment is reduced, the amount overpaid must be returned to the appellant, (g) The law is different outside the Metropolis. (Ii) An appeal to Special Sessions must be to the next practicable Sessions after the final deposit of the valuation list. («) As to what are the next practicable Sessions the reader is referred to Article 101. (*) (e) Appendix, p. 403. (/•) 1 Q.B.D.503 ; 45 L.J.M.C. 117 ; 34 L.T. 795 ; 40 J. P. 743. Ante p. 238. (g) 3-2 & 33 Vict., c. 67, s. 44. Reg. v. Marsham, 50 L.T. 142 ; 32 W.R. 157. (h) Ante p. 239. (i) Reg. v. Traford, 15 Q.B. 200 ; 19 L.J.M.C. 199. \k) Ante p. 239. In the Metropolis. 265 The question of interested justices has already been dealt interested , 7X justices. with. {/) By 47 Vict., c. 5, s. 2 (m), an owner or lessee who pays the owner or lessee may rates may appeal. appeal. ARTICLE 127. — Notice of appeal to Special f p ^S sessions Sessions must be given before November 21 to -notice. 68 ' (1) the surveyor of taxes of the district, (2) the clerk to the Assessment Committee, (3) where the appeal relates to the unfairness or incorrectness of the valuation of, or to the omission of an hereditament occupied by any person other than the appellant, or to the incorrectness of any matter stated in the list with respect to any such heredita- ment, then to such person. This is enacted by the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict., c 67) ss. 33 & 42 (10). (n) No notice need be given to the surveyor of taxes when the appeal relates only to the rateable value of any hereditament. The notice may be in the following form, no special form Form of notice# being provided by the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869. To Mr. Clerk to the Assessment Committee of the Union, in the County of London. To Mr. Surveyor of Taxes for the district, including the Parish of To A. B. [Where, notice to A. B. is required by the above Articled] I, C. D., of Street, hereby give you notice that I feel myself aggrieved by the decision of the Assessment Committee of the Union, on an objection made before them on the day of , 189 , with respect to the unfairness or incorrectness of the valuation of [here describe the hereditament], included in the valuation list of the parish of in the said Union. The decision of the Assessment Committee was as follows : [Here give the decision.'] And I hereby give you notice that I intend to appeal against such decision to the next Special Sessions to be holden in pursuance of the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869. The corrections which I desire to have made in the valuation list of the said parish of are as follows : [Here, set out the corrections.] Dated this, the day of ,189 (Signed) C. D. (0 Ante pp. 240, 241. (m) Appendix, p. 438. (n) Appendix, pp. 409, 414. 266 Procedure on Appeal. where no If f rom mistake or accident notice of appeal has not been notice has been . -iti-i i • i i • i .li given. given, or it an additional notice appears to be required, tne justices may order notice of appeal to be given. This is provided by s. 34 of the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869. (o) Under the same section the justices have power to adjourn the hearing from time to time and to any day not later than December 31st. joint notice of Where two or more persons have a joint grievance, such as appea . ^ e om j ss j on f p ers0 ns from the rate who ought to be rated, they may join in giving a joint notice of appeal, (p) Notice must The notice must contain all the grounds of appeal, and the grounds of appellant cannot rely on any ground that was not raised in appeal — abandonment of the notice of objection before the Assessment Committee, (q) some. J He may, however, abandon some of his grounds of appeal, and proceed on others, (r) sessions cannot The Sessions have no power to quash a rate for a defect not quash rate for % m defect not pointed out in the notice of appeal, though apparent on the appeal!* faCe ° f the rate> (*) Appellant must ARTICLE 128.— Within seven days after giving reS^koe. notice of appeal to Special Sessions the appellant must enter into a recognizance before a Justice of the Peace for the County of London in the sum of £20 with one surety in a like amount to duly prosecute his appeal and for the payment of any costs ordered. This is provided by rule 1 of the " Orders of the County of London Quarter Sessions." (7) The Order does not apply to an Assessment Committee, to overseers, or to surveyors of taxes, waiver of By rule 3 of the same Orders the Court may waive recogni- depolit iniieu 0r zances, or where an appellant desires to make a deposit of money in substitution for the recognizances, he may, by rule 4, make a deposit of £50 with the London and Westminster Bank in the joint names of the chairman and of the clerk of the Court. (o) Appendix, p. 410. Ip) Rex v. Sussex J J., 15 East 206. (q) Williams v. Bedminster Union, 30 L.T. 710 ; 22 W.R. 943. (■;■) Reg. v. Kent J J., L.R. 6 Q.B. 132 ; 40 L.J.M.C. 76 ; 19 W.R. 205. Ante p. 244. (s) Rex v. Bromyard, 8 B. & C. 240. (0 Post p. 279. of recognizance. In the Metropolis. 267 ARTICLE 129. — The Assessment Committee, Respondents to with the consent of the Guardians of the Union, the surveyor of taxes, and any other person to whom notice has been given as required by Article 127, may appear as respondents to an appeal. An Assessment Committee who appear as respondents to an appeal are entitled to appeal to Quarter Sessions against the decision of the Special Sessions, (it) It was held in West Ham v. Essex J J. and London **££>*>*> County Council (.») that if an Assessment Committee appear as respondents to an appeal without the consent of the Guardians of the Union, they are not entitled to costs where the appeal is dismissed "with costs to the respondents." An order for costs cannot be made against an Assessment Committee who do not appear, (xx) Special Sessions — right f audience. ARTICLE 130— An appellant may appear before * Justices at Special Sessions by counsel or solicitor. " This rule does not prevent a party appearing in person. Where, however, the party is a corporate body such party can only appear by counsel or solicitor. The rule is different at Quarter Sessions, where counsel fSL only have a right of audience, (y) ARTICLE I31.-The Justices at Special Sessions S c r e ° f at may, upon appeal, confirm or alter the valuation f>' list, so far as it is questioned by the appeal, as they think just; and the costs of any appeal are in the discretion of the Justices and shall be awarded by them to be paid by such parties to the appeal, and in such proportions, as they think just. This is enacted by the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict., c. 67), ss. 34 and 39. (a) (u) Reg. v. Montgomery J J., 50 L.J.M.C. 52 ; 44 L.T. 310 ; 29 W.R. 806 ; 45 J.P. 407. (x) (1896) A.C. 443 ; 65 L.J.M.C. 231 ; 75 L.T. 1 ; 60 J.P. 756. Ante p. 244. (xx) Reg. v. Salop J J., 60 J.P. 552. (y) Post p. 275. (z) Appendix, pp. 410, 411. ecial essions — costs. nient. 268 Procedure on Appeal. justices can The Justices at Special Sessions can only hear appeals appeals relating relating to the value of a hereditament ; they cannot inquire to the value of , , . anhereaita- into any other question. This is provided by s. 20 ol the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869. (a) By the same section it is provided that the decision of the Justices and an alteration by them of the value of an hereditament in the valuation list of any parish shall only affect the rights of the ratepayers of such parish among themselves, and shall not of itself in any way alter the totals of the gross or rateable value of such list as settled by the Assessment Committee, but may form a reason for an appeal against such totals to the Assessment Sessions. Appeaito ARTICLE 132. —Any ratepayer, any surveyor of Quarter . sessions from taxes, and any overseer with the consent of the A ssessment committee and vestry of his parish, who may feel aggrieved by sessions. any decision of the Assessment Committee, on an objection made before them to which he was a party or by any decision of Special Sessions, whether he was a party or not, may appeal against such decision to London Quarter Sessions. Any Assessment Committee in the Metropolis or in the county in which the parish to which the appeal relates is situate, any overseers in the Metropolis or such county with the consent of the vestry of their parish, any ratepayer in the Metropolis or such county, and any body of persons authorised by law to levy taxes or require con- tributions payable out of rates in the Metropolis or such county, may appeal to Quarter Sessions if they or he feel aggrieved by reason (1) of the total of the gross value of any parish being too high or too low; (2) of the total of the rateable value of any parish being too high or too low ; or (3) of their being no approved valuation list for any parish. Time for hold- THis is enacted by the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869, 32. (b) By the Local Government Act, 1888 (51 & 52 Vict., Sessions and for hearing appeals. (a) Appendix, p. 404. (b) Appendix, p. 408. In the Metropolis. 269 e. 41), s. 42 (10), the Assessment Sessions are replaced by the London Quarter Sessions. By s. 42 (13) of the former Act the Sessions may be held at any time after February 1st, which will enable the Justices to determine all appeals before the ensuing March 31st. Public notice must be given by adver- tisement in some newspaper circulating generally in the Metropolis ten days at least before the first Court is held, and notice must be sent to all parties to an appeal, (e) A scheme has been framed for regulating the holding of Courts of Quarter Sessions for the County of London, (d) The Court may, however, in cases in which the requisite formalities have been complied with, hear and determine all appeals remaining to be heard upon March 31 in any year, if the Court has been unable through press of business or other unavoidable cause to hear and determine them by that date, (e) Persons deeming themselves " aggrieved " within s. 32 of Persons • -»«- t a aggrieved not the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869, bv reason of the total entitled to 1 J obtain altera- of the gross or rateable value of any parish being too high or tion of totals - too low, are not entitled to obtain an alteration of the totals by showing that particular hereditaments have been under or over- assessed. (/) The effect of an appeal pending to Quarter Sessions is the same as of an appeal pending to Special Sessions, (g) The question of interested justices has already been dealt interested x * * justices. with, (h) (<•) Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869, ss. 30 and 42 (14). Appendix, pp. 407, 415. (d) Post p. 282. (e) Peg. v. London JJ. and London County Council, 63 LJ.Q.B. 148 ; 69 L.T. 682 ; 58 J.P. 69 ; 9 R. 14. This case went to the House of Lords on another point. It is reported in (1894) A.C. 600 ; 64 L.J.Q.B. 48 ; 71 L.T. 409 ; 6 R. 310, under the name London County Council v. St. George's Union. (f ) London County Council v. St. George's Union, supra. (g) Ante p. 264. (A) Ante pp. 240, 241. 270 Procedure on Appeal. On whom notice of appeal to Quarter Sessions must be served. Form of notice. Form of notice of appeal from supplemental list. ARTICLE 133.— Notice in writing of appeals to Quarter Sessions must be served on or before January 14 (1) on the clerk of the Assessment Committee, (2) on the surveyor of taxes of the dis- trict unless the appeal relates only to the rateable value of an hereditament), (3) when the appeal relates to the unfairness or incorrectness of the valuation of, or to the omission of an hereditament occupied by any person other than the appellant, or to the incorrectness of any matter stated in the list with respect to any such hereditament, then on such person. This is provided by the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869, s. 33. (i) The notice of appeal to Quarter Sessions from an Assessment Committee may be as follows : To Mr. , Clerk to the Assessment Committee of the Union. To Mr. , Surveyor of Taxis of the district of [if it is necessary to give notice to the Surveyor of Taxes.] To A. B. [if it is necessary to give notice to any other person^] I, C. !>., of , hereby give you notice that I feel myself aggrieved by the decision of the Assessment Committee of the Onion, on an objection made by me before them on the day of , 189 . The decision of the Assessment Committee was as follows : [Here set out the decision.] And I hereby give you notice that I intend to appeal against such decision to the next General Quarter Sessions for the County of London, to be hoi den under the Valuation (Metropolis) Act. 1869, and the Local Government Act, 1888. The corrections which I desire to make are as follows : [Here set out all the corrections desired.] Dated this, the day of ,189 . (Signed) C. D. Where the appeal is from a supplemental list, the only alteration in the foregoing notice necessary is in the part setting out the decision of the Assessment Committee, which (i) Appendix, p. 409. In the Metropolis. 271 may be in this form : " The decision of the Assessment Committee was as follows: They refused to expunge an hereditament [describe if] of which I am the occupier [or owner] from the supplemental valuation list made on or about the day of ,189 , for the parish of , in the said Union, although no alteration in value had taken place in the said hereditament during any part of the rating year preceding the making of the said list." Where the notice of appeal is from a decision of Special ^mof notice Sessions it may be as follows : sessions. To the Assessment Committee of the Union, in the County of London. To the Surveyor of Taxes for the District [if it is necessary to give notice to the Surveyor of Taxes.'] To A. B. [if it is necessary to give notice to any other person.] I, C. P., of , hereby give you notice that I feel aggrieved by a decision of the Court of Special Sessions on an appeal heard by the said Court of Special Sessions on the day of , 189 . The decision of the said Court of Special Sessions was as follows : [Here set out the decision. ] And I hereby give you notice that I intend to appeal to the next General Quarter Sessions for the County of London, to be holden in pursuance of the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869, and the Local Government Act, 1888. The corrections which I desire to have made in the valuation. list of the parish of are as follows : [Here set out the corrections desired."] Dated this, the day of ,189 . (Signed) CD. The notices may be served on or sent to any person or body ^™ ceof of persons by either being delivered to such person or the clerk of such body, or left at the usual place of abode of such person or clerk, or at the office of such clerk or body, or (if such abode or office cannot on reasonable inquiry be discovered) at the premises to which the order, notice, or document relates. They may also be served by being sent by post in a prepaid letter Prepaid letter addressed to the persons entitled to notice. In the latter event it may be necessary to prove the posting of the notices when the appeal is heard, (k) (k) Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869, s. 65. Appendix, p. 428. 272 Procedure on Appeal. Notice to be By Order 6 of the Orders of the County of London Quarter aiven by _. . . ,. , . . respondents. Sessions (/) any person or persons claiming to appear as respondents in an appeal to Quarter Sessions must give notice in writing of their intention so to appear to the clerk of the Court and the appellant within 14 days after January 14th next following the final deposit of the valuation list. Eowerof By s. 34 of the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869 (m), if from justices where J . r.o notice given, accident or mistake due notice of appeal has not been given, or it an additional notice of appeal appears to be required, the Justices may, if they think it just, order notice of appeal to be given. Where two or more persons have a joint grievance they may join in giving a joint notice of appeal, (n) The notice of appeal must contain all the grounds of appeal. The appellant cannot rely upon any ground of appeal that was not raised in the notice of objection before the Assessment Committee, (o) He may, however, abandon some of the grounds of appeal, and proceed on others, (p) The Quarter Sessions have no power to quash a rate for a Joint notice of appeal. Notice must contain all grounds of appeal. Sessions cannot quash a rate for a defect not defect not pointed out in the notice of appeal, though apparent notice of appeal. on the face of the rate, (q) Appellant to ARTICLE 184.— On an appeal to Quarter Sessions enter into recognizances, from the decision either of a a Assessment Com- mittee or Special Sessions, the appellant and two sureties must, within seven days after giving notice of appeal, enter into recognizances before a justice of the peace for the due prosecution of the appeal and the payment of any costs ordered to be paid by him, and the amount of such recognizances shall be determined by such justice of the peace, and shall not be less than £50. waiver of This is provided by Order 2 of the Orders of the County of recognizances — Deposit instead L on d. on Quarter Sessions, (r) The Court may waive the of recog- x ' u nizances. . — (/) Post p. 280. (m) Appendix, p. 410. (>i) Rex v. Sussex JJ., 15 East 206. (o) Williams v. Bedminster Union, 30 L.T. 710 ; 22 W.R. 943. (p) Reg. v. Kent JJ., L.R. 6 Q.B. 132 ; 40 L.J.M.C. 76 ; lit W.R. 205. (q) Rex v. Bromyard, 8 B. & C. 240. (r) Post p. 279. In the Metropolis. 273 recognizances. Instead of entering into recognizances an appellant may make a deposit of £50 in the London and Westminster Bank to a joint account of the Chairman and Clerk of the Court. This does not apply to an Assessment Committee, to overseers, or to surveyors of taxes. ARTICLE 135.— All appeals to Quarter Sessions Appeal to be must be entered by Petition to be lodged with the potion. y Clerk of the Court, on or before January 14 next following the final approval of the Valuation List or the Supplemental List, as the case may be, by the Assessment Committee. This is required by Order 5 of the Orders of the County of London Quarter Sessions, (s) The Petition may be in the following form :— llmol. To Her Maiesty's Justices of the Peace for the County of in an appeal i i i j. • A +1,^ from an London in Quarter Sessions assembled, acting under tne AsseS sment Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869, and the Local Government Committee. Act, 1888. The Humble Petition of of in the County of , sheweth : — 1. That your Petitioner feels aggrieved by the decision of the Assess- ment Committee for the Union [or Parish of ], in the County of London, on an objection made before them on the day of , 189 . 2. That such objection related to [Here insert the grounds of objection and description of the property occupied or owned by the Petitioner]. 3. That your Petitioner has duly served the notices required by the said Act of his intention to appeal to your Honorable Court against the said decision, and has specified therein the corrections which your Petitioner desires to have made in the Valuation List. 4. That the respondents to this appeal are [Here insert the names of those persons to whom notice of appeal has been given]. Your Petitioner therefore humbly appeals to your Honorable Court against the decision of the said Assessment Committee, and prays that a time and place may be appointed for hearing and determining the said appeal. Cowdy of London to wit. (s) Post p. 280. 18 274 Procedure on Appeal. From special If the appeal is from a decision of the Special Sessions Sessions. paragraph 1 of the above form must be altered as follows : 1. That your Petitioner feels aggrieved by the decision of the Special Sessions for the Division of , in the County of London, upon an appeal by your Petitioner against the decision of the Assessment Committee of the Union [or Parish of ]. The remainder of the Petition will be the same as for an appeal from an Assessment Committee, the words Special Sessions being substituted for Assessment Committee in the last paragraph. The Court makes the following order on the above Petition : County 1 At a Court of Quarter Sessions of the County of London, of London \ holden at the Sessions House, Clerkenwell, in the said County, to wit. J on the day of in the year of our Sovereign Lady Victoria, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, Queen, Defender of the Faith, and in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and ninety It is ordered that an appeal of in respect of the Valuation List for the Parish of , in the Union of , in the County of London, be entered for hearing at in the County of , on the day of at the hour of in the forenoon, and that all parties concerned have notice of this order. By the Court. case to be stated ARTICLE 136.— On or before February 1 next and a ?e p S pondent. following the entry of an appeal to Quarter Sessions, the appellant and respondent respec- tively shall state his case and the facts to be proved and the points of law to be argued in support of the case. This is provided by Eule 7 of the Orders of the County of London Quarter Sessions, (t) It does not apply to an appeal in which the total rateable value appealed against does not exceed £300. copies for The appellant and respondent must each deliver to the Clerk of the Court fifteen copies of his case, and one copy to the other side. (0 Post p. 280. In the Metropolis. 275 ARTICLE 137.~At any time after notice given case sutedby of appeal to Quarter Sessions the parties may, j£5°£ * by consent and by order of any judge of the gp^ of High Court of Queen's Bench, state the facts of the case in the form of a special case for the opinion of such Court, and may agree that a judgment in conformity with the decision of that Court, and for such costs as that Court may adjudge, be entered on the application of either party at the meeting of the Justices in Quarter Sessions next or next but one after such decision has been given. This is provided by s. 40 of the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 2Jf^* t °« B if 1869(h), and is a re-enactment for the Metropolis of s. 11 of g™» e b / Baines's Act (12 & 13 Vict., c. 45). (x) Se88ions ' If such a judgment is entered the section provides that " it shall be of the same effect in all respects as if the same had been given by the Quarter Sessions upon an appeal duly brought before them and adjourned." Where a case is stated as here provided it would seem to be ^f c t a °^ he Act> " an appeal " within s. 2 of the Judicature Act, 1894 (y), cases 1994 - stated under 11 & 12 Vict., c. 78, and Baines's Act (12 & 13 Vict., c. 45) being alone excepted. Notice in writing of the decision of the Court of Queen's gg»£rf Bench must be served by the Clerk of the Quarter Sessions on ^ n ^ n t c o h the Assessment Committee which approved the list questioned c^S! on the appeal. ARTICLE 138— A party can only appear atm g htof Quarter Sessions by counsel. This rule does not affect the right of a party to appear in person. Where, however, a party is a corporate body, such party can only appear by counsel. Consents must be signified by counsel in open Court in accordance with Order 10 of the Orders of the County of (u) Appendix, p. 412. For decisions, vide ante p. 240. (x) Appendix, p. 348. (y) Article 141, post p. 278. 18 A 276 Procedure on Appeal. London Quarter Sessions. (2) A clerk to the Assessment Com- mittee cannot consent to an alteration in the Valuation List. This was decided in Reg. v. London J J. (a), where Lord Esher, M.R., referring to s. 62 of the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, can hefheara on 1869, said: "The object of the section appears to me to be that, instead of its being necessary for the individual members of the committee to appear in Court, the clerk may appear for all of them. With regard to the proceedings which are subse- quently to take place upon the appeal, the justices have made rules for the purpose of regulating them under s. 27, one of which is to the effect that consents shall be signified by counsel in open Court. That is a rule which, in my opinion, they were entitled under the Statute to make, and which is not ultra vires. It is not necessary to say exactly what the clerk may or may not do under s. 62, but I do not think it entitles him to be heard as contended in this case." One counsel only for each party to the appeal is heard, unless by special leave of the Court, (b) The counsel for the appellant begins except when a surveyor of taxes is the appellant, in which case the counsel for the respondent shall begin, (c) One counsel only can be heard. Quart e e r sat ARTICLE 1 3 9. — The Justices at Quarter comp^produc- Sessions may order any clerk to the Commissioner uon of evidence. Q ^ iji axeSj any surveyor f taxes, clerk of Assess- ment Committee, overseer, assistant-overseer, or like officer in the Metropolis to produce any documents relating to rates or taxes which such Justices may consider necessary for determining an appeal, and which do not relate to the profits of trade or concerns in the nature of trade. This is enacted by s. 31 of the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869. (d) Any person who, after tender of a reasonable sum (V) Post p. 281. (a) (1896) 1 Q.B. 659 ; 65 L.J.M.C. 120 ; 74 L.T. 523 ; 44 W.R. 485 ; 60 J.P. 420. (b) Post p. 281. (c) Post p. 281. (d) Appendix, p. 407. Penalty for refusal. In the Metropolis. 277 for expenses, refuses to obey any order under this section, is on conviction before two justices liable to a penalty not exceeding- five pounds. ARTICLE 140.— The Justices at Quarter Sessions power of Justices at may adjourn the hearing of an appeal from time g e u ^* e n r s _ c to time, and to any day not later than the day "before which all appeals to them are required by this Act to be heard; and for the purpose of obtaining the decision of any superior Court to any day necessary for that purpose ; and if from acci- dent or mistake due notice of appeal has not been given, or if an additional notice of appeal appears to be required they may, if they think it just, order notice of appeal to be given. They may confirm or alter the Valuation List, so far as it is questioned by any appeal, in such manner as they think just; and the costs of any appeal shall be in the discretion of the Justices, and shall be awarded by them to be paid by such parties and in such proportions as they think just. These are the powers conferred on the Justices by sections 34 and 39 of the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869. (e) By section 42 (13) all appeals must be determined by Quarter Sessions before March 31. The cases on the question of costs have been fully referred to in Article 114. (,/') ARTICLE 141.— There is an appeal from the Appeal from decision of the Justices at Quarter Sessions to Ks- _ _ .. , . . special case. the Queens Bench by special case. So provided by the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869, s. 40. ((/) It would seem that such case must be taken up within three months. (e) Appendix, pp. 410, 411. (/) Ante p. 254. (g) Appendix, p. 412. 278 Procedure on Appeal. By the Summary Jurisdiction Act, 1879, s. 40, a writ of certiorari is not necessary where a special case is stated by a Court of Quarter Sessions. cawAclfsk B J the Judicature Act, 1894 (57 & 58 Vict., c. 16), s. 2, deemedto be every case stated by Quarter Sessions otherwise than under an appeal. u & ^ y^ ^ ^ ^ 12 & jg y^ Q ^ ^ the CQn _ sideration of the High Court shall be deemed to be an appeal. On the hearing of such appeal the Appellate Court may draw Appellate Court an y inference of fact which might have been drawn in the may draw J ° fact-ma e ° f Court of Quarter Sessions, and may give any judgment or be^-heardM make any order which ought to have been given or made by that Court, and may remit the order and the case stated on it, with the opinion or direction of the Appellate Court, for re-hearing and determination by the Court of Quarter Sessions, or may remit the case for re-statement. Appellate Court The Appellate Court has full power over the costs in the full power over L *- *- . costs. Appellate Court and in the Court of Quarter Sessions. The judgment on any such appeal, or where an appeal to a Court of Quarter Sessions has been directed to be entered for re-hearing, then that appeal, shall on motion by any party to the appeal, judgment on be entered at the Sessions next or next but one after the entered at delivery of the judgment, or the giving of the direction, and Sessions on J JO O O motion by any s hall, unless the Appellate Court otherwise directs, have effect party to the rr appeal. ag jf ^he judgment had been given, or, in case of an appeal directed to be re-heard, the appeal had been heard and determined by the Court of Quarter Sessions at the time of the decision in respect, of which the appeal from Quarter Sessions was brought, and entry and respite of any appeal to Quarter Sessions in resj>ect of which a case has been stated for the consideration of the High Court shall not be necessary. Decision of By s. 1, subs. (5) of the Act the appeal is to be heard by a Divisional Court f v ' \ l J final unless Divisional Court, and the determination thereof by such Court leave to appeal «/ given - is final unless leave to appeal is given by that Court or the Court of Appeal. 279 ORDERS Of the County of London Quarter Sessions, Regulating the Proceedings on Appeals under the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869. 1. Appellants to Special Sessions to enter into Recognizances. — On an appeal to Special Sessions from the decision of an Assessment Committee, the appellant and one surety shall, within seven days after giving notice of appeal, enter into recognizances in the sum of £20 each, before a justice of the peace for the county, 'conditioned for the due prosecution of the appeal, and for the payment of any costs ordered by the Special Sessions to be paid by the appellant. This Order shall not apply to an Assessment Committee, to overseers, or to surveyors of taxes. 2. Appellants to Quarter Sessions to eider into Recognizances. — On an appeal to Quarter Sessions from the decision either of an Assessment Committee or Special Sessions, the appellant and two sureties shall, within seven days after giving notice of appeal, enter into recognizances before a justice of the peace for the county, conditioned for the due prosecution of the appeal, and for the payment of any costs ordered by the Quarter Sessions to be paid by the appellant, and the amount of such recognizances shall be deter- mined by such justice, having regard to the nature of the appeal, so that the amount be not less than £50. This Order shall not apply to an Assessment Committee, to overseers, or to surveyors of taxes. 3. Power for Court to waive Recognizances.— in any case in which it shall appear to the Quarter Sessions that, for some reasonable cause, the recog- nizances, directed by Orders Nos. 1 and 2, to be entered into by appellants and their sureties, or any of them, have been omitted to be entered into, in conformity with the Order, the Court may, if it sees fit so to do, waive all or any of such recognizances, and proceed to hear the appeal, notwith- standing such omission. Or the Court may, if it think fit so to do, order such security to be given or entered into as to the Court may seem just, and may, if necessary for the purpose of such order being complied with, post- pone the hearing of such appeal until such time, and upon such terms and conditions, as to costs or otherwise, as the Court shall think fit. 280 Procedure on Appeal. 4. Money may be Deposited in lieu of Recognizances. — In any case in which it shall be desired by an appellant to make a deposit of money in substitu- tion, or in part substitution, for the recognizances required by Orders Nos. 1 and 2, the money so to be deposited shall be paid by him into the London and Westminster Bank to a joint account in the names of the Chairman of the Court and of the Clerk of the Court, and the receipt given by the bank for such payment shall be deposited with the Clerk of the Court, and shall be filed by him in proof of such payment, and such deposit shall not, in any case, be less than £50. 5. Appeals to be entered by Petition. — Appeals to Quarter Sessions shall be entered by petition, to be lodged in duplicate with the Clerk of the Court, on or before the 14th January next following the final approval of the valuation list, or the supplemental list, as the case may be, by the Assess- ment Committee. 6. Respondents at Quarter Sessions to give Notice of Intention to Appear. — In an appeal to Quarter Sessions, the person or persons claiming to appear as respondents shall give notice in writing of his or their intention so to appear, and shall state in the notice whether he, or they, intend to appear separately, or as joint respondents with any other person or persons ; and such notice shall be delivered to the Clerk of the Court, and served on the appellant, within fourteen days after the time limited by Order No. 5 for the entry of the appeal, and the person or persons omitting to give such notice shall not be heard unless by special leave of the Court, until he or they shall have given such notice or complied with such terms as the Court may think fit to direct or impose. The expression " person or persons " in this Order shall extend to and include a ratepayer, an occupier, a surveyor of taxes, an Assessment Com- mittee, overseers, and any body of persons authorized by law to levy rates or require contributions payable out of rates. 7. Appellants and Respondents at Quarter Sessions to State Cases. — On, or before, the 1st February next following the entry of an appeal to Quarter Sessions, the appellant shall state his case and the facts to be proved, and the points of law (if any) to be argued in support of the case, and shall deliver to the Clerk of the Court 15 copies thereof for the use of the Court, and shall serve one copy on each respondent ; and in like manner, each respondent shall, on or before the same day, state his case and the facts to be proved, and the points of law (if any) to be argued in support of the case, and shall deliver, in like manner, 15 copies thereof for the use of the Court, and shall serve one copy on the appellant. Provided that this Order shall not apply to an appeal in which the total rateable value appealed against does not exceed £300. 8. Notices of Motion. — Notices of motion shall be served two clear days before the Court is moved, unless by special leave of the Court, and a copy of the notice shall be delivered to the Clerk of the Court. 9. Consent Motions. — Consent motions may be made at any time, not- withstanding that the appeals to which they relate are not in the daily cause list. Orders of the County of London Quarter Sessions. 281 10. — By Counsel. — Consents shall be signified by counsel in open Court. [It was held in Reg. v. London JJ.(a) that the clerk to the Assessment Committee could not consent to an alteration in the list.] 11. Orders affecting Gross Value. — No order shall be made affecting the gross value of a hereditament until proof has been given, orally or by affidavit, that notice of appeal has been served upon the surveyor of taxis. 12. Paper and Printing. — The appellants' and respondents' cases shall be lithographed or printed on judicature paper, bookwise, or on white paper of the same size, and shall be endorsed longways ; and the petition of appeal and all other documents (except the appellants' and respondents' cases) supplied for the use of the Court or required to be delivered to the Clerk of the Court, shall be written, lithographed, or printed as aforesaid. 13. One Counsel only to be Heard. — One counsel only for each party to the appeal shall be heard unless by special leave of the Court. 14. Counsel for Appellant to begin. — The counsel for the appellant shall begin, except when a surveyor of taxes is the appellant, in which case the counsel for the respondents shall begin. In cases in which there shall be more than one respondent claiming to appear separately, their counsel shall be heard in the order determined by the Court at the time. 15. Costs to be Taxed. — The costs, ordered by the Court to be paid by any of the parties to the appeal, shall be taxed, in the usual manner, by the Clerk of the Court before the order is settled. 16. Solicitors to attend on Settling Order of Court. — The solicitors of the parties shall attend the Clerk of the Court, on settling any order of the Court, at a time to be fixed by him. 17. Service of Documents. — The provisions of section 65 of the Act with respect to the service of orders and notices under the Act shall apply to all documents required to be served under these Orders. 18. Interpretation. — Such of the expressions in these Orders as are the same as those used in the Act, shall respectively bear the interpretation given to them by the Act. P. H. EDLIN, Chairman, 31st March, 1890. (Approved) HENRY MATTHEWS, One of Her Majesty's Principal Secretaries of State. Whitehall, 16th April, 1890. (a) 0896) 1 Q.B. 659; 65 L.J.M.C. 120; 74 L.T. 523; 44 W.R. 485 ; 60 J.P. 420. 282 Procedure on Appeal. COUNTY OF LONDON. Scheme for Regulating the Holding of Courts of Quarter Sessions for the County of London, as provided by Section 42 (7) of the Local Government Act. As to Appeals under the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869. 1. At every adjourned January Quarter Session* held at Clerkenwell, sittings of the Court shall be fixed to hear appeals under the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869. 2. Such sittings shall begin not earlier than the 1st February then next, and shall be so arranged as to enable the Court to determine all appeals (except where a valuation list or valuation is ordered) before the ensuing 31st March. [51-52 Vict., c. 41, s. 42 (10).] 3. The Court shall at the same session appoint, with the consent of the Local Government Board, a clerk and other persons to assist the Sessions in the performance of their duties under the Act. (32-33 Vict., c. 67, s. 25.) 4. A separate list shall be prepared of appeals relating to property in the City of London, and prior to the hearing of such appeals the Clerk of the Court (appointed under Order 3) shall send seven days' previous notice to the Clerk of the Peace of the City of London, in order that two members of the Court of Quarter Sessions of the City of London may be appointed by that Court to attend and sit as members of the Quarter Sessions for the County of London upon the hearing of such appeals. [51-52 Vict., c. 41, s. 42 (10).] 5. Appeals may be heard at Clerkenwell or at Newington, or in the City of London, or at some or all of such places, at the same time, or at different times, as the Court shall from time to time determine. (32-33 Vict., c. 67, s. 26.) 6. At every April Quarter Session held at Clerkenwell, the Court shall assign the remuneration (subject to the approval of the Local Government Board) of the clerk and other officers appointed as aforesaid for the year ended the 31st March. 7. A separate account shall be kept of the expenses incurred by the Sessions in respect of the exercise of its jurisdiction under the Act, and * The last day for serving notice of appeal is 14th January. The Holding of Courts of Quarter Sessions. 283 such account made up to the 31st March in every year shall he submitted to and be examined by the Court of the April Quarter Sessions held at (Jlerkenwell. (32-33 Vict., c. 67, s. 25.) 8. Such account, when approved by the Court, shall be submitted by the Clerk of the Court (appointed under Order 3) for such audit as may lie directed by the Local Government Board, with a view that the same, when audited, may be paid in manner prescribed by the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869. HENRY MATTHEWS, One of Her Majesty's Principal Secretaries of State. Approved, 4th January, 1892. [The above Scheme of the London County Council is published in the London Gazette of January 15th, 1892.] PART II. APPENDIX. STATUTES RELATING TO RATING. 287 AN ACT FOE THE BELIEF OF THE POOR. (43 Eliz., c. 2.) 1. — The churchwardens of every parish, and four, three, or overseers for the poor. two substantial householders there, as shall be thought meet, having respect to the proportion and greatness of the same parish and parishes, to be nominated yearly in Easter week, or within one month after Easter, under the hand and seal of two or more justices of the peace in the same county, whereof one to be of the quorum, dwelling in or near the same parish or division where the same parish doth lie, shall be called overseers of the poor of the same parish ; and they, or the greater part of them, shall take order from time to time, by and with the consent of two or more such justices of peace as is aforesaid, for setting to work the children of all such whose parents, shall not by the said churchwardens and overseers, or the greater part of them be thought able Their duty. to keep and maintain their children ; and also for setting to work all such persons, married or unmarried, having no means to maintain them, as use no ordinary and daily trade of life to get their living by ; and also to raise weekly or otherwise (by taxation of every inhabitant, parson, vicar and other, and of every occupier of lands, houses, tithes impropriate, propria- tions of tithes, coal mines, or saleable underwoods in the said parish, in such competent sum and sums of money as they shall think fit) a convenient stock of flax, hemp, wool, thread, iron, and other necessary ware and stuff to set the poor on work, and also competent sums of money for and towards the necessary relief of the lame, impotent, old, blind, and such other among them, being poor and not able to work, and also for the putting out of such children to be apprentices, to be 288 An Act for the Relief of the Poor. 43 Eliz.,c. 2. gathered out of the same parish according to the ability of ~~ the same parish and to do and execute all other things as well for the disposing of the said stock as otherwise concerning the premises, as to them shall seem convenient, Which said churchwardens and overseers so to be nominated, or such of them as shall not be let by sickness or other just excuse, to be allowed by two such justices of peace or more as is aforesaid, The overseers s l ia ll meet together at the least once every month, in the shall meet once . „ every month c l lur eh of the said parish, upon the Sunday m the afternoon and account. r L after divine service, there to consider of some good course to be taken, and of some meet order to be set down in the premises; and shall within four days after the end of their year, and after other overseers nominated as aforesaid, make and yield up to such two justices of peace as is aforesaid a true and perfect account of all sums of money by them received, or rated and assessed and not received, and also of such stock as shall be in their hands or in the hands of any of the poor to work, and of all other things concerning their said office ; and such sum or sums of money as shall be in their hands or in the hands of any of the poor to work, and of all other things concerning their said office ; and such sum or sums of money as shall be in their hands shall pay and deliver over to the said church wardens and overseers newly nominated and appointed as aforesaid ; upon pain that every one of them absenting themselves without lawful cause as is aforesaid from such monthly meeting for the purpose aforesaid, or being negligent in their office or in the execution of the orders aforesaid, being made by and with the assent of the said justices of peace or any two of them before mentioned, to forfeit for every such default of absence penalty twenty or negligence twenty shillings. shillings. By the Eating Act, 1874(a), this Act is extended to land used for a plantation. wood or plantation or for the growth of saleable underwoods and not Sorting. subject to any right of common ; to rights of fowling, of shooting, of taking and killing game or rabbits, and of fishing, when severed from Mines. the occupation of the land ; to mines of every kind. Section 14 of the Act of 1874 repeals the above section so far as it relates to saleable underwoods. (a) Post p. 440. An Act for the Relief of the Poor. 289 43 Eliz Personal property is exempted from rating by 3 & 4 Vict., c. 89. (b) c 2, "' The only property which is exempt from rating under the above section is Crown property, because it is not mentioned. In the Mersey Docks property. Cases (c), Lord Westbury, L.C., said: "The only occupier exempt from crown property the operation of the Act is the King, because he is not named in the ex statute ; and the direct and immediate servants of the Crown whose occupation is the occupation of the Crown itself, also come within the exemption." For the various kinds of property which have been rendered exempt other^property from rating by statute the reader is referred to Article 28. (d) An "inhabitant" within this section means a person permanently " Inhabitant." resident in the parish, (e) "Permanence" is essential to render an occupier rateable. In Beg. v. St. Pancras Assessment Committee (/), Lush, J., said : " Thus a transient, temporary holding of land is not enough to make the holding rateable. It must be an occupation which has in it the character of permanence ; a holding as a settlor, not as a wayfarer." A rate is bad which is made for a period for which a rate has already been made and not quashed, (g) Bv the Local Government Act, 1894 (57 & 58 Vict., c. 73), s. 5, any Effect of l.g. J , , n i Act, 1894. reference in any Act to churchwardens and overseers as respects any churchwardens rural parish, except so far as those references relate to the affairs of the JJ^^SSbb. church, is to be construed as a reference to the overseers only. The churchwardens are therefore no longer overseers as far as rural parishes are concerned, but additional overseers are appointed in their place. By the same Act the overseers are to be nominated by the Parish JJ^J^J^ 01 Council. Upon the Parish Council coming into office the duties of Parish Council r .... — appeals or overseers and churchwardens with respect to appeals or objections by objections to them in respect of the valuation list, or appeals in respect of the poor-rate or county rate, or the basis of the county rate, are transferred to the Parish Council. By section 7, sub-s. (3), where the consent or approval of the vestry of a rural parish is required to any expense or rate the parish meeting- shall be substituted for the vestry, and for this purpose the expression " vestry " shall include any meeting of the ratepayers or voters. This Act does not affect the duties of overseers ; only their appointment. 2. — And if the said justices of peace do perceive that the clauBe re i a ting inhabitants of any parish are not able to levy among them- parishes, selves sufficient sums of money for the purposes aforesaid, that then the said two justices shall and may tax, rate, and (b) Post p. 324. {c) 11 H.L.C. 443 ; 35 L.J.M.C. 1 ; 20 C.B.N.S. 56 ; 12 L.T. 643 ; 13 W.R. 1069; 11 Jur. N.S. 746. Ante p. 72. {d) Ante p. 72. (e) Rex v. Nicholson, 12 East 330. (/) 2 Q.B.D. 581 ; 46 L.J.M.C. 243 ; 37 L.T. 126 ; 25 W.R. 827. Ante p. 5. la) Reg. v. Fordham, 11 A. & E. 73 ; 9 L.J.M.C. 3. 19 290 An Act for the Relief of the Poor. 43 Eliz assess as aforesaid any other of other parishes, or out of any c - % • parish within the hundred where the said parish is, to pay such sum and sums of money to the churchwardens and overseers of the said poor parishes for the said purposes as the said justices shall think fit, according to the intent of this law ; and if the said hundred shall not be thought to the said justices able and fit to relieve the said several parishes not able to provide for themselves as aforesaid, then the justices of peace, at their general quarter sessions, or the greater number of them, shall rate and assess as aforesaid, any other of other parishes, or out of any parish within the said county, for the purposes aforesaid, as in their discretion shall seem Church- fit. And that it shall be lawful, as well for the present as wardens, etc., etc y ij e% distress subsequent churchwardens and overseers, or any of them, by warrant, from any two such justices of peace as aforesaid, to levy as well the said sums of money and all arrearages, of every one that shall refuse to contribute according as they shall be assessed, by distress and sale of the offender's goods, as the sums of money or stock which shall be behind upon any account to be made as aforesaid, rendering to the parties the overplus : and the said justices of peace, or any one of them, to send to the house of correction or common gaol such as shall not employ themselves to work, being appointed thereunto as aforesaid ; and also any two such justices of peace to commit to the said prison every one of the said churchwardens and overseers who shall refuse to account, there to remain without bail or mainprize, until he have made a true account and satisfied and paid so much as upon the said account shall be remaining in his hands. Distress. A part of this section relating to the commitment of any person for non-pajnnent of any poor-rate or for default of distress is repealed and replaced by a somewhat similar enactment by 12 & 13 Vict., c. 14. (h) Arrears of poor-rate can be levied under this Act by overseers other than the immediate successors of those who made the rate, and 17 Geo. II., c. 38, s. 11(/) nas not the effect of confining this right to the immediate successors, (k) [h\ Post p. 331. (t) Post p. 301. \k) East Dean y. Everett, 30 L.J.M.C. 117 ; 7 Jur. N.S. 124. An Act for the Relief of the Poor. 291 In Clark v. Woods (I) where a warrant of two justices of a county aq v\i z commanded a constable to apprehend and take a man to the house of c. 2. correction there to remain until payment of a sum made up of the arrears Act of Elizabeth of poor-rate due from him and of costs awarded, it was held that such does not extend warrant was bad and that an action for trespass lay against the justices and the constable for the arrest and imprisonment under it, the ground of the decision being that the Act of Elizabeth does not extend to costs. Under this Act justices may lawfully issue a distress warrant against Distress may be a churchwarden on the complaint of his co-churchwarden or overseer for clmrcfcwarden. non-payment of poor-rates, where there has been a legal demand of the rate and a refusal to pay. The law will not infer payment of the rate from the mere fact that a person is a churchwarden or overseer, (m) The existence of an equitable charge on goods does not protect them from distress for poor-rate. (//) {!) 2 Ex. 395; 17 L.J.M.C. 189. (m) Skmgley v. Surridge, 11 M. & W. 503 ; 12 L.J.M.C. 122. (») In re Marriage, Neare <£ Co., (1896) 2 Ch. 663 ; 65 L.J. Ch. 839 ; 75 L.T. 169 ; 45 W.E. 42 ; 60 J. P. 805. 19 a 292 THE POOR EATE ACT, 1744. Poor's rates to be published. An Act to oblige Overseers of the Poor to give Public Notice of Rates wade for the Relief of the Poor, and to Produce the Same. (17 Geo. II, c. 3.) Notice may be affixed to church door. WHEEEAS great inconveniences do often arise in cities, towns corporate, parishes, townships, and places by reason of the unlimited power of the churchwardens and overseers of the poor, who frequently, on frivolous pretences, and for private ends, make unjust and illegal rates in a secret and clandestine manner, contrary to the true intent and meaning of a statute made in the forty-and-third year of the reign of Queen Elizabeth, intituled " an Act for the Eelief of the Poor " : for remedy whereof, and preventing the like abuses for the future, Be it enacted — That from and after the 1st day of May, 1744, the church- wardens and overseers, or other persons authorised to take care of the poor in every parish, township, or place, shall give or cause to be given public notice in the church of every rate for the relief of the poor allowed by the justices of the peace, the next Sunday after the same shall have been so allowed ; and that no rate shall be esteemed or reputed valid and sufficient, so as to collect and raise the same, unless such notice shall have been given. By 7 Will. IV. and 1 Vict., c. 45, s. 2, the notice referred to in this section need not be given during or after divine service, but may be affixed to the church door. The Poor Rate Act, 1744. 293 As to publication where there is no parish church, the reader is referred i7 ^°^ " to 45 & 46 Vict., c. 20, section 4. («) The notice need not be posted on the w ^ ereno ' arish doors of dissenters' chapels, (i) church. In Burnley v. Methley (c) it was held that a notice not put up previously to the commencement of the morning service, but put up before the com- mencement of the evening service was a good notice. In Reg. v. Paynter (d) it was held that it was not necessary to state in a Allowance. notice of allowance of a rate how the rate was allowed. Where a rate has not been properly allowed or published it is null and Rate not duly r * ^ allowed or void, (e) published. Where some rates had not been duly published on the Sunday following the allowance in accordance with the above section, and a warrant of distress issued for a single sum made up of these rates and others which were regular, it was held that the warrant was wholly bad, and that replevin lay for a distress taken under it. (/) 2. — And the churchwardens and overseers of the poor or T he rates to be . . . 1 . inspected by other persons authorised as aforesaid, m every parish, township, any inhabitant 1 _ and copies or place, shall permit all and every the inhabitants of the taken. said parish, township, or place, to inspect every such rate at all seasonable times, paying one shilling for the same, and shall upon demand forthwith give copies of the same, or any part thereof, to any inhabitant of the said parish, township, or place, paying at the rate of sixpence for every twenty-four names. " Overseer " in this section includes an assistant overseer appointed under Assistant 59 Geo. III., c. 12, where such assistant overseer has charge of the rate- overseer - book. (#) In Wethered v. Calcutt (h) it was held that the words " churchwarden or overseer" are used in contradistinction to the word ''inhabitant," and therefore that a churchwarden or overseer cannot bring an action, under this and the following section, against a co-overseer for refusing him a copy of the rate. Inspection may be enforced by mandamus, (i) Mandamus. (a) Post -p. 395. Vide also Reg. v. Wolferstan, (1893) 2 Q.B. 451 ; 6:) L.T. 429 ; 32 W.R. 176 ; 58 J.P. 133. (h) Ormerod v. Chadwick, 16 M. & W. 377 ; 16 L.J.M.C. 143. (c) IE. &E. 789; 28 L.J.M.C. 152. Vide also Reg. v. Marriott, 12 A. &E. 779. d) 10 Q.B. 908 ; 16 L.J.M.C. 136. (e) Rex v. Newcomb, 4 T.E, 368 : Fox v. Bavies, 6 C.B. 11 ; 18 L.J.C.P. 48. Vide also Rex v. Fully, 1 Bott. 76. (/) Sibbaldx. Roderick, 11 A. & E. 38 ; 9 L.J.M.C. 76. (g) Bennett v. Edwards, 8 B. & C. 702 ; Batcheldor v. Hodges, 4 A. & E. 592. For 59 Geo. III., c. 12, ride post p. 311. (A) 4 M. & Gr. 566 ; 11 L.J.M.C. 123. ((') Rex v. Clear, 4 B. & C. 899 ; Rex v. Great Faringdon, 9 B. & C. 541. The Poor Rate A:\ 1744. 17Geo.II- An overseer must have a reasonable time within which to comply with C.3, a demand, (k) A demand is made at a reasonable place if made to an overseer on his own premises. (7) 3, — And if any churchwarden or of the poor, or other person authorised as aforesaid, shall not permit any inhabitant or parishioner to inspect the said rates, -hall refuse or neglect to give copies thereof as aforesaid, such churchwarden or overseer, or other person authorised as afore- said, for i h offence shall forfeit and pay to the \ aggrieved the sum of twenty pounds, to be sued for and recovered by action of debt. bill, plaint or information in any of ffifl Ifajesi 'urts of Record, wherein no en in, protection, or wager of law, or more than one imparlance, shall be allowed. In Whitchurch r. Chapman (m) it was held that the clerk to the guardians was not a person liable to the pena. section upon penalties, churchwarden- oilier persons authorised to take care of the poor, for not permitting an inhabitant to inspect the rat Thi s secti on is \ L ,rho refuses upon demand to give an inhabitant copies of ^TWfflLir? the poor-rate is still liable to the penalty imposed by this section, as not repealed 1 VOL IV.. c. 96. («) In order to entitle a p. r- for the penalty he w that he ^7i :■- ;. I . * has sustained an injury by the act of t: r ; and that he has made neaa nal Ic a demand to inspect the rate made at a reasonable time and place It is a question for the jury whether . seer u]*>n whom a demand lias been made for a copy of the poor-rate, has complied with the demand within a reasonable time.(f ) nmmt v. Btll, 9 Q.B. 684 : 16 LJ.M.C. 31 ; Spenceley v. Robin* m, 3 B. k C. 658. (0 Pmrker v. Edtcard*, 7 B. i C. 594. (m) 3 B & Ad. 691. (*) Post p. 315. («) Spaueley v. Robinton. 3 B. i C. 65S. Tide also Bateheldor v. He I E. 592. (p) Tennant v. Bell, 6 Q-B. 684 : 16 I Tide also Teiuumt t*t) 1 B. & Aid. 640. (c) Rex v. George, 6 A. & E. 305 ; 6 L..T.M.C. 34. (d) Reg. v. Watts, 7 A. & E. 461 ; 7 L.J.M.C. 72. \e) 1 B. & Ad. 1. (/) 15 East 632. Vide also Sex v. Thackwell, 4 B. & C. 62 ; Reg. v. Trafford, 15 Q.B. 200 ; 19 L.J.M.C. 199. (g) 6 E. & B. 992 ; 26 L.J.M.C. 14. (h) 7 E. & B. 609 ; 26 L.J.M.C. 121. An Act to Amend 43 Eliz., c. 2. 299 In Rex v. Wiltshire J J. (i) Lord Tenterden, C.J., said : " I think it 17 Geo. II., would be more beneficial to the public, and more consistent with the C. 38. intention of the Legislature, if the justices did not adjourn appeals Justic . es not t , , against rates as a matter of course. I think they should endeavour to ^ ^ e p r p ^ als induce parties to try their appeal at the next practicable Sessions after course, the publishing of the rate." An order for the payment of costs under this section may be enforced by removal into the Court of Queen's Bench, (k) etc. 5.— Provided always, that in all corporations or franchises j£jS£s, who have not four justices of the peace, it shall, and may he lawful for any person or persons in any of the cases aforesaid, where an appeal is given by this Act, to appeal, if he or they shall think fit, to the next General or Quarter Sessions of the Peace for the county, riding, or division wherein such corpora- tion or franchise is situate. It was decided in Rex v. Essex J J. (I) that where the corporation justices consist of a greater number than four, an appeal lies to them at Sessions against a poor-rate, although there be less than four who are devoid of interest in the question. 6. And whereas it hath been held, that upon appeals from How far justices w * shall give relief rates and assessments, the justices of the peace may not only on appeals. quash the old rates, but make new rates and assessments from which no appeal can be had, be it enacted that upon all appeals from rates and assessments, the justices of the peace (where they shall see just cause to give relief) shall and are hereby required to amend the same, in such manner only as shall be necessary for giving such relief, without altering such rates or assessments, with respect to other persons mentioned in the same ; but if upon an appeal from the whole rate, it shall be found necessary to quash or set aside the same, then and in every such case the said justices shall and are hereby required to order and direct the churchwardens and overseers of the poor to make a new equal rate or assessment, and they are hereby required to make the same accordingly. («') 8 B. & C. 380. Vide also Reg. v. Skircoat, 2 B. & S. 185 ; 28 L.J.M.C. 224. (k) Reg. v. Huntley, 3 E. & B. 172 ; 23 L.J.M.C. 106 ; 18 Jur. 745. (/) 5 M. & S. 513. 300 An Act to Amend 43 EJiz., c. 2. 17 Geo. II., If the name of any person be omitted in a rate made for the relief of Cl «*8. the poor, the justices may amend it by inserting his name under 41 Geo. Name omitted III., C. 23, 8. 1. (wi) from rate. Where, however, a person is overcharged, justices may amend the Overcharge. . . rate. \ji) clause relating 7 — And f r the more effectual levying money assessed for to warrants of distress. t ^ e re ii e f f the poor, be it enacted, that the goods of any person assessed, and refusing to pay, may be levied by warrant of distress, not only in the place for which such assessment was made, but in any other place within the same county or precinct ; and if sufficient distress cannot be found within the said county or precinct, on oath made thereof before some justice of any other county or precinct (which oath shall be certified under the hand of such justice on the said warrant) such goods may be levied in such other county or precinct by virtue of such warrant and certificate ; and if any person shall find him or herself aggrieved by such distress as aforesaid, it Appeal to shall and may be lawful for such person to appeal to the next sessions. General or Quarter Sessions of the Peace for the county or precinct where such assessment was made, and the justices there are hereby required to hear and finally determine the same. clause to pre- 8. — And to prevent all vexatious actions against overseers of actions against the poor, be it enacted, that where any distress shall be made overseers. r for any sum or sums of money justly due for the reliet of the poor, the distress itself shall not be deemed to be unlawful, nor the party or parties making it be deemed a trespasser or tres- passers on account of any defect or want of form in the warrant for the appointment of such overseers, or in the rate or assessment, or in the warrant of distress thereupon ; nor shall the party or parties distraining be deemed a trespasser or trespassers ab initio on account of any irregularity which shall be afterwards done by the party or parties distraining, but the party or parties aggrieved by such irregularity shall or may recover full satisfaction for the special damage he, she, or they shall have sustained thereby, and no more, in an action of tres- pass, or on the case, at the election of the plaintiff or plaintiffs. (m) Post p. 303. («) Hex v. Cheshunt, 2 T.R. 623. An Act to Amend 43 ffliz,, c. 2. 301 9. [Provided always that where the plaintiff or plaintiffs shall 17 Geo. II., recover in such action, he, she, or they shall be paid his, her, or c ' °' their full costs of suit, and have all the like remedies for the same ^covering to i ; /i / -i have full costs. as in other cases of costs.] This section is repealed and replaced by the Public Authorities Pro- tection Act, 1893. 10. [Provided nevertheless that no plaintiff or plaintiffs shall Proviso in case "- -* ' ■* ' of irregularity. recover in any action for any such irregularity as aforesaid, if tender of amends hath been made by the party or parties dis- training before such action brought.] This section is repealed and replaced by the Public Authorities Pro- tection Act, 1893. 11. — And in case any person or persons shall refuse or neglect succeeding overseers to to pay to such overseers as aforesaid, any sum or sums of money levy arrears to *■ J ' " J reimburse the that he, she, or they shall be legally rated or assessed to, it former - shall and may be lawful to and for the succeeding overseers, and they are hereby required to levy such arrears, and out of the money so levied, to reimburse their predecessors all sums of money which they have expended for the use of the poor, and which are allowed to be due to them in their accounts as aforesaid. It was decided in East Dean v. Everett (o) that arrears of poor-rate can be levied by overseers other than the immediate successors of those who made the rate. Overseers are not estopped from recovering a rate by reason of a Mistake by mistake in the original demand and in the entry in the rate-book estoppel. &0rS n ° committed by their predecessors, (p) 12. — [Repealed by Poor Rate Assessment and Collection Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict., c. 41).] 13. And true and just copies of all rates and assessments Copies of rates to be entered hereafter to be made for the relief of the poor, be fairly wrote in a book. and entered in a book or books, to be provided for that purpose by the churchwardens and overseers of the poor of every parish, township, or place, who shall take care that such copies be wrote and entered accordingly, within fourteen days after (o) 30 L.J.M.C. 117 ; 7 Jur. N.S. 124. Ante p. 290. {p) Reg. v. blenkinsop (1892), 1 Q.B. 43 ; 61 L.J.M.C. 45 ; 66 L.T. 187 ; 40 W.R. 272. 302 An Act to Amend 43 Eliz., c. 2. 17 Geo. II., all appeals from such rates are determined, and shall attest the J__ same by putting their names thereto ; and all and every such book or books shall be carefully preserved by the church- wardens and overseers of the poor for the time being, or one of them, in some public or other place in every such parish, township, or place, whereto all persons assessed or liable to be To be kept for assessed, may freely resort, and shall be delivered over from public perusal. time to time to the new and succeeding churchwardens and overseers of the poor, as soon as they enter into their said offices, to be preserved as aforesaid, and shall be produced by them at the General or Quarter Sessions, when any appeal is to be heard or determined. Penalty on 14. — And if any churchwarden, overseer of the poor, or other parish officers x ?Ws Act yin£J °™ cer oi an y parish, township, or place, shall neglect or refuse to obey and perform the several orders and directions of this Act, or any of them, where no penalty is before provided by this Act, or shall act contrary thereto, every such church- warden, overseer of the poor, or other officer so offending in the premises, shall for every such offence, on oath thereof made, within two calendar months after the offence committed, before any two or more of His Majesty's justices of the peace, forfeit for the use of the poor of such parish, township, or place, a sum not exceeding five pounds, nor less than twenty shillings, to be levied by distress and sale of the offender's goods, by warrant from such justices ; which sum shall be paid to some churchwarden or overseer of the poor of such parish, township, or place, for the purpose aforesaid. Power of 15. — And overseers of the poor, within every township or overseers where - 1 J * chur'chwaMens. place where tliere are no churchwardens, shall from time to time do, perform, and execute all and every the acts, powers and authorities concerning the relief of, and other matters and things relating to the poor, as churchwardens and overseers of the poor may do, perform and execute by this Act, or any former statute concerning the poor, and shall lose, forfeit, and suffer all such pains and penalties for neglect, abuse, or non- performance thereof, as churchwardens and overseers of the poor are liable to, by virtue of this or any former statute concerning the poor. 303 An Act for the Better Collection of Rates made for the Relief of the Poor. (41 Geo. III., c. 23.) WHEREAS by an Act of Parliament made and passed in the seventeenth year of the reign of his late Majesty King George the Second, intituled " An Act for remedying some defects in the Act made in the forty-third year of the reign of Queen Elizabeth intituled ' An Act for the Eelief of the Poor,' " power was given to justices of the peace, upon appeals from rates and assessments, where they should see just cause to give relief, to amend the same in such manner only as should be necessary for giving such relief, without altering such rates or assess- ments with respect to other persons mentioned in the same : and whereas the quashing or setting aside of rates or assess- ments made for the relief of the poor is attended with great inconvenience; and it hath happened, in consequence of the rate or assessment being quashed or set aside, or of notice of appeal against the whole rate being given, the churchwardens and overseers of the poor have not had any money in hand for the relief and maintenance of the poor : for remedy whereof, Be it enacted, That upon all appeals from any rate or assessment made on appeal 1 . „. . Quarter for the relief of the poor of any parish, township, vill or place, sessions may 1 ^ amend or quash the Court of General or Quarter Sessions of the Peace shall, and the rate ; but such Court is hereby authorized and required (in all cases where ^fthLttnd- they shall see just cause to give relief) to amend such rate or ^ appitedftn . . , . , . n . , , i satisfaction of assessment, either by inserting therein or striking out the name the next J . effective rate. or names of any person or persons, or by altering the sum or sums, therein charged on any person or persons, or in any other manner which the said Court shall think necessary for giving such relief, and without quashing or wholly setting aside such rate or assessment : provided always that if the said Court shall 304 An Act for the Better Collection of Poor Rates. 41 Geo. III., be of opinion that it is necessary, for the purpose of giving '■ ' relief to the person or persons appealing, that the rate or assess- ment should be wholly quashed, then the said Court may quash the same ; but nevertheless all and every the sum and sums of money in and by such rate or assessment charged on any person or persons, shall and may be levied and recovered by such ways and means, and in such and the same manner, as if no appeal had been made against such rate or assessment ; and all and every the sum and sums of money which any person or persons charged in such rate or assessment shall pay, or which shall be levied upon or recovered from him, her or them, shall be deemed and taken as payments on account of the next effective rate or rates, assessment or assessments, which shall be made for the relief of the poor of the same parish, township, vill, or place. Justices must I n Reg. v. Kingston J J. (a) the justices refused to issue a distress warrant issue warrant v J if rate good on to enforce payment of a rate on the ground that it was retrospective, although the rate had not been appealed against, and was good on the face of it. The Court held the justices were wrong. Lord Campbell, C.J., said : " The ground of objection taken is wholly untenable. The rate has been duly made, and there has been no appeal against it, and on the face of it it is good. The justices had no right to inquire into its validity, when the matter was before them, and it would be most inconvenient if such a course were to be allowed." slau^otf Te P - eal 2* — ^- n(i * rom and a ^ ter tne P assm g of this Act, all and every befng^ade^for the sum an d sums of money at which any person or persons is therate^butno or are or shall be rated or assessed in any rate or assessment shall he made for the relief of the poor of any parish, township, vill, or proceeded for L J r l ' than that place, shall and may be levied and recovered by distress, and assessed in the " J «te. effective a ^ otner lawful ways and means, notwithstanding the person or persons so rated or assessed, or any other person or persons shall have given notice of appeal from or against such rate or assessment, for any cause whatsoever : provided always that if any person, rated or assessed in any rate or assessment made for the relief of the poor, shall give such notice of appeal as herein- after mentioned to the churchwardens and overseers of the poor (a) E. B. & E. 256 ; 27 L.J.M.C. 199. Vide also Reg. v. Bradshau; 2 E. & E. 836 ; 29 L.J.M.C. 176 ; 8 W.R. 435 ; 6 Jur. N.S. 629, and Manchester v. Headlam, 21 Q.B.D. 96; 57 L.J.M.C. 89; 52 J. P. 517. An Act for the Better Collection of Poor Rates. 305 of any parish, township, vill, or place, or any two of them, then 41 Geo. III., from and after the giving of such notice and until the appeal ! ! — shall have been heard and determined, no proceedings shall be commenced or carried on to recover any greater sum or sums of money from such person or persons than the sum or sums at which he, she, or they, or any occupier of the same premises shall have been rated or assessed in the last effective rate which shall have been collected in such parish, township, vill, or place. In Priestley v. Watson (b) an action was brought against an overseer to Action to „ „. iii • j i l recover back recover back excess of a rate. I he money had been paid under protest to exceS 8. avoid distraint, ami the rate had been subsequently reduced upon appeal. It was held that, as no notice had been given to the overseers pursuant to the above section, the action would not lie. 3. — And in case the said Court of General or Quarter Sessions Quarter Sessions having of the Peace shall upon appeal order any rate or assessment for °£be™ua a shed e the relief of the poor to be quashed, it shall be lawful for the £ a ||f^ on said Court to order that any sum or sums of money, in and by to L^aXaM , stop proceed- such rate or assessment charged on any person or persons, or m gs for the recovery any part of any such sum or sums, not to be paid ; and then thereof, etc. and in every such case no proceedings shall, after making such order be commenced, or if any proceedings have been previously commenced, such proceedings shall be no further prosecuted or carried on for the purpose of levying or en- forcing the payment of any sum or sums which shall be so ordered by the said Court not to be paid as aforesaid : Provided J^jj^j e ^' always that no justice of the peace, constable, or other officer of trespassers for the peace, or other person, shall be deemed a trespasser, or ceedings. liable to any action for any warrant, order, act, or thing, which such justice, constable, or other officer or person shall have granted, made, executed, or done for the purpose of levying or enforcing the payment of any such sum or sums of money before he shall have had notice in writing of the order for the non-payment of such sum or sums of money, which the said Court is hereby authorized to make as aforesaid. (6) 2 C. &M. 691. 20 306 An Act for the Better Collection of Poor Mates. 41 Geo. III. 4. — And from and after the passing of this Act, all notices C i **' f appeal from or against any rate or assessment made for the appeaUgainst relief of the poor, or from or against the account of the church- mwritin^etc. 6 , wardens and overseers of the poor of any parish, township, vill, grounds"/ ' e or place, shall be in writing, and shall be signed by the person appeal. or persons giving the same, or his, her, or their attorney, on his, her, or their behalf ; and such notices of appeal shall be delivered to or left at the places of abode of the churchwardens and overseers of the poor of the parish, township, vill, or place, or any two of them, and the particular causes or grounds of appeal shall be stated and specified in such notice ; and upon the hearing of any appeal from or against any such rate or assessment, or account, the Court of General or Quarter Sessions to which such appeal shall be made, shall not examine or in- quire into any other cause or ground of appeal than such as are or is stated and specified in the notice of appeal. Notice must state grounds of appeal. Even where rate bad on face of it. Respite — notice necessary. In Rex v. Sheard(c) a notice of appeal against overseers' accounts stated that the appellant objected to certain specified payments alleged in the accounts to have been made to persons specified by name in the notice. The notice was held to be bad because it did not state the ground of appeal as required by the above section. In Rex v. Bromyard (d) it was held that on the hearing of an appeal against a poor-rate, the Sessions have no jurisdiction to quash the rate for a defect appearing on the face of the rate itself, unless that defect be specified in the notice as a cause of appeal. In Rex v. Hertfordshire J J. (e) notice was given of appeal against a poor- rate, and the respondents attended at the Sessions and prayed a respite, alleging that they had not had time to prepare their defence to the matters stated as grounds of appeal. The appellant opposed the respite ; but it was granted, no notice of appeal having been proved or admitted. An order of respite was made out, embodying the grounds of appeal stated in the notice. The Court held that the appellant was entitled to be heard at the following Sessions without proving any notice of appeal. Appeals may be 5. — Provided nevertheless, that with the consent of the over- decided if the . parties consent, seers, signified by them or their attorney in open Court, and such notice. .^th the consent of any other person interested therein, the said Court of Sessions may proceed to hear and decide upon (c) 2 B. & C. 856. (d) 8 B. & C. 240. (*) 4 B. & Ad. 561 An Act for the Better Colleetion of Poor Rates. 307 such appeal, although no notice thereof shall have been given 41 Q eo jjj in writing ; and also that with the like consent such Court may c> * 3 - hear and decide upon grounds of appeal, not stated or misstated in such written notice, where any notice shall have been given in writing. In Rex v. Sheard (/) Bayley, J., said : " We think that the statute has waiver excluded, and intended to exclude, all questions of waiver in any other Iterate! ' way [i.e., than by consent in open Court]." 6. — And if any person or persons shall appeal against any Persons appeai- x •*• x. a «j " j n g a g ams t any rate or assessment made for the relief of the poor, because any J^^f^^L other person or persons is or are rated or assessed in such rate warfens^etclj , . -i-jjiji l -\ i but also to the or assessment, or is or are admitted to be rated or assessed persons ... . . , _ interested, etc. therein, or because any other person or persons is or are rated or assessed in any such rate or assessment at any greater or less sum or sums of money than the sum or sums at which he, she, or they ought to be rated or assessed therein, or for any other cause that may require any alteration to be made in such rate or assessment with respect to any other person or persons, then and in every such case the person or persons so appealing for the causes aforesaid, or any of them, shall give such notice of appeal, in writing as hereinbefore mentioned, not only to the churchwardens or overseers of the poor, or any two or more of them, but also to the other person or persons so interested or concerned in the event of such appeal as aforesaid ; and such other person or persons shall, if he, she, or they shall so desire, be heard upon the said appeal ; and it shall be lawful for the Court of General or Quarter Sessions of the Peace on the hear- ing of such appeal, to order the name or names of such other person or persons to be inserted in such rate or assessment, and him, her, or them to be therein rated and assessed at any sum or sums of money, or to order the name or names of such other person or persons to be struck out of such rate or assessment, or the sum or sums at which he, she, or they is or are rated or assessed therein, to be altered, in such manner as the said Court shall think right ; and the proper officer of the said Court shall forthwith add to or alter the rate or assessment accordingly. (/) 2 B. & C. 856. 20 a 308 An Act for the Better Collection of Poor Bates. 41 Geo. III., c. 23. Joint grievance — one appeal. Appeal— notice to person omitted. Notice to all inhabitants unnecessary. Notice where persons are omitted. Abandonment of grounds of appeal. Notice to a corporation. Where rate contains many omissions. In Rex v. Sussex JJ. (g) it was held that persons having a joint grievance, such as the omission of persons in the rate who ought to be rated, may join in giving one notice of appeal. Where there is an appeal against a poor-rate on the ground that some person is omitted who ought to be rated, the Justices at Sessions cannot hear the appeal, unless the notice of appeal and the grounds of it have been given to the person said to have been improperly omitted, (h) If the proper notice has not been given the appeal must be respited, {i) Where the ground of complaint is that a person is rated in respect of his lands in a higher proportion than the other inhabitants mentioned in the rate, it is not necessary to give notice of appeal to all the inhabitants named in the rate, (Jc) If the ground of appeal is that certain persons are omitted, the notice must expressly state the names of persons omitted, and it must appear in the body of the rate that the persons so omitted are liable to be rated. (Z) Overseers cannot abandon a rate, though bad, but must enforce it unless it is appealed against, and amended or quashed, (m) But the overseers must not incur expense in supporting a bad rate. («) It was decided in the case of Reg. v. Cambridgeshire (o) that an appellant had no right to abandon particular grounds of appeal where the notice required by this section had not been given. This case, however, was questioned in Reg. v. Kent JJ.(p), where Cockburn, C.J., Blackburn and Lush, JJ., held that an appellant could abandon some of his grounds of appeal, and go on as to others. Cockburn, C.J., expressed the opinion that the decision in Rex v. Cambridgeshire arose from a misconception. Notice may be given to the corporation and the parish officers where the corporation are seized in fee of lands which are omitted from the poor- rate, (q) It was decided in Rex v. Milton (■>•) that the Court of Queen's Bench has no power to amend a rate under this Act. In Rex v. Hull Dock Co. (s) Abbott, C.J., said : " When a rate contains so many omissions that it can hardly be expected of an appellant that he should have evidence to shew the extent to which each person omitted ought to be rated, and where the investigation before the Sessions would be likely to exhaust more time than they could reasonably be required to give up, we think it would not be an improper exercise of their discretion to quash the rate, and make the officers do in the end what they ought to have done at the beginning." (g) 15 East 206. (A) Hex v. Brooke, 9 B. & C. 915. (i) Reg. v. Eyre, 6 E. & B. 992 ; 26 L.J.M.C. 14. Ante p. 243. \k) Rex v. Suffolk, 1 B. & Aid. 640. \l) Rex v. Berkshire JJ., 1 Bott. 274. (m) Rex v. Cambridgeshire JJ., 2 A. & E. 370 ; 4 L.J.M.C. 8. («) Reg. v. Fouch, 2 Q.B. 308; 11 L.J.M.C. 1. (o) 1 L.M. & P. 47 ; 19 L.J.M.C. 130 ; 4 New Sess. Cas. 87. (jp) L.R. 6 Q.B. 132 ; 40 L.J.M.C. 76 ; 19 W.R. 205. (q) Rex v. Aberciron, 5 East 453. (r) 3 B. & Aid. 112. (*) 3 B. & C. 516. An Act for the Better Collection of Poor Rates. 309 7. — And if upon the hearing of any appeal from or against 41 Geo. III., any rate or assessment, the said Court shall order the name or ! ! P , i • i t ,i 11- The rate shall names of any person or persons to be inserted therein, and mm, be recovered as her, or them to be rated or assessed at any sum or sums of the Quarter Sessions. money, or shall order the sum or sums at which any person or persons is or are therein rated or assessed to be raised or increased, then and in such case all and every the sum and sums of money, at or to which such person or persons shall be so ordered to be rated or assessed, or to be raised or increased, or so much thereof as shall not have been already paid, shall and may be recovered in such and the same manner, and by such and the same means, as if he, she, or they had been originally named in such rate or assessment, and rated or assessed therein at such sum or sums of money. 8. — And if upon the hearing of any appeal from any rate or if the name of x o •/ a i •/ an y p erson kg assessment for the relief of the poor, the Court of General or struck out . ° r i ' any sum Quarter Sessions of the Peace shall order the name or names of Quarter' the a "L a i j. £ i j. Sessions shall any person or persons to be struck out oi such rate or assess- orae r the money , . 1 . , , which ought ment, or the sum or sums rated or assessed on any person or not to have . been recovered persons to be decreased or lowered ; and if it shall be made to be repaid x with costs. appear to the said Court, that such person or persons hath or have, previously to the hearing of such appeal, paid any sum or sums of money in consequence of such rate or assessment, which he, she, or they ought not to have paid or been charged with, then and in every such case the said Court shall order all and every such sum and sums of money to be repaid and returned, by the said churchwardens and overseers of the poor, to the person or persons having paid the same respectively, together with all reasonable costs, charges and expenses, occasioned by such person or persons having paid or being required to pay the same ; and all and every the sum and sums of money so ordered to be repaid or returned by the churchwardens and overseers of the poor, or any of them, shall and may, together with all such costs, charges, and expenses as aforesaid, be levied and recovered from them, or any of them, by distress and all such other ways and means as the money charged, rated or assessed on any person, by any rate or assessment made for the relief of the poor, can or may be by law levied or recovered. 310 An Act for the Better Collection of Poor Rates. 41 Geo. III., In Reg. v. Parker (t) the rate had been reduced on appeal, but no order c - 33. j ia( j been ma( j e un d er this section for repayment by the overseers of the Where rate excess paid by the appellant. The overseers were willing to allow the over- ordermade d for payment on account of subsequent rates which it more than covered. The repayment. poor-law auditor would not certify the allowance, on the ground that it could not be made without an order of Quarter Sessions. On a motion for a mandamus to justices to issue a distress warrant for the subsequent rates, the Court of Queen's Bench refused the writ. Application It was held in Rex v. St. Peter's, York (u), that an application for an order to refund must be made to the same Court of General or Quarter Sessions which heard the appeal, or to the Court which ordered the sums rated to be decreased. (t) 7 E. & B 155 ; 26 L.J.M.C. 199 ; 3 Jur. N.S. 771. («) 4 B. & Ad. 342. 311 An Act to Amend the Laws for the Relief of the Poor. [59 Geo. III., c. 12 (Sturges Bourne's Act).] 19. — It shall be lawful for the inhabitants of any parish in vestries may vestry assembled, and they are hereby empowered, to resolve owners of certain houses, and direct that the owner or owners of all houses, apartments, etc., instead of - 1 occupiers. or dwellings in such parishes, being the immediate lessor or lessors of the actual occupier or occupiers which shall respectively be let to the occupiers thereof at any rent or rate not exceeding twenty pounds, nor less than six pounds by the year, for any less term than one year, or on any agreement by which the rent shall be reserved or made payable at any shorter period than three months, shall be assessed to the rates for the relief of the poor, for or in respect of such houses, apartments, or dwellings, and the outhouses and curtilages thereof, instead of the actual occupiers ; and the inhabitants so assembled in vestry may and they are hereby authorised from time to time to rescind, renew, vary, and amend every such resolution and direction as they shall see occasion, so as no such resolution or direction shall extend to assess or charge the owner of any house, apartment, or dwelling which shall with the outhouses and curtilages thereof be let at a greater rent than twenty pounds or less than six pounds as aforesaid, and the church- wardens and overseers of the poor of every such parish are hereby empowered and required to carry into effect all such resolutions and directions of the inhabitants in vestry assembled, and in pursuance and execution thereof, in all rates to be by them made for the relief of the poor, to assess by a fair and equal pound rate the owner or owners, being the immediate lessor or lessors of the actual occupier or occupiers of every house, apartment, or dwelling to which such resolution and direction shall extend, for or in respect of the same, according 312 An Act to Amend the Laws for the Relief of the Poor. 59 Geo III ^° ^ ne ac ^ ua l ren t a t which every such house, apartment, or c. 12. dwelling shall be let, after making a reasonable deduction from such rent, not exceeding in any case one-half of the same : and upon non-payment of the sum or sums so to be assessed, the same may and shall be levied upon and the payment thereof be enforced against such owner and owners, lessor and lessors, so to be assessed, and his and their goods and chattels, in like manner as rates for the relief of the poor may by law be levied and recovered, and the payment thereof enforced, upon and against any actual occupier on whom the same are charged. In West Ham v. Fourth City Mutual Building Society (a) the Court of Appeal decided that this section was impliedly repealed by the Poor Rate Assessment and Collection Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict., c. 41). (b) If the rent is at a rate which amounts to more than £20 a year the owner of a house let " on any agreement by which the rent is reserved or made payable at any shorter period than three months " cannot be assessed to the poor-rates instead of the occupier, (c) G oods of occu ■ piers may be distrained for rates to the amount of the rent actually due. Occupiers pay- ing rates may deduct the amount out of their rent. 20. — Provided also, that the goods and chattels of every occupier of any such house, apartment, or dwelling, which shall be found in and about the same, shall be liable to be distrained and sold for raising so much of any such rate or assessment being in arrear as shall have become due during the occupancy of the person or persons whose goods and chattels shall be so distrained (to be ascertained in a summary way by the justices granting the warrant of distress), so that in no case any greater sum be raised by distress of the goods and chattels of any such occupier than shall, at the time of making such distress be actually due from such occupier for rent of the premises on which such distress shall be made. Provided also, that every occupier who shall pay any such rate or rates, or upon whose goods or chattels the same or any part thereof shall be levied, shall and may deduct the amount of the sum which shall be so paid or levied out of the rent by him or them payable ; and such payment shall be a sufficient (a) (1892) 1 Q.B. 654; 61 L.J.M.C. 128; 66 L.T. 350 ; 40 W.R. 446; 56 J.P. 438. (b) Post p. 387. \e) West Ham v. lies, 8 App. Cases 386 ; 52 L.J.M.C. 650 ; 49 L.T. 205 ; 31 W.R. 928; 47 J.P. 708. An Act to Amend the Laws for the Belief of the Poor. 313 discharge to every such occupier for so much of the rent 59 Q eo jjj payable by him as he shall have paid, or as shall have been Cj *"• levied on his goods and chattels, of such rate, and for the costs of levying the same. 21. — Provided that every person receiving or claiming the Receivers in rent of any such house, apartment, or dwelling for his or her shall be rated as owners. own use, or receiving the same for the use of any corporation aggregate, or of any landlord or lessor who shall be a minor under coverture, or insane, or for the use of any person who shall not be usually resident within twenty miles from the parish in which any such house, apartment, or dwelling shall be situated, shall for this purpose be deemed and taken to be and shall be rateable as the owner thereof. 22. — Provided also, that every person to be rated as the Persons rated owner of any such house, apartment, or dwelling, who shall appeal; think himself or herself aggrieved by any such rate shall have such and the like remedy by appeal against the same, as any other person thereby rated ; and every person so rated shall be entitled, as an inhabitant of the parish in and for which he shall be assessed, to be present and to vote in every vestry or ? nd ma .y vote L J d in vestries. meeting of the inhabitants thereof for the execution of the laws for the relief of the poor, or for the consideration of any matter or question in relation thereto, in like manner as the inhabitants of the said parish. 23. — Provided that nothing in this Act contained shall No owner not being the extend or be construed to extend to give anv power or authority occupier shall d L ■ / be rated in to assess the owner (not being the occupier) of any house, {^ri^of 6 apartment, or dwelling in any city, borough, or town corporate, membereof in which the right of voting for the election of members to depends on the t» i • 1' it i i o-i rating. Mode serve m Parliament shall depend upon the assessment of the of rating not to be varied. voter to the poor's rate, or to vary or affect the manner of assessing and charging any of the inhabitants or occupiers of houses, lands, or tenements within any such city, borough, or town corporate. 314 An Act to Exempt from Poor and Church Rates «all Churches, Chapels, and other Places of Religious Worship. (3 & 4 Will. IV., c. 30.) No persons \ t — No person or persons shall be rated or shall be liable to shall be rated L • L to or rIte\°for ^e ra ted or to pay to any church or poor rates or cesses, for or p^ace? 68 ° r m respect of any churches, district churches, chapels, meeting appropriated to houses, or premises, or such part thereof as shall be exclusively worship, and appropriated to public religious worship, and which (other than duly certified. churches, district churches, and episcopal chapels ot the established church) shall be duly certified for the performance of such religious worship according to the provision of any Act or Acts now in force : Provided always, that no person or persons shall be hereby exempted from any such rates or cesses for or in respect of any parts of such churches, district churches, chapels, meeting houses, or other premises which are not so exclusively appropriated, and from which parts not so exclusively appropriated such person or persons shall receive any rent or rents, or shall derive profit or advantage. persons not to 2. — Provided always, that no person or persons shall be be liable to rates J ' x A because liable to any such rates or cesses because the said churches, premises are J schooi°s! &c nday district churches, chapels, meeting houses, or other premises, or any vestry rooms belonging thereto, or any part thereof may be used for Sunday or infant schools, or for the charitable education of the poor. 315 An Act to Regulate Parochial Assessments (6 & 7 Will. IV., o. 96.) WHEBEAS it is desirable to establish one uniform mode of rating for the relief of the poor throughout England and Wales, and to lessen the cost of appeal against an unfair rate ; Be it enacted — That from and after such period, not being earlier than the ah rates to be twenty first day of March next after the passing of this annual value of Act, as the Poor Law Commissioners shall by any order under their seal of office direct, no rate for the relief of the poor in England and Wales shall be allowed by any justices, or be of any force, which shall not be made upon an estimate of the net annual value of the several hereditaments rated thereunto ; that is to say, of the rent at which the same might reasonably be expected to let from year to year free of all usual tenants rates and taxes, and tithe commutation rent-charge, if any, and deducting therefrom the probable average annual cost of the repairs, insurance and other expenses, if any, necessary to maintain them in a state to command such rent : Provided always that nothing herein p rov iso. contained shall be construed to alter or affect the principles or different relative liabilities (if any) according to which different kinds of hereditaments are now by law rateable. This section is repealed so far as it relates to the Metropolis by section Metropolis. 77 of the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict., c. 67). (a) It was held in Reg. v. Lumsdaine (b) that this statute makes no alteration Act only as to the rateability of property, but only regulates the mode of rating. modVofrating. The Court will grant a mandamus to compel overseers to make a rate (c); Mandamus, but not to make a rate equal, that being a matter for the Quarter Sessions. {a) Post pp. 432, 436. (J) 10 A. & E. 157 ; 8 L.J.M.C. 69. (e) Rex v. Barnstaple, 1 Barnardiston 137 ; Rex v. Edlaston, 1 N. & P. 20 ; 6 L.J.M.C. 36. value. 316 An Act to Regulate Parochial Assessments. 6 & 7 Will. The principle of rating property on the " net annual value " was the IV., C. 96. principle laid down in Rex v. Adames (d), the last important case on the sub- Net annual ject before this Act was passed. Parke, J. (who delivered the judgment of the Court), said : " In practice it is usual, and it is most convenient, to rate lands at the rack-rent which they would pay to a landlord, or some certain portion of it, the tenant paying all rates, charges, and outgoings ; which is, in effect, rating according to a part of the net profit only ; but provided it be the same aliquot part in all cases, it makes no difference. An allowance should be made if the subject of occupation be of a perishable nature, or require an annual expense to secure its existence. The total annual profit is not the net annual profit ; a part must be set aside for the restoration and maintenance of the subject of occupation. It is on this principle that buildings have been permitted to be rated at less in proportion than arable and other land ; the cases, especially those of a more recent date, in which the principle of rating has been more fully discussed and considered, will be found to have established this rule of rating, which is, in other words, that all lands are to be assessed in proportion to the net rent which a tenant at rack-rent would pay, he discharging all rates, charges, and outgoings." The profits of land are to be valued at what they would let for annis." communibus annis, and no difference is to be made because in one particular year there was a loss, (e) Tithe As to the calculation of the rateable value of a tithe commutation rent- recharge 11 charge and the deductions which ought to be made the reader is referred to Article 92. (/) Proviso. The effect of the proviso to this section is discussed in Reg. v. CapeL (g) " Communibus Riites to be 2. — Every such rate made after the said period shall, in form in a given a( idition to any other particular which the form of making out such rate shall require to be set forth, contain an account of every particular set forth at the head of the respective columns in the form given in the schedule to this Act annexed so far as the same can be ascertained ; and the churchwardens and overseers or other officers whose duty it may be to make and levy the said rate, or such a number of the said churchwardens and overseers or other officers as are competent to the making and levying of the same, shall, before the rate is allowed by the justices, sign the declaration given at the foot of the said form ; and otherwise the said rate shall be of no force or validity : Provided always, that (d) 4 B. & Ad. 61 ; 2 L.J.M.C. 90. (e) Vide Article 10 and the cases there cited, ante p. 44. (/) Ante p. 227. {g) 12 A. & E. 382 ; 9 L.J.M.C. 65 ; 4 Jur. 886. An Act to Regulate Parochial Assessments. 317 nothing herein contained shall be construed to prevent the 6 & 7 Will. owners of tenements from compounding for the rates to be M c ' ""' assessed on the same in such manner as they were by any ^"prevent" em statute or statutes enabled to do before the passing of this compounding Act, so that the gross estimated rental of the hereditaments compounded for be entered on the rate in the proper column. This section is repealed so far as it relates to the Metropolis by s. 77 Metropolis. of the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict., c. 67). The justices to whom a rate is presented for allowance have no greater Justices cannot discretion to refuse it under this Act than they possessed before. If the a n wance. overseers have signed the declaration mentioned in the above section the — mandamus, justices cannot examine whether or not the rate has been made upon correct principles, and refuse the allowance if they think otherwise, (/i) Where a poor-rate had been made by the two overseers of a parish alone there being also two churchwardens who had not been sworn in, and the magistrates refused to allow it, as not having been made by a majority of the parish officers, a mandamus to the justices to allow the rate was granted. (/) A rule for a mandamus to justices to allow a poor-rate is made absolute in the first instance. (&) It was held in Fox v. Davies (I) that a rate not duly allowed is a R a t e not duly nullity. aUowed - In In Re Eastern Counties Railway Co. (to) it was held that a rate that does poor-rate must not by its heading or otherwise shew upon its face for what purpose and ^lauThority by what authority it is made, is void. Lord Campbell, C.J., said : " We all —otherwise think that the first two rates are void as they do not shew on their face for what purpose or under what authority they are made. Irrespectively of 6 & 7 Will. IV., c. 96, at common law there must be something on the face of such a document to give information upon those points. Otherwise it is void." In Reg. v. Fordham (n) it was held that the words " of no force or " of no force or validity" in this section only apply to an omission by the parish officers to application of. sign the declaration ; and not to the particulars required to be given in the first part of the section. 3. — When it shall be made to appear to the Poor Law rower to order new survey and Commissioners by representation in writing from the Board valuation. of Guardians of any union or parish under their common seal, or from the majority of the churchwardens and overseers (h) Reg. v. Yarborough, 12 A. & E. 416 ; 9 L.J.M.C. 62. («) Reg. v. Godolphin, 13 L.J.M.C. 57. (k) Reg. v. Godolphin , suprd, (!) 6 C.B. 11; 18L.J.C.P. 48. (m> 5 E. & B. 974 ; 25 L.J.M.C. 49 ; 2 Jur. N.S. 161. («) 11 A. &E. 73; 9 L.J.M.C. 3. 318 An Act to Regulate Parochial Assessments. 6 & 7 Will. or other officers competent as aforesaid to the making and IV., c. 96. levying the rate, that a fair and correct estimate for the aforesaid purposes cannot be made without a new valuation, it shall be lawful for the Poor Law Commissioners where they shall see fit, to order a survey, with or without a map or plan on such a scale as they shall think fit, to be made and taken of the messuages, lands, and other hereditaments liable to poor rates in such parish or in all or any one or more parishes of such a union, and a valuation to be made of the said messuages, lands and other hereditaments, according to their annual value, and to direct such Guardians to appoint a fit person or persons to make and take every such survey, map or plan, and valuation, and to make provision for paying the costs of every such survey, map, or plan and valuation, either by a separate rate or by a charge on the poor rates, as they may see fit ; but in case of such charge being made, then provisions shall be made for paying off not less than one fifth of the sum charged on the rates, and such interest as may from time to time be payable in respect of such charge or any part thereof, in each succeeding year, till the whole is repaid. Money so In Bag. v. Hurstbourne Tarrant (o) it was decided that money borrowed borrowed a^ £ or a p ar j sn surve y under this section is a charge on rates generally, and rates generally. no t only on the rate of the five years. The lender therefore of money upon a bond is entitled to a mandamus to the parish officers to repay him after the five years have elapsed. If, however, he has declared in coming to the Court, the delay must be explained. Order made by In Paine v. Strand U?iiou(p) the Poor Law Commissioners upon the Guardians representation of the Board of Guardians of the Union, made at the request seal of Board. f the parish officers of St. Clement Danes, one of the parishes of the Strand Union, ordered the Guardians to have a survey and plan made of the parish of St. Clement Danes. The Board of Guardians contracted under seal with the plaintiff to execute the survey and plan for £500. After its completion they verbally ordered him to prepare a reduced plan as a key to the larger plan. It was executed accordingly and delivered to the Board of Guardians. It was held that as the contract for the reduced plan was not under the seal of the Board of Guardians, nor incident to the purposes for which they were incorporated — viz., for the purpose of managing and conducting the relief and maintenance of the poor within the several (o) E. B. & E. 246 ; 27 L.J.M.C. 214. (p) 8 Q.B. 326 ; 15 L.J.M.C. 89. Vide also Reg. v. Bangor, 10 Q..B. 91 ; 16 L.J.M.C. 58. An Act to Regulate Parochial Assessments. 319 parishes of the Union — that it was not binding on them. In the course a o » tit-;-]! of his judgment, Lord Denman, C.J., said : " It is plain that the Legislature IV., C. 96. did not intend the Guardians of the Union to make themselves liable for the amount." In the same case it was decided that the Board of Guardians cannot Remuneration bind themselves by an order, not under seal, to remunerate a surveyor appeal. for attending as a witness on an appeal against a parochial assessment within the Union. If, however, the Guardians of a Poor Law Union, at a board properly Contract not , . . , under seal — constituted and authorised to enter into contracts, give orders tor work when binding to be done or goods supplied, and the work is done or goods supplied and on oar ' accepted by the corporation, and the whole consideration for payment is executed, the corporation cannot keep the goods or the benefit and refuse to pay on the ground that, though the members of the corporation who ordered the goods or work were competent to make a contract and bind the rest, the formality of a deed or of affixing the seal is wanting. (7) 4. — For the purpose of making every such survey, map rower for r L ° J ■/ » j. gur veyors to or plan, and valuation, it shall be lawful for the person or enter and Jr ' ' J- examine lands, persons so to be appointed for making the same respectively, purposes of together with their and every of their assistants and servants, pians y M at all reasonable times, until the same respectively shall be completed, to enter, view, and examine, survey, and admeasure all and every part of the messuages, lands and other heredita- ments aforesaid and to do or cause to be done any act or thing necessary for making such survey, map or plan, and valuation : Provided always that any map, survey, plan, or valuation made previously to the appointment of such person or persons, which shall be tendered to him or them, and which shall be in his or their judgment, and to his or their satisfaction a just and true map or survey, proper for the purposes aforesaid, may be used for such purposes. 5. — It shall be lawful for any person or persons rated to Rower to take " x *■ copies or the relief of the poor of the parish in respect of which any ratls gratis rate shall be made, at all seasonable times, to take copies thereof or extracts therefrom without paying anything for the same, anything in any Act of Parliament to the contrary notwithstanding ; and in case the person or persons having (q) Clark v. Cuckfield, 21 L.J.Q.B. 349. Vide also Sanders v. St. Neots, 8 Q.B. 810 ; 15 L.J.M.C. 104; and Lamprell v. Billericay Union, 3 Ex. 283 ; 18 L.J. Ex. 282. 320 An Act to Regulate Parochial Assessments. 6 & 7 Will. ^ ne cus tody of such rate shall refuse to permit or shall not IV., c. 9 6. p erm it such person or persons so rated as aforesaid to take P fM^ 7 to° r copies thereof or extracts therefrom, the person or persons so permit. refusing or not permitting such copy or extract to be made shall forfeit and pay any sum not exceeding five pounds to be recovered in a summary way before any justice of the peace having jurisdiction in the parish or place. The right to inspect rates is given by 17 Geo. II., c. 3. (/•) justices acting g — The justices acting in and for every Petty Sessional fc e ursperiai h0ld Division shall f our times at least in every year hold a Special jtlfto heai the Sessions for hearing appeals against the rates of the several parishes within their respective divisions, and shall cause public notice of the time and place when and where such Special Sessions will be holden to be affixed to or near to the door of the parish church of the said parishes, twenty eight days at the least before the holding of the same : and such Special Sessions shall and may be adjourned from time to time by the justices there present, as they may think fit ; and at such Special or adjourned Sessions the justices there present shall hear and determine all objections to any such rate on the ground of inequality, unfairness, or incorrectness in the valuation of any hereditaments included therein, which decision shall be binding and conclusive on the parties, unless the person or persons impugning such decision shall within fourteen days after the same shall have been made cause notice to be given in writing of his, her, or their intention of appealing against such decision and of the matter or cause of such appeal, to the person or persons in whose favour such decision shall have been made, and within five days after giving such notice shall enter into a recognizance before some justice of the peace, with sufficient securities, conditioned to try such appeal at the then next General Sessions or Quarter Sessions of the Peace which shall first happen, and to abide the order of and pay such costs as shall be awarded by the justices at such Quarter Sessions or any adjournment thereof ; and such justices upon hearing and (r) Ante -p. 293. An Act to Regulate Parochial Assessments. 321 finally determining such matter of appeal, shall and may 6 & 7 Will. according to their discretion, award such costs to the party IV., c. Ub. or parties appealing or appealed against as they shall think proper, and their determination in or concerning the premises shall be conclusive and binding on all parties, to all intents and purposes whatsoever : Provided always that no such objection shall be inquired into by the said justices in Special Session unless notice of such objection in writing under the hand of the complainant shall have been given, |^P notice t0 seven days at least before the day appointed for such Special objections! Session, to the collector, overseers, or other persons by whom such rate was made : Provided also that the said justices in Pr0vlS0 - Special Session shall not be authorised to inquire into the liability of any hereditaments to be rated but only into the true value thereof, and into the fairness of the amount at which the same shall have been rated. This section is repealed so far as it relates to the Metropolis by the Metropolis. Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict., c. 87), s. 77. Appeals against poor-rate to Special Sessions must be prosecuted at the Next nest practicable Sessions ; or within a reasonable time, of which the sessions. justices at Sessions are the proper judges, (s) In Ren. v. St. Albans (f) Lord Denman, C.J., held that it is sufficient if Recognizance . . — acknowledg- the recognizance is verbally acknowledged within the five days. It may ment. be perfected afterwards. In order to entitle a person to be heard before justices at Special Sessions Notice to one against a rate made for the relief of the poor it is only necessary to prove sufficient. service of notice of objection on one of the overseers or other person by whom the rate was made, (u) 7. — The justices present at any such Special or adjourned £^-^^ he Session shall for the aforesaid purpose have all the powers of f°^f c r e 8 3 °l amending or quashing any such rate so objected to of any sessions. parish or other district within their division, and likewise of awarding costs to be paid by or to any of the parties, and of recovering such costs, which any Court of Quarter Sessions [of the peace] has upon appeal from .any such rate, except as herein excepted : Provided always that no order of the (s) Reg. v. Trafford, 15 Q.B. 200 ; 19 L.J.M.C. 199. Ante p. 239. {t) 8 A. & E. 932 ; 8 L.J.M.C. 33. (u) Reg. v. Devon, 3 New Sess. Cases 96 ; Rex v. Warwickshire, 6 L.J.M.C. 113. 21 322 An Act to Regulate Parochial Assessments. 6^ 7 Will. sa id justices shall be removed by certiorari or otherwise into IV., c. 96. an y f jj-g Majesty's Courts of Eecord at Westminster : Provided also that nothing in this Act contained shall be construed to deprive any person or persons of the right to appeal against any rate to any Court of [ General or] Quarter Sessions : Provided also, that no order of the said justices in Special Session shall be of any force pending any appeal touching the same subject matter to the Court of [General or] Quarter Sessions [of the peace] having jurisdiction to try such appeal, or in opposition to the order of any such Court upon such appeal. This section is repealed so far as it relates to the Metropolis by the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict., c. 67), s. 77. The words in brackets are repealed by the Statute Law Revision Act, 1892. Metropolis. Limits of Act. 8. — This Act shall extend only to England and Wales. SCHEDULE TO WHICH THIS ACT EEFEES. Form of Hate. An Assessment for the Relief of the Poor of the Parish of Merton, in the County of Surrey, and for other purposes chargeable thereon according to law, made this Thirtieth Day of March in the year of our Lord One Thousand Eight Hundred and Thirty Seven, after the rate of Sixpence in the Pound. No. Arrears Due or if Excused. Name of Occupier. Name of Owner. Description of Property Rated. Name or Situation of Property. ■c- ..• „i„a Gross Extent 8d Elated Extent. Rental> Rateable Value. Rate at in the Pounc £ 8. d. A. R. P. £ s. d. £ s. d. £ s. 1 — James Smith John Green Land and Buildings Whiteacre Farm 40 60 55 1 7 2 — Ditto Ditto House and Garden In West Street 1 030 25 12 3 o 7R excused J John Poor Ditto House In Brick Lane — 1 10 1 5 &c. &c. &c. &c. &c. &c. &c. &c. &c. &c. An Act to Regulate Parochial Assessments. 323 6 & 7 Will. DECLARATION OF OVERSEERS AND CHURCHWARDENS. IV> C " 96 ' "We do declare the several particulars specified in the respective columns of the above rate to be true and correct, so far as we have been able to ascertain them, to which end we have used our best endeavours. Thomas Jones, Overseer, John Thomas, Churchwarden, &c, &c. It was held by Denman, C.J., in Reg. v. Capel (x), that this form cannot Form in be strictly followed with regard to tithes ; but the second section, which t[ tn e es ^ e_ prescribes it, by no means requires that this shall be the only form of rate. A rate is not invalid for not following the precise words of the prescribed Precise words ,i-i i u £ -A need not ^ e form, if it is duly signed by the churchwardens and overseers betore it followed. is allowed, (y) Where a rate was signed by vestrymen, some of whom had not been signature by lawfully elected, it was held that the rate was good, on the ground that it ^l* men de was signed by de facto vestrymen in accordance with the requirements of the local Act which required that the rate should be signed by seven or more vestrymen, (z) The Union Assessment Act, 1862, has substituted another form of Declaration in schctlvil© declaration for the one given in this Act. (a) It was held in Reg. v. Middlesex J J. (b) that where a local Act Local Act- prescribes a special form for a rate made under it, that form must be spec followed. (.r) 12 A. & E. 382 ; 9 L.J.M.C. 65. Vide also Reg. v. Woods, E.B. & E. 481 ; 27 L.J.M.C. 289 ; 4 Jur. N.S. 1233. 0/) Rey. v. Paynter, 10 Q.B. 908 ; IB L.J.M.C. 136. \z) Lorrant v. Scudding, 13 Q.B. 687 ; 19 L.J.M.C. 5. (a) Post p. 374. (b) L.R. 7 Q.B. 653 ; 26 L.T. 902 ; 20 W.R. 774. 21a 324 An Act to Exempt Inhabitants of Parishes, Townships, and Villages from liability to be rated as such, in respect of Stock-in-Trade or other Property to the Relief of the Poor. (3 & 4 Vict., c. 89.) [Preamble recites 43 Eliz., c. 2, and 13 & 14 Chas. II., c. 12.] stock-in-trade, 1. — It shall not be lawful for the overseers of any parish, etc., not to be . , rated. township, or village to tax any inhabitant thereot, as such inhabitant, in respect of his ability derived from the profits of stock-in-trade or any other property, for or towards the relief of the poor : Provided always, that nothing in this Act contained shall in any wise affect the liability of any parson or vicar, or of any occupier of lands, houses, tithes impropriate, propriations of tithes, coal mines, or saleable underwoods, to be taxed under the provisions of the said Acts for and towards the relief of the poor. 2— [Rep. by 37 & 38 Vict., c. 96.] . This Act, which was originally in force for one year only, has been continued from time to time by the Expiring Laws Continuance Acts. Reg. v. Lumsdaine (a) and Reg. v. Cupel (b) decided that the Parochial Assessment Act did not exempt personal property from rating. These decisions probably led to the passing of this Act. (a) 10 A. & E. 157 ; 8 L. J.M.C. 69. (b) 12 A. & E. 382 ; 9 L.J.M.C. 65 ; 4 Jur. 886. 325 An Act to Exempt from County, Borough, Parochial, and other Local Rates, Land and Buildings occupied by Scientific or Literary Societies. (6 & 7 Vict., c. 36.) WHEREAS it is expedient that societies established exclusively for purposes of science, literature, or the fine arts should be exempt from the charge of county, borough, parochial, and other local rates in respect of land and buildings occupied by them for the transaction of their business, and for carrying into effect their purposes : Be it therefore enacted that — From and after the 1st day of October, 1843, no person or ^^ cetc - persons shall be assessed or rated, or liable to be assessed or rateTupon r ° ,-. i • I obtaining the rated, or liable to pay, to any county, borough, parochial, or certificate 1 J ' J *" hereinafter other local rates or cesses, in respect of any land, houses or mentioned. buildings, or parts of houses or buildings, belonging to any society instituted for purposes of science, literature, or the fine arts exclusively, either as tenant or as owner, and occupied by it for the transaction of its business, and for carrying into effect its purposes, provided that such society shall be sup- ported wholly or in part by annual voluntary contributions, and shall not, and by its laws may not, make any dividend, gift, division, or bonus in money unto or between any of its members, and provided also that such society shall obtain the certificate of the barrister-at-law or lord advocate, as herein- after mentioned. It was decided in Reg. v. Jones (a) and Reg. v. Baptist Missionary Religious Society (b) that societies for the diffusion of religious principles are not within the exemption in this section. {a) 8 Q.B. 719; 15 L.J.M.C. 129; 10 Jur. 613. {b) 10 Q.B. 884 ; 18 L.J.M.C. 194. 326 An Act to Exempt Scientific, etc., Societies from Mates. 6 & 7 Vict. I Q R e 0- v - Pocock (c) it was held that societies established for the C. 36. promotion of education are not within the exemption. The same rule Educational or applies to a society the primary object of which is the acquisition of scientific scientific knowledge for a particular profession, but which is not a society societies. for the purposes of science exclusively, (a) Zoological The Zoological Society is not exempt, (e) Newsrooms for Societies for providing libraries and newsrooms for the use of subscribers subscribers. are not exempt. (/) The Botanic Gardens at Oxford, used for the growth of plants exclusively for scientific purposes, have been held to be exempt from rating, (g) Must be solely A society instituted for purposes of science, literature, or the fine arts scIence P utera- f i s not exempt from rating unless its premises are occupied solely for ture.or fine arts, f^ge pur p ses. (//) Where society Where a society is exempted from rates, it may let off part of its premised ° premises not required for the use of the society. No exemption will be allowed for the part so let off. (/) Working men's i n g co tt v . gft. Martin' 's-in-the-Fields (/.•) a working man's educational educational . v ■ ' union. union was held not exempt on the ground that the promotion or science, literature, and the fine arts was not the direct object of the institution, but only a means among others for effecting the general elevation of the physical, intellectual, moral, and religious condition of the working classes. The Manchester Institution, the London Library, the Linnasan Society, the Bradford Library and Literary Society, and the Liverpool Library have all been held exempt from rating under this section (J), these societies being exclusively for purposes of science, literature, or the fine arts. '•Voluntary A society is not "supported by voluntary contributions" within this con n u ions. sec tj on w h en it returns to every contributor the equivalent of his contri- butions in money's worth. " Voluntary " does not mean not compulsory ; it means gratuitous, without any money or other material consideration, (to) (c) 8 Q.B. 729 ; 15 L.J.M.C. 132 ; 10 Jur. 662. (d) Reg. v. Institute of Civil Engineers, 6 Q.B.D. 48 ; 49 L.J.M.C. 34 ; 42 L.T. 145 ; 28 W.R. 253 ; 44 J. P. 265. Ante p. 84. (e) Reg. v. Zoological Society of London, 3 E. & B. 807 ; 23 L.J.M.C. 139; 18 Jur. 786; Ante p. 84. (/) Reg. v. Gaskell, 16 Q.B. 472; 21 L.J.M.C. 29; 15 Jur. 1156; Reg. v. Brandt, 16 Q.B. 462 ; 20 L.J.M.C. 119; 15 Jur. 223. Ante p. 83. Vide also the cases there cited. (g) Oxford Poor Rate Case, 8 E. & B. 184 ; 27 L.J.M.C. 33. (h) Purvisv. Traill, 3 Ex. 344; 18 L.J.M.C. 57. Ante p. 83. Vide also cases there cited. (t) Reg. v. Manchester, 16 Q.B. 449 ; 20 L.J.M.C. 113 ; 15 Jur. 219. (*) 5 E. & B. 558 ; 25 L.J.M.C. 42 ; 1 Jur. N.S. 1207. (1) For cases and references, ride ante p. 82. (m) Overseers of Savoy v. Art Union of London (1896), A.C. 296 ; 65 L.J.M.C. 161; 74 L.T. 497; 45 W.R. 34; 60 J.P. 660. Ante p. 81. An Act to Exempt Scientific, etc., Societies from Rates. 327 2. — Provided always that before any society shall be entitled 6 & 7 Vict., to the benefit of this Act such society shall cause three copies — of all laws, rules, and regulations for the management thereof, societies to _ cause three signed by the president or other chief officer and three members copies of their ° J A rules to be of the council or committee of management, and counter- b a^stCT d ap - thc signed by the clerk or secretary of such society, to be sub- certify the rules mitted in England, Wales, and Berwick-upon-Tweed, to the societies, who i i p i • i • • i'fi shall certify barrister-at-law for the time being appointed to certify the thereon, if 011 J entitled. rules of friendly societies there, and in Scotland to the lord advocate, or any depute appointed by him to certify the rules of friendly societies there, and in Ireland to the barrister for the time being appointed to certify the rules of friendly societies there, for the purpose of ascertaining whether such society is entitled to the benefit of this Act ; and such barrister, or lord advocate, as the case may be, shall give a certificate on each of the said copies that the society so applying is entitled to the benefit of this Act, or shall state in writing the grounds on which such certificate is withheld ; and one of such copies, when certified by such barrister or lord one certified copy to be re- advocate, shall be returned to the society, another copy shall be turned to the " ' J- " society ; one to retained by such barrister or lord advocate, and the other of the^^Sster^ such copies shall be transmitted by such barrister or lord transmittecuo advocate to the clerk of the peace for the borough or county peace for confir- . . , mation at where the land or buildings of such society m respect of which sessions, and ° J r t0 be deposited. such exemption is claimed shall be situated, and shall by him be laid before the recorder or justices for such borough or county at the General Quarter Sessions, or adjournment thereof, held next after the time when such copy shall have been so certified, and transmitted to him as aforesaid, and the recorder or justices then and there present are hereby authorized and required, without motion, to allow and confirm the same ; and such copy shall be filed by such clerk of the peace with the rolls of the sessions of the peace in his custody, without fee or reward. It was held in Reg. v. Phillips («) that the certificate of the barrister is not conclusive proof of the other requisites of the statute having been complied with ; but is merely one of the several conditions precedent which must all concur to give a right of exemption. («) 8 Q.B. 745 ; 17 L.J.M.C. 83 ; 12 Jur. 431. 328 An Act to Exempt Scientific, etc., Societies from Rates. 6 & 7 Vict. c. 36. 3. — If the laws, rules and regulations of any such society shall be altered, so as to affect or relate to the property or tions made in constitution of such society, such alterations shall, within one the rules to be " . . . . , certified and calendar month after the same shall have been made, be deposited in like manner. submitted to such barrister or lord advocate, and such barrister or lord advocate shall certify as aforesaid ; and such rules, when so certified, shall be filed with the clerk of the peace as aforesaid ; and in the meantime such society shall be entitled to the benefit of this Act, as if no such alterations had been made ; provided always, that if the said barrister or lord advocate shall refuse to certify, that then, subject to such appeal, as is hereinafter provided, the said society shall cease to be entitled to the benefit of this Act from the time when such alterations shall come into operation. Fee to Banister, etc. Provision in cases where certificate is refused. Appeal to Quarter Sessions. 4. — Provided always that the fee payable to such barrister or lord advocate for perusing the laws, rules and regulations of each society, or the alterations made therein, and giving such certificate or statement as aforesaid shall not at any one time exceed the sum of one guinea, which, together with the expense of transmitting the rules to and from the said barrister or lord advocate, shall be defrayed by each society respectively. 5. — Provided always that in case any such barrister or lord advocate shall refuse to certify that any such society is entitled to the benefit of this Act, it shall then be lawful for any such society to submit the laws, rules and regulations thereof to the Court of Quarter Sessions for the borough or county where the land or buildings of the society shall be situated, together with the reasons so assigned by the said barrister or lord advocate as aforesaid ; and the recorder or justices at such Quarter Sessions shall and may, if he or they think fit, order the same rules to be filed, notwithstanding such refusal as aforesaid ; and such filing shall have the same effect as if the said barrister or lord advocate had certified as aforesaid. 6. — Provided also that any person or persons assessed to any rate from which any society shall be exempted by this Act may appeal from the decision of the said barrister or lord advocate An Act to Exempt Scientific Societies, etc., from Hates. 329 in granting such certificate as aforesaid to the said Court of g & 7 Vict. Quarter Sessions, within four calendar months next after the c. 36. first assessment of such rate made after such certificate shall have been filed as aforesaid, or within four calendar months next after the first assessment of such rate made after such exemption shall have been claimed by such society, such appellant first giving to the clerk or secretary of the society in question, twenty-one days previously to the sitting of the said court, notice in writing of his intention to bring such appeal, together with a statement in writing of the grounds thereof, and within four days after such notice entering into a recog- nizance before some justice, with two sufficient sureties, to try such appeal at and abide the order of and pay such costs as shall be awarded by the recorder or justices at such Quarter Sessions ; and at such Quarter Sessions such recorder or justices shall, on its being proved that such notice and statement have been given as aforesaid, proceed to hear such appeal, according to the grounds set forth in such statement, and not otherwise, and if the certificate of the said barrister or lord advocate .shall appear to him or them to have been granted contrary to the provisions of this Act, shall and may annul the same, and shall and may, according to their discretion, award such costs to the party appealing or appealed against as he or they shall think proper, and his or their determination concerning the premises shall be conclusive and binding on all parties to all intents and purposes whatsoever. In Reg. v. Stacey (0) it was held that if the order of the Sessions is Certiorari, good on the face of it the Court of Queen's Bench will not interfere on certiorari. In Reg. v. PococJc (p) it was held that an appeal within four calendar Appeal— time, months next after an assessment made after the filing of the barrister's certificate was in time within this section. (0) 14 Q.B. 789 ; 19 L.J.M.C. 177 ; 14 Jur. 649. (p) 8 Q.B. 729 ; 15 L.J.M.C. 132 ; 10 Jur. 662. 330 An Act to enable Overseers of the Poor and Surveyors of the Highways to Recover the Costs of Distraining for Bates. (12 & 13 Vict., c. 14.) 43 Eiiz., c. 2, WHEKEAS provision is already made by law for the recovery c 50 - of the sum or sums at which any person is rated or assessed to the relief of the poor, or is rated or assessed in any rate for the highways, in England or Wales, by distress and sale of his goods and chattels, and in default of such distress by commit- ment to prison until the same shall be paid ; but no provision is made for levying the costs and expenses incurred by the overseers of the poor or the surveyors of highways in the recovery of the same respectively ; Be it therefore enacted that — where a It shall be lawful hereafter for all justices of the peace, if distress is i n their discretion they shall so think fit, in any warrant of granted for a ^ h?"h way rate, distress they shall make and issue for the levying of any sum or J c tai t n 1 in|it tsof or sums to which any person or persons is or are now or may iK^ obe hereafter be rated or assessed in or by any rate or assessment for the relief of the poor, or for the highways, in England or Wales, or in or by any other rate or assessment which by law now or hereafter is or shall be directed to be enforced or recovered in the same manner as a poor rate, or in any warrant for the levying of any arrears of the same, to order that a sum, such as they may deem reasonable, for the costs and expenses which such overseers or surveyors, or the persons applying for such warrant, shall have incurred in obtaining the same, shall also be levied of the goods and chattels of the person or persons against whom such warrant shall be granted, together with the reasonable charges of the taking, keeping, and selling of the said distress. An Act to Recover Costs of Distraining for Hates. 331 2. — And whereas by an Act passed in the forty-third year of c ^ 1C ' the reign of Queen Elizabeth, intituled " An Act for the Eelief Iniprisomeiltin of the Poor," it is amongst other things enacted, that in default actress? 43 of distress for a poor-rate it shall be lawful for two justices of the peace to commit the party against whom the distress warrant shall have issued to the common gaol of the county, there to remain without bail or mainprize until payment ; and whereas it is desirable to limit the time within which a person assessed to a poor-rate, or any other of the rates or assessments aforesaid may be imprisoned for non-payment of the same : Be it therefore enacted, that so much of the said recited Act 43 ehz., c. 2, as relates to as relates to the commitment of any person to the county gaol commitments for non-payment of any poor-rate, or for default of distress ggJJ^'^J. whereon to levy the same, shall be and the same is hereby Stress?* , , , n - -i • repealed. repealed ; and every person now undergoing any sucn im- prisonment under or by virtue of the said recited Act shall be discharged from such imprisonment so soon as he or she shall have been imprisoned three calendar months, or shall sooner ,, •i-ii-11 i-i -i j Power to order pay the sum or sums with which he or she is charged ; and imprisonment ,„,., piii' not exceeding that hereafter, when to any warrant of distress tor the levying three months in default of of any sum or sums to which any person or persons is or are distress. now or may hereafter be rated or assessed in or by any rate or assessment hereinbefore mentioned it shall be returned by the constable or person having the execution of such warrant that he could find no goods or chattels, or no sufficient goods or chattels, whereon to levy such sum or sums, together with the costs of or occasioned by the levying of the same, it shall be lawful for any two or more justices of the peace before whom the same shall be returned, or for any two or more justices of the peace for the same county, riding, division, liberty, city, borough, or place, if in their discretion they shall so think fit, to issue their warrant of commitment against the person with relation to whom such return shall be so made as aforesaid, in the form (D) in the schedule to this Act annexed, or in any form to the like effect, and thereby order such person to be imprisoned in the common gaol or house of correction for any time not exceeding three calendar months, unless the sum or sums therein mentioned shall be sooner paid ; and every such 332 An Act to Recover Costs of Distraining for Rates. 12 & 13 Vict, warrant of commitment made or issued for default of distress c - 14. as aforesaid shall be made as well for the non-payment of the costs and expenses so as aforesaid incurred in obtaining such warrant of distress, if the same shall be so ordered as aforesaid, and the costs attending the said distress, and also the costs and charges of taking and conveying the party to prison (the amount of such several costs, expenses, and charges being stated in such warrant of commitment) as for the non-payment of the sum or sums alleged to be due for the said rates respectively. Married woman. It was held in In re Elizabeth Allen (a) that a married woman, rated as owner of hereditaments under section 4 of the Poor Rate Assessment and Collection Act, 1869, is liable to be imprisoned on non-payment of parochial rates in defaidt of sufficient goods being found whereon to levy distress. one warrant 3, — For the saving of expense in the levying of any sum or may be issued against several sums f or ra te and costs as af oresaid it shall be lawful to make ratepayers. and issue one warrant of distress against any number of persons neglecting or refusing to pay the same, in the form in the schedule to this Act annexed ; but nothing herein shall be deemed or construed to authorize justices in like manner to grant or issue one warrant of commitment against several persons in default of distress as aforesaid. To whom 4« — The warrants aforesaid may be directed to the church- distre^OT 1 wardens and overseers of the poor, or the overseers of the poor, sSmbe me or the surveyors of the highways respectively, and to the constable of the parish or township, and to any other person or persons, or to any one or more of them, as by the justices granting the same shall be deemed fit. summons for 5. — Every summons to be issued against any person for non-payment of ni-ii i int. rate-how non-payment of any sum for which he or she is or snail be so served; L J J rated or assessed as aforesaid shall be directed to such person, and may be in the form (B) in the schedule to this Act annexed, or in any form to the like effect ; and the same may be served by any churchwarden or overseer of the poor, or (a) (1894) 2 Q.B. 924 ; 63 L.J.M.C. 267 ; 43 W.E. 141 ; 59 J.P. 229 ; 10 R. 514. An Act to Recover Costs of Distraining for Rates. 333 surveyor of the highways, respectively, or constable or other \2 & 13 Vict. person, to whom it shall be delivered for that purpose, upon c - *■*' the person to whom it is so directed, by delivering the same to the party personally or by leaving the same with some person for him or her at his or her last place of abode ; and the person who shall serve the same in manner aforesaid shall attend at the time and place and before the justices in the said summons mentioned, to depose if necessary to the service of the said summons ; and if, upon the day and at the place appointed in and by the said summons for the appearance of the party so summoned, such party shall fail to appear accordingly in obedience to such summons, then and in every such case, if it be proved upon oath or affirmation to the justices then present that such summons was duly served as aforesaid a reasonable time before the time so appointed for his or her appearance as injustices 64 ' aforesaid, it shall be lawful for such justices of the peace in eTparte. Cee ' their discretion, if they shall so think fit, to proceed ex parte, in the same manner to all intents and purposes as if such party had personally appeared before them in obedience to the said summons. r fi. — In all cases where any proceedings have been or shall 0n payment or d L ° tender of rate hereafter be taken to compel payment of any sum for which proceedings to any such person is or shall be so rated or assessed as aforesaid, cease ' if at any time before such person shall be committed to and lodged in prison for non-payment thereof or for or by reason of its being returned to such warrant of distress as aforesaid that there are no goods or chattels or no sufficient goods or chattels of such person whereon the same may be levied as aforesaid, such person shall pay or tender to the churchwardens or overseers of the poor, or any of them, or to the surveyor of highways respectively, or other person authorized to collect or receive such rate, the sum so sought to be recovered, together with the amount of all costs and expenses up to that time incurred in the proceedings so taken to compel payment thereof as aforesaid, then and in every such case the person to whom such sum and costs shall be so paid or tendered shall receive the same, and thereupon no further proceedings for the recovery of the same shall be had or taken, 334 An Act to Recover Costs of Distraining for Hates. 12&13Vict. 7.— [Repealed by 38 & 39 Vict., c. 66 (S.L.R.).] c. 14. Forms in 8. — And whereas it may be convenient, and save expense schedule valid. -it,',- • p p it -ii«j_i r> i and litigation, if torms to be used for the purpose of levying the sums aforesaid should be given, be it enacted that the forms in the schedule to this Act contained, or forms to the same or the like effect, shall be deemed good, valid, and sufficient in law. 9.— [Repealed by 47 & 48 Vict., c. 43, s. 4.] SCHEDULE. (A. 1.) Complaint of the Overseers or Surveyors against One Ratepayer. 1 Be it remembered, that on the day of , To wit. ) in the year of our Lord the [churchwardens and over- seers of the poor or the surveyors of the highways] of the parish of , in the county of aforesaid, by C. D., one of the said [overseers or surveyors], complain to the undersigned, [owe] of her Majesty's Justices of the Peace in and for the said [county'] that A. B. of the said [parish], being a person duly rated and assessed to [the relief of the poor, or the maintenance of the highways] of the said parish in and by a rate ° made on the day of , in the year , in the sum of , hath not paid the same or any part thereof, but hath refused so to do : Wherefore the said [churchwardens and overseers or surveyors], by C. D. aforesaid, pray that the said A. B. may be summoned to appear before two of her Majesty's Justices of the Peace, to show cause why he hath not paid and refuses to pay the said sum. CD. Made and exhibited before me , at , in the county of , on this day of , 1849. E. F. * Or, in and by several rates made on and on in the several sums of and of An Act to Recover Costs of Distraining for Hates. 335 (A. 2.) 12 & 13 Vict, c. 14. Complaint against Several Ratepayers. \ Be it remembered, that on the day of , To wit. j in the year of our Lord the [churchwardens and overseers of the poor, or the surveyors of the highways] of the parish of , in the [county'] of aforesaid, by C. D., one of the said [overseers or surveyors] complain to the undersigned, [one] of her Majesty's Justices of the Peace in and for the said [county], that the several persons whose names are mentioned and set out in the schedule hereunder written, being persons duly rated and assessed to [the relief of the poor, or the maintenance of the highways] of the said parish, in and by the rates in the said schedule mentioned, in certain sums set down opposite to their respective names in the said schedule, have not respectively paid the said sums or any part thereof, but have respectively refused so to do : Wherefore the said [churchwardens and overseers, or surveyors], by C. D., aforesaid, pray that said several persons may respectively be summoned to appear before two of her Majesty's Justices of the Peace, to show cause respectively why they have not paid and refuse to pay the said sums respectively. Schedule. Names of the Ratepayers. Residence. Under Rate dated the , 1849. £ s. d. 1 7 13 14 3 Arrears due under Rate dated the , 1848. Total Sum Due. A. B I. K Here state it. )> >» £ s. d. 1 7 18 6 14 3 £ s. d. 2 14 13 L. M N. P 18 6 1 8 6 Made and exhibited before me , at , in the county of , on this day of , 1849. E. F. ; CD. 336 An Act to Recover Costs of Distraining for Rates. 12 & 13 Vict. rn . c. 14. ( R ) Summons upon the Complaint. To A. B., of Whereas complaint hath this day been made before the undersigned, [one] of her Majesty's Justices of the Peace in and for the [county] of , by the [churchwardens and overseers of the poor, or surveyors of the highways] of the parish of in the said [county'] that you, being a person duly rated and assessed to [the relief of the poor, or the maintenance of the highways] of the said parish, in and by a rate made on the day of 1849, in the sum of , hath not paid the same or any part thereof, but hath refused so to do : These are therefore to command you, in her Majesty's name, to be and appear on , at o'clock in the forenoon, at , before such two or more Justices of the Peace for the said [county'] as may then be there, to show cause why you have not paid and refuse to pay the same, other- wise you shall be proceeded against by default as if you had appeared, and be dealt with according to law. Given under my hand and seal, this day of , in the year of our Lord , at , in the [county] aforesaid. E. F. Take NOTICE, that you have already incurred the undermentioned s. .1. costs, viz. Clerk to the justices Overseer [or surveyor] for obtaining the summons Constable, for serving ditto 1 Ditto, travelling expenses at threepence per mile ... Total If the amount of these charges, together with the rate claimed, be paid to the overseer [or surveyor] before the day on which the summons is returnable, all further proceedings will be stopped. (C. 1.) Warrant of Distress against One Ratepayer. To the overseers of the poor [or to the surveyors of the high- ways] of the parish of , in the [coinrfy] of , and to the constable of , and to all other peace officers in the said [county]. Whereas on last past a complaint was made before E. F., one of her Majesty's Justices of the Peace in and for the [county] of , by the [churchwardens and An Act to Recover Costs of Distraining for Hates. 337 overseers of the poor, or surveyors of the highways] of the parish of io&iq Vipt , in the said [county], that A. B., being a person q % \^ duly rated and assessed to the relief of the poor [or to the main- — tenance of the highways] of the said parish, in and by a rate made on , in the sum of , had not paid the same or any part thereof, but had refused so to do ; and now at this day, to wit, on , at , the parties aforesaid appear before us, the undersigned, two of her Majesty's Justices of the Peace in and for the said county [or the said churchwardens and overseers, or surveyors, by C. D., one of the said overseers, or surveyors, appear before us, the undersigned, two of her Majesty's Justices of the Peace in and for the said county ; but the said A. B., although duly called, doth not appear by himself, his counsel or attorney, and it is now satisfactorily proved to us on oath that the said A. B. has been duly served with the summons in this behalf, which required him to be and appear here at this day before such two or more Justices of the Peace as should now be here, to answer the said complaint, and to be further dealt with according to law] ; and now having heard the matter of the said complaint, and it being now duly proved to us upon oath [in the presence and hearing of the said A. B.] that an assessment for the [relief of the poor, or the maintenance of the highways] of the said parish of , and for other purposes chargeable thereon according to law, dated the , was duly made, allowed, and published, and that the said A. B. is therein and thereby assessed at the sum of aforesaid,* and that the said sum hath been duly demanded of the said A. B., but that he hath not paid, and hath refused and still refuses to pay the same ; and the said A. B. now not showing to us any sufficient cause for not paying the same, these are therefore to command you, in her Majesty's name, forthwith to make distress of the goods and chattels of the said A. B. ; and if within the space of [five] days after the making of such distress the said sum, and the sum of for the costs incurred by the said [churchwardens and overseers or surveyors] in obtaining this warrant, together with the reasonable charges of taking and keeping the said distress, shall not be paid, that then you do sell the said goods and chattels so by you distrained, and out of the money arising by such sale you retain the said sums of and , rendering the overplus, on demand, to the said A. B., the reasonable charges of taking, keeping, and selling the said distress being first deducted ; and if no such distress can be found that then you certify the same unto us, to the end that such further proceedings may be had herein as to the law doth appertain. Given under our hands and seals, this day of , in the year of our Lord , at , in the [county] aforesaid. E. F. G. H. e it A nt j ^hat a certain other assessment for the relief," etc., to the asterisk, if there be arrears. 22 12 & 13 Vict, c. 14. 338 An Act to Recover Costa of Distraining for Hates. (C. 2.) Warrant of Distress against Several Ratepayers. To the overseers of the poor [or the surveyors of the highways] of the parish of . in the [county'] of , and to the constable of , and to all other peace officers in the said [county']. Whereas on last past a complaint was made before E. F., one of her Majesty's Justices of the Peace in and for the [county] of , by the [churchwardens and overseers of the poor, or the surveyors of the highways] of the parish of , in the said [county], that the several persons whose names are mentioned and set forth in the schedule, here- under written, being persons duly rated and assessed to [the relief of the poor, or maintenance of the highways] of the said parish, in and by the rates in the schedule in that complaint and in this warrant underwritten, in certain sums set down opposite to their respective names in the said schedule, had not respectively paid the said sums or any part thereof, but had respectively refused so to do ; and now at this day, to wit, on , at , the said [churchwardens and overseers, or surveyors] by C. D., one of the said overseers, or surveyors, and A. B., I. K., and L. ML, some of the said parties in the said schedule mentioned, appear before us, the undersigned, two of her Majesty's Justices of the Peace in and for the said [county] ; but the said N. P., although duly called, doth not appear by himself, his counsel or attorney, and it is now satisfactorily proved to us on oath that the said N. P. has been duly served with the summons in this behalf, which required him to be and appear here at this day before such two or more Justices of the Peace as should now be here to answer the said complaint, and to be further dealt with according to law ; and now having heard the matter of the said complaint against the said several parties, and it being now duly proved to us upon oath, in the presence of the parties so appearing as aforesaid, that an assessment for [the relief of the poor] of the said parish of , and for other purposes chargeable therein according to law, dated the was duly made, allowed, and published, and that the said several persons whose names are mentioned and set out in the schedule, hereunder written are therein and thereby assessed at the sums set down opposite to their respective names in the said schedule, and that the said several sums have been duly demanded of them respectively, but they have not nor hath any of them paid the said sums or any of them, or any part thereof respectively, but they have refused and still do refuse to pay the same respectively, and have not, nor hath any of them, showed to us sufficient cause for not paying the same ; these are therefore to command you, in her Majesty's name, forthwith to make distress of the goods and chattels of the several persons whose names are mentioned and set out in the schedule hereunder written ; and if within the space of five days after the making of such distresses respectively the said several sums set An Act to Recover Costs of Distraining for Bates. 339 opposite to their respective names at which they were so rated and assessed 12&13Vict as aforesaid, and the said several sums for costs incurred by the said c. 14. [churchwardens and overseers, or surveyors] also set opposite to their respective names, together with the reasonable charges of taking and keeping the said distress in each case, shall not be paid, that then you do sell the goods and chattels of the party so making default so by you dis- trained, and out of the money arising by such sales respectively you retain the sums so set opposite to the name of each party whose goods you shall have so sold, rendering to him the overplus, the reasonable charges of taking, keeping, and selling the said distress being first deducted ; and if in any of the cases mentioned in the schedule hereunder written no such distress can be found, that then you certify the same unto us, to the end that such further proceedings may be had herein as to the law doth appertain. Schedule. Names of Ratepayers. Residence. Under Rate dated 1849. Arrears Due under Rate dated , 1848. Costs. Total. £ 8. d. £ s. d. £ s. d. £ s. d. A. B Here state it. 1 7 1 7 6 3 ]. K h >> 13 — 2 15 L. M 5J 55 — 18 6 3 1 1 6 N. P 1) >> 14 3 14 3 5 1 13 6 Given under our hands and seals, this in the year of our Lord , at [county] aforesaid. day of in the E. F. G. H. Warrant of Commitment in Default of Distress. To the overseers of the poor [or the surveyors of the highways] of the parish of , in the [county] of , and to the constable of , and to all other peace officers in the said [county], and to the keeper of the [house of correction] at , in the said [county]. Whereas on last past a complaint was made before E. F., esquire, one of her Majesty's Justices of the Peace in 22 a 340 An Act to Recover Costs of Distrain fag for Rates. 12 & 13 Vict. an(1 f° r tlie said [county] of , by the [church- C. 14. wardens and overseers of the poor, or surveyors of the highways] ~ of the parish of , in the said [county], that A. B., being a person duly rated to the [relief of the poor, or main- tenance of the highways] of the said parish, in and by a rate made on , in the sum of , had not paid the same, or any part thereof, but had refused so to do ; and afterwards on , at , the parties aforesaid appeared before E. F. and G. H., esquires, two of her Majesty's Justices of the Peace in and for the said county [or the said churchwardens and overseers, or surveyors, by C. D., one of the said over- seers, or surveyors, appeared before E. F. and G. H., esquires, two of her Majesty's Justices of the Peace in and for the said county ; but the said A. B., although duly called, did not appear by himself, his counsel or attorney, and it was then satisfactorily proved to the said Justices that the said A. B. had been duly served with the summons in that behalf, which required him to be and appear there at that day before such two or more Justices of the Peace as should then be there, to answer the said complaint, and to be further dealt with according to law] ; and then having heard the matter of the said complaint, and it being then duly proved to the said Justices upon oath [in the presence and hearing of the said A. B.] that an assessment for the [relief of the poor, or the maintenance of the highways] of the said parish of , dated the , was duly made, allowed, and published, and that the said A. B. was therein and thereby assessed at the sum of aforesaid, and that the said sum had been duly demanded of the said A. B., but that he had not paid, and had refused and still refused to pay the same, and the said A. B. then not showing to the said E. F. and G. H. any sufficient cause for not paying the same, the said Justices thereupon then issued a warrant to , commanding them to levy the said sum of and the sum of for the costs incurred in obtaining that warrant, by distress and sale of the goods and chattels of the said A. B. : and whereas it now appears to me, the undersigned, one of her Majesty's Justices of the Peace in and for the said [county], as well by the return of the said to the said warrant of distress as otherwise, that the said hath made diligent search for the goods and chattels of the said A. B., but that no sufficient distress whereon to levy the said sums above-mentioned could be found : these are therefore to command you, the said [churchwardens and overseers, or surveyors] and constable and peace officers, or some or one of you, to take the said A. B., and him safely to convey to the [house of correction] at aforesaid, and there deliver him to the said keeper, together with this precept : And I do hereby command you, the said keeper of the said [house of correction], to receive the said A. B. into your custody in the said [house of correction], there to imprison him for the space of unless the said sums of and , together with the sum of for the costs attending the said An Act to Recover Coat* of Distraining for Rates. 341 distress, and the further sum of , being the costs and 12 & 13 Vict, charges of this commitment, and of taking and conveying the said A. B. c - 1^ - to prison, making in the whole the sum of , shall he sooner paid unto you, the said keeper ; and for your so doing this shall be your sufficient warrant. Given under my hand and seal, this day of , in the year of our Lord , at , in the [county'] aforesaid. J. S. 342 An Act to Amend the Procedure in Courts of Quarter Sessions in England and Wales, and for the better Advancement of Justice in cases within the Juris- diction of those Courts, (a) (12 & 13 Vict., c. 45.) Notice of appeal WHEREAS in cases of appeal to Courts of Quarter Sessions, to Quarter - 1 A sessions. y. j g expedient that the law should be more uniform, Be it therefore enacted that : 1. — In every case of appeal (except as hereinafter men- tioned) to any Court of Quarter Sessions fourteen clear days' notice of appeal at least shall be given, and such shall be sufficient notice, any Act or Acts, or any rule or practice of any Court or Courts, to the contrary notwithstanding ; and such notice of appeal shall be in writing, signed by the person or persons giving the same, or by his, her, or their attorney on his, her, or their behalf, and the grounds of appeal shall be specified in 'every such notice : Provided always that it shall not be lawful for the appellant or appellants, on the trial of any such appeal to go into or give evidence of any other ground of appeal besides those set forth in such notice. This section is repealed, so far as relates to any appeal from a Court of Summary Jurisdiction, by the Summary Jurisdiction Act, 1884 (47 & 48 Vict., c. 43). Notice may be In Reg. v. Kent J J. (b) it was held that a notice of appeal signed, in the to g s n o e uci , tor < : lerk name of the appellant, by a clerk to the solicitor of the appellant, by the authority of the appellant, was sufficiently signed to comply with this section. Blackburn, J., said : " There seems to be no doubt that this is a case to which the maxim, qui facit per alium facit per se, will apply." This Act not to 2. — None of the provisions hereinbefore contained relating certain matters, to notices of appeal shall be construed to affect or alter the law as to notice of appeal against a summary conviction, or against (a) This Act is known as " Barnes's Act." (5) L.R. 8 Q.B. 305 ; 42 L.J.M.C. 112 ; 21 W.R. 635 ; 37 J.B. 644. An Act to Amend Procedure in Quarter Sessions. 343 an order of removal, or against an order under any statute 12 & 13 Vict. c 45. relating to pauper lunatics, or against an order in bastardy, or against any proceeding under or by virtue of any of the statutes relating to her Majesty's Ee venue of Excise or Customs, Stamps, Taxes, or Post Office, but the law with regard to notices of all such appeals shall be deemed and taken to be the same as if the provisions hereinbefore contained had not been enacted. 3. — Upon the hearing of any appeal to any Court of Quarter °^jf ons not Sessions no objection on account of any defect in the form of to i ireviuL setting forth any ground of appeal shall be allowed, and no objection to the reception of legal evidence offered in support of any ground of appeal shall prevail, unless the Court shall be of opinion that such ground of appeal is so imperfectly or in- correctly set forth as to be insufficient to enable the party receiving the same to inquire into the subject of such state- ment, and to prepare for trial : Provided always that in all Amendment, cases where the Court shall be of opinion that any objection to any ground of appeal, or to the reception of evidence in support thereof, ought to prevail, it shall be lawful for such Court, if it shall so think fit, to cause any such ground of appeal to be forthwith amended by some officer of the Court, or otherwise, on such terms as to payment of costs to the oijier party, or postponing the trial to another day in the same Sessions, or to the next subsequent Sessions, or both payment of costs and postponement, as to such Court shall appear just and reasonable. The recital to this section was repealed by the Statute Law Revision Act, 181)1. 4. — If in any notice of appeal the appellant or appellants c° 8ts in shall have included any ground or grounds of appeal which vc shall in the opinion of the Court determining the appeal be frivolous or vexatious, such appellant or appellants shall be liable, if the Court shall so think fit, to pay the whole or any part of the costs incurred by the respondent or respondents in disputing any such ground or grounds of appeal, such costs to be recoverable in the manner hereinafter directed as to the other costs incurred by reason of such appeal. frivolous or vexatioui appeals. 344 An Act to Amend Procedure in Quarter Sessions. 12&13Vict. 5. — Upon any appeal to any Court of Quarter Sessions, the Court before whom the same shall be brought may, if it think as to costs of fit, order and direct the party or parties against whom the same appeals. . shall be decided to pay to the other party or parties such costs and charges as may to such Court appear just and reasonable, such costs to be recoverable in the manner provided for the recovery of costs upon an appeal against an order or conviction 11 & 12 Vict., by the Summary Jurisdiction Act, 1848. Where party It was held in Freeman v. Read (c) that the justices at Quarter Sessions ngainst whom in j j. 1 • costs are given may direct their officer to tax the costs of an appeal, and may adopt his taxation shall taxation as their own act and insert the amount in their order, provided all take pla^ce after this be done before the end of the Sessions. If, however, the party against the Sessions are over, he cannot whom the costs are given consent that the taxation shall take place after object to the Sessions are over, and the justices give judgment for costs nunc pro jurisdiction. tunc, the party so consenting is precluded from afterwards objecting to their want of jurisdiction. It was decided in the same case that the above section includes appeals in which the appellant has entered into recog- nizances to pay the costs. Justices may In Reg. v. Huntley (d) it was held that an order of Sessions dismissing be paid directly an appeal against a poor-rate and ordering costs to be paid by the appellant ful'party 00688 ' to the respondent, and not to the clerk of the peace as required by 17 Geo. II., c. 38, s. 4, was valid, and that it may be enforced in the manner pointed out by s. 18. (e) Or to the clerk In Gay v. Matheios (/) it was held that an order of the Sessions directing be paid by^him the unsuccessful party to pa} T the costs to the clerk of the peace, to be paid to the success- ^y hj m ^ the other party, was good. No costs The Sessions have no power under this section to award costs against an against officer ~, , , , r ^ , x of the Crown, officer who represents the Crown, (r/) Appeal dis- Where the Sessions dismiss an appeal on the ground that they have no missed for want ..... . • , , i , • ,1^ of jurisdiction jurisdiction to hear it they have power to give costs, (h) Subs u nt ^ n R f 9- v - Staffordshire J J. (/) it was held that subsequent Sessions have Sessions cannot no power to award costs. The same view was expressed in Ren. v. Hamp- award costs. shire J J. («) (c) 9 C.B.N.<. 301 ; 30 L.J.M.C. 123 ; 9 W.R. 141 ; 7 Jur. N.S. 546. Vide also Reg. v. Mortlock, 7 Q.B. 459 ; 14 L.J.M.C. 153 ; 9 Jur. 621 ; Ex parte Watkins, 5 L.T. 605 ; 10 W.E. 249. (d) 3 E. & B. 172 ; 23 L.J.M.C. 106; 18 Jur. 745. (e) Post p. 352. (/•) 4 B. & S. 425 ; 33 L.J.M.C. 14 ; 8 L.T. 674 ; 11 W.E. 922 ; 9 Jur. N.S. 716. Vide also Reg. v. Peck, 20 L.T. 393. (g) Reg. v. Beadle, 7 E. & B. 492 ; 26 L.J.M.C. 111. Vide also Moor v. Smith, 28 L.J.M.C. 126 ; 5 Jur. N.S. 892. (/>) Reg. v. Padwick, 8 E. & B. 704; 27 L.J.M.C. 113; 4 Jur. N.S. 360. (i) 7 E. & B. 935 ; 26 L.J.M.C. 179 ; 3 Jur. N.S. 1148. (A) 32 L.J.M.C. 46 ; 11 W. R. 122 ; 8 Jur. N.S. 1212. An Act to Amend Procedure in Quarter Sessions. 34o In Reg. v. Yorkshire (West Biding) JJ.(l) an order was made under ]_2& 13 Vict, s. 13 of this Act referring the matter to an arbitrator. The order was silent C. 45- as to costs, and the appeal was respited from Sessions to Sessions. It was held that a subsequent Court of Quarter Sessions had no power to allow the respondents the costs of the reference and award. The Sessions cannot delegate their power of giving costs. An order Sessions must giving costs to he taxed by the clerk of the peace is bad. The Sessions amoimtof cos^s. must determine the amount of the costs awarded by them, (m) But if a m , . . They may be Court of Quarter Sessions on hearing an appeal direct costs to he given and taxed between adjourn the Court, it is sufficient to have the costs taxed by the clerk of the and adjourned peace between the day of hearing and the adjournment day, and on the hearm o- adjournment day to draw up the order, inserting a direction to pay the amount of costs ascertained on the taxation, («) In Rawnsley v. Hutchinson (o) an appeal to Quarter Sessions was Or at adjourned dismissed with costs. The Sessions were afterwards adjourned till Sessions - the following month, and the costs of the appeal were taxed at the adjourned Sessions. The Court held that the costs were rightly taxed. An appeal to Quarter Sessions was referred by consent under s. 13 of this Taxation out of Act. By the order of reference the costs of the appeal and reference were pUed^erinof to be in the discretion of the arbitrator. The arbitrator determined the referenee - matter of the appeal in favour of the respondents, and awarded them the costs of the appeal and reference. The Court held that it was an implied term of the reference that the costs should be taxed out of Sessions, {p) In Lear v. Botting (q) it was held that the words, " costs to follow the "Costs to follow event," contained in a case stated and signed only by the chairman of Quarter Sessions, amounted to an agreement which was binding on the parties to the case, and that the defendant was therefore liable to pay the costs so incurred. It was also held that the taxation of the costs so incurred was not a condition precedent to the plaintiff's right to bring an action to recover them. The House of Lords has recently decided in Midland Railway v. Decision of the Guardians of Edmonton Union (r) that the practice to tax out of Sessions has become so common, that the slightest evidence of consent will suffice. Where, however, no consent has been given to taxation out of Sessions a subsequent Court of Quarter Sessions has no jurisdiction to make an order for the taxation of costs awarded by a previous Court of Quarter Sessions. (/) 6 B. fr S. 531 ; 34 L.J.M.C. 142 ; 12 L.T. 380 ; 29 J.P. 324. Vide also West London Extrusion Railway <'o. v. Fulham Union, L.R. 6 Q.B. 220 ; 40 L.J.M.C. 109 ; 24 L.T. 131 ; 19 W.E. 744 ; 34 J.P. 423. {m) Sellwoo-ir. Mount, 1 Q.B. 726 ; 6 Jur. 78 ; Reg. v. Long, 1 Q.B. 740; 6 Jur. 98. (») Reg. v. Hampshire J J., 33 L.J.M.C. 104; 9 L.T. 730 ; 12 W.R. 441 ; 28 J.P. 151. (o) L.R. 6 Q.B. 305 ; 40 L.J.M.C. 97 ; 23 L.T. 843 ; 19 W.R. 436 ; 35 J.P. 501. Vide also Reg. v. Phillips, 29 L.T. 100. {p) Southampton Cat Light and Coke Co. v. Southampton Union, 2 Q.B.D. 371 ; 46 L.J.M.C. 238 ; 36 L.T. 548 ; 25 W.R. 671 ; 41 J.P. 645. (?) 44 L.T. 58 ; 45 J.P. 240. (r) (1895) A.C. 485 ; 64 L.J.Q.B. 710 ; 72 L.T. 811 ; 60 J.P. 68 ; 11 E. 246. House of Lords. 346 An Act to Amend Procedure in Quarter Sessions. 12 &13Vict. A person making default in payment of costs awarded under this Act is not protected from imprisonment by the Debtors' Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict., c. 45. Default in pay- C 62). (s) ment of costs. Costs where appeal is not prosecuted. Powers of amendment on appeal or certiorari. Defective recognizances 6. — And for the more effectual prevention of frivolous appeals, any Court of Quarter Sessions, upon proof of notice of any appeal to the same Court having been given to the party or parties entitled to receive the same, though such appeal was not afterwards prosecuted or entered, may, if it so think fit, at the same Sessions for which such notice was given, order to the party or parties receiving the same such costs and charges as by the said Court shall be thought reasonable and just, to be paid by the party or parties giving such notice, such costs to be recoverable in the manner last aforesaid. 7. — If upon the trial of any appeal to any Court of Quarter Sessions against an order or judgment made or given by any justice or justices of the peace, or if upon the return to any writ of certiorari any objection shall be made on account of any omission or mistake in the drawing up of such order or judgment, and it shall be shown to the satis- faction or the Court that sufficient grounds were in proof before the justice or justices making such order or giving such judg- ment to have authorized the drawing up thereof free from the said omission or mistake, it shall be lawful for the Court, upon such terms as to payment of costs as it shall think fit, to amend such order or judgment and to adjudicate thereupon as if no such omission or mistake had existed : Provided always, that no objection on account of any omission or mistake in any such order or judgment brought up upon a return to a writ of certiorari shall be allowed, unless such omission or mistake shall have been specified in the rule for issuing such certiorari. The recital of this section was repealed by the Statute Law Revision Act, 1891. 8. — Where any recognizance or recognizances which shall have been entered into within the time by law required before (») Reg. v. Pratt, L.R. 5 Q.B. 176; 39 L.J.M.C. 73; 21 L.T. 750; 18 W.R. 626. An Act to Amend Procedure in Quarter Sessions. 347 any justice or justices for the purpose of complying with any 12 & 13 Vict, such condition of appeal shall appear to the Court before which c * such appeal is brought to have been insufficiently entered into, or to be otherwise defective or invalid, it shall be lawful for such Court, if it shall so think fit, to permit the substitution of a new and sufficient recognizance or new and sufficient recog- nizances to be entered into before such Court in the place of such insufficient, defective, or invalid recognizance or recog- nizances, and for that purpose to allow such time, and make such examination, and impose such terms as to payment of costs to the respondent or respondents, as to such Court shall appear just and reasonable ; and such substituted recognizance or recognizances shall be as valid and effectual to all intents and purposes as if the same had been duly entered into at any earlier time or times as required by any statute or statutes for that purpose. The recital of this section was repealed by the Statute Law Revision Act, 1891. 9. — The decisions of the Court of Quarter Sessions upon Decisions of Sessions as to the hearing of any appeal, as to the sufficiency of the state- statement of ment of any ground or grounds of appeal, and as to the "™"^izances r amending or refusing to amend any order or judgment of a t0 be finaU justice or justices appealed against, or the statement of any ground or grounds of appeal, and as to the substitution of any new recognizance or recognizances as aforesaid, shall be final; and shall not be liable to be reviewed in any Court, by means of a writ of certiorari or mandamus, or otherwise. 10.— Every Court of Quarter Sessions on the trial of any ^ctmmu ° f offence within its jurisdiction, whenever any variance or sessions^ variances shall appear between any matter in writing or in print produced in evidence and the recital or setting forth thereof in the indictment, shall have the same power in all respects to cause the indictment to be amended which is given to Courts of oyer and terminer and general gaol delivery with regard to offences tried before such last-mentioned Courts by virtue of an Act of the twelfth year of her Majesty's c .4 6 . reign, intituled " An Act for the removal of defects in the ;J48 An Act to Amend Procedure in Quarter Sessions. 12&13 Vict, administration of criminal justice ; " and after such amendment c ' the trial shall proceed in the same manner in all respects, both with regard to the liability of witnesses to be indicted for perjury and otherwise, as if no such variance or variances had appeared. special case 11. — At any time after notice given of appeal to any Court given of appeal of Quarter Sessions against any judgment, order, rate, or other to Quarter sessions. matter (except an order in bastardy, or a proceeding under or by virtue of any of the statutes relating to her Majesty's Revenue of Excise or Customs, Stamps, Taxes, or Post Office), for which the remedy is by such appeal, it shall be lawful for the parties, by consent, and by order of any judge of one of the superior Courts of Common Law at Westminster, to state the facts of the case in the form of a special case for the opinion of such superior Court, and to agree that a judgment in conformity with the decision of such Court, and for such costs as such Court shall adjudge, may be entered on motion by either party at the Sessions next or next but one after such decision shall have been given ; and such judgment shall and may be entered accordingly, and shall be of the same effect in all respects as if the same had been given by the Court of Quarter Sessions upon an appeal duly entered and continued. It was decided in Ren. v. Marton-cum -Grafton (t) that the Court of Question '' « ■ • reserved for Queen's Bench will only entertain cases from the Sessions which raise a finally dispose question, the decision of which will decide the appeal. The Court will not of appeal. act Qn a t i u . ec tj 0n by the Sessions that in a particular event the case is to be sent back to them to be re-heard. This case was followed in Reg. v. Sutton Coldfield. (u) In that case on an appeal against a poor-rate the Sessions granted an application to enter and respite the appeal, subject to a case for the opinion of the Court of Queen's Bench, the reservation at the end of the case being, " if the Court should be of opinion that the Quarter Sessions ought not to have granted the application, the entry of the appeal is to be struck out." [t was held that the point being raised on an order which did not finally dispose of the appeal, the Court would not entertain the case. Blackburn, J., referring to the decision in Reg. v. Marton-cum-Grafton(x), said: "This is a strong (/) 10 Q.B. 971 ; 16 L.J.M.C. 159. Vide also Reg. v. Kesteven, 3 Q.B. 810 ; 13 L.J.M.C. 78; 1 New Sess. Cases 151. (w) L.R. 9 Q.B. 183 ; 43 L.J.M.C. 57 ; 29 L.T. 840 ; 22 W.R. 324. (x) Suprd. An Act to Amend Procedure in Quarter Sessions. 349 authority for saying that a point, not finally disposing of the appeal, ought 12 &13 Vict. not, in any form, to be brought before the Court on a case." _^_Z__ With respect to cases stated by Quarter Sessions otherwise than under Effiect of this Act or under 11 & 12 Vict., c. 78, the law has been altered by the ^^JT' Judicature Act, 1894 (57 & 58 Vict., c. 16, s. 2). (y) * ecisi ' ns - If upon appeal to the Quarter Sessions a case is stated for the opinion of gostaas ^^ the superior Court under this section, the practice is to give costs as between and party, party and party, (s) In Walsall v. London and North- Western Railway Co. (a) it was decided f.^XisioTof by the House of Lords that an appeal lies to Court of Appeal, and thence to Queen's Bench. the House of Lords, on a case stated by Quarter Sessions, the jurisdiction of the Queen's Bench being judicial, and not merely consultative. And it is not necessary that the appellant should have leave to appeal, (b) Since the Judicature Act, 1894 (57 & 58 Vict., c. 16), ss. 1 and 2, there is Effect^ Act> no appeal, except by leave, from the decision of the Divisional Court upon 1894. cases stated by Quarter Sessions otherwise than under 11 & 12 Vict., c. 78, and under this Act. 12. — At any time after notice given of appeal to an}' Court at - t er nou ? c° of of Quarter Sessions against any order, rate, or other matter to Quarter •ii Sessions. (except a summary conviction, or an order in bastardy, or any proceeding under or by virtue of any of the statutes relating to her Majesty's Revenue of Excise or Customs, Stamps, Taxes, or Post Office), for which the remedy is by such appeal, it shall be lawful for the parties, by themselves or their attornies, and by order of a judge of her Majesty's Court of Queen's Bench to submit the matter or matters of such appeal to the award or umpirage of any person or persons .... and every award or umpirage duly made under this Act shall be as binding and effectual to all intents as if the same had been a regular judgment of the said Court of Quarter Sessions, and shall and may, on the application of either party, be enrolled among the records of the said Court of Sessions. A portion of this section was repealed by the Statute Law Revision Act, 1891. 13.— It shall be lawful for any Court of Quarter Sessions ^tratonby before which any appeal (except against a summary conviction, jjjjgg?' (y) Ante p. 278. (2) Clarendon v. St. James's, Westminster, 10 C.B. 806 ; 20 L.J.M.C. 213 ; 15 Jur. 492. {a) 4 App. Cases 30 ; 48 L.J.M.C. 65 ; 39 L.T. 453 ; 43 J.P. 108. (b) Reg v. Sworn, 6 Q.B.D. 309 ; 29 W.R. 638 ; Peterborough v. Wilsthorpe, 12 Q.B.D. 1; 53 L.J.M.C. 33; 50 L.T. 189; 32 W.R. 548. Holborn Union v. Chert sey Union, 15 Q.B.D. 76 ; 54 L.J.M.C. 137 ; 53 L.T. 656 ; 33 W.R. 698 ; 50 J.P. 36. 350 An Act to Amend Procedure in Quarter Sessions. 12&13Vict or an or( i er i n bastardy, or any proceeding under or by virtue c. 45. of an y f the statutes relating to her Majesty's Revenue of Excise or Customs, Stamps, Taxes, or Post Office) shall be brought, to order, with consent of the parties or their attornies, that the matter or matters of such appeal be referred to arbitra- tion, to such person or persons and in such manner and on such terms as the said Court shall think reasonable and proper . . and the award of the arbitrator or arbitrators or umpirage of the umpire, may, on motion by either party at the Sessions next or next but one after such award or umpirage shall have been finally made and published, or after the decision of the Court of Queen's Bench on any motion for setting aside the same, be entered as the judgment of the Court of Quarter Sessions in the appeal, and shall be as binding and effectual to all intents as if given by the said Court. A portion of this section was repealed by the Statute Law Kevision Act, 1891. Arbitrator may An arbitrator appointed under this or the preceding section may, pursuant state a case. tQ the power con f er red upon any arbitrator by s. 19 of the Arbitration Act, 1889 (52 & 53 Vict., c. 49), state in the form of a special case for the opinion of the Court any question of law arising in the course of the reference. Arbitrator In North and South- Western Junction Railway Co. v. Brentford (c) a must find facts S p ec ia.l case stated by an arbitrator upon an appeal against an assessment to poor-rates set out two alternative modes, neither contrary to law, for ascertaining the value of the tenements assessed. The House of Lords held that the arbitrator must find the facts affirmatively and not in the alternative. Order of If the order of reference is silent as to costs the Sessions by whom the a e s f to e c n osts S . ilent award is entered have no jurisdiction to award costs either of the appeal or of the reference and award. Nor has the arbitrator any power to award them. (fZ) • In Reg. v. Yorkshire (West Riding) JJ.(e), on an appeal at Quarter Sessions against a poor-rate, an order under this section was made by con- sent respiting the appeal, in order that the opinion of the Court of Queen's Bench might be taken to ascertain the principle on which the property should be rated ; and when that was ascertained, the matter should be referred to an arbitrator to certify whether the appellants had been rated properly. The order was silent as to costs, and the appeal was respited from Sessions to Sessions. The Court having laid down the principle upon (c) 13 A.C. 592 ; 58 L.J.M.C. 95 ; 60 L.T. 274. (d) TT^est London Extension Railway Co. v. Fulham, L.R. 6 Q.B. 220 ; 40 L.J.M.C. 109; 24 L.T. 131; 19 W.R. 744; 34 J.P. 423. Vide also Bell v. Post let hivaite, 5 E. & B. 695 ; 25 L.J. Q.B. 63. (e) 6 B. & S. 531 ; 34 L.J.M.C. 142 ; 12 L.T. 380 ; 12 Jur. N.S. 162 ; 29 J.P. 324. An Act to Amend Procedure in Quarter Sessions. 351 which the property should be rated, the arbitrator found that the appellant 12&13Vict. had been rated too higldy. * It was held that a subsequent Court of Quarter c - **■ Sessions had no power to allow the respondents the costs of the reference and award. In Southampton Gas Light and Coke Co. v. Southampton Union (f) an Costs in i - a c i* i • a discretion of appeal to Quarter Sessions was referred by consent under s. Id or this Act. arbitrator— By the order of reference the costs of the appeal and reference were to be outu>f°Ses8ions. in the discretion of the arbitrator. The arbitrator determined the matter of the appeal in favour of the respondents, and awarded them the costs of the appeal and reference. The Court held that it was an implied term of the reference that th.; costs should be taxed out of Sessions. 14. — If upon any reference to arbitration under this Act it where reference shall be made to appear to the Court of Queen's Bench that Queen's Bench may order either from the death of the arbitrator or arbitrators or umpire, sessions to hear L 7 the appeal. or from any other cause, it has become impossible that an award or umpirage can be made, it shall be lawful for the said Court to order the Court of Quarter Sessions to enter con- tinuances and hear the appeal. [Section 15 was repealed by the Statute Law Revision Act, 1891.] 16. — No recognizance entered into pursuant to any statute Recognizances or statutes for the prosecution and trial of any appeal shall be statement of special case. deemed to be forfeited by such agreement as aforesaid for the statement of a special case without previously going to the Court of Quarter Sessions, or by any submission to arbitration under the provisions of this Act. 17. — And whereas by the Levy of Fines Act, 1822, provision Recovery of fines, etc., is made for authorizing the levying and recovery of fines, issues, imposed by amerciaments, and forfeited recognizances, set, imposed, lost or forfeited by or before any justice or justices of the peace in England : And whereas it is expedient that the subsequent proceedings in such cases should be uniform : Be it enacted, that the proceedings subsequent to such authority given for so levying and recovering as aforesaid shall and may be the same in all respects, in the case of such fines, issues, and amercia- ments, as are by the said Act provided, permitted, and required in the case of such forfeited recognizances. (/) 2 Q.B.D. 371 ; 46 L.J.M.C. 238 ; 36 L.T. 548 ; 25 W.R. 671 ; 41 J.P. 645. 352 An Act to Amend Procedure in Quarter Sessions. 12&13Vict. c.45. Enforcing orders of Sessions. Setting aside proceedings. Certiorari not necessary. Costs ordered to be paid under s. 5 may be enforced under this section. Order enforced against succeed- ing overseers. 18. — In all cases where any order shall be made by any Court of Quarter Sessions it shall be lawful for the Court of Queen's Bench, or for any judge of that Court at chambers, either in term or vacation, upon the application of any person entitled to enforce such order, and upon the production of a copy of such order under the hand of the clerk of the peace or his deputy, and upon proof of refusal or neglect to obey such order, to order and direct such order of the Court of Quarter Sessions to be removed into the said Court of Queen's Bench, and thereupon such order shall be of the same force and effect, and may be enforced in the same manner, as a rule made by the said Court of Queen's Bench ; and all the reasonable costs and charges attendant upon such application and removal shall be recoverable in like manner as if the same were part of such order. It was held in Reg. v. Hellier(g) that where proceedings are taken under this section objections may be taken to such proceedings ; and that though the party affected by the order cannot remove it by certiorari, that remedy being taken away, yet if it has been brought up by the party who seeks to enforce it, it is open to the party affected to object to it as a bad order, and to apply to have the proceedings taken to enforce it set aside. It was held in Haieker v. Field (h) that when a judge's order or rule is made under this section for the removal of an order of Quarter Sessions into the Queen's Bench, it is not necessary that any certiorari should issue to remove the order of Sessions. In Reg. v. Huntley (/) it was decided that an order of Sessions dismissing an appeal against a poor-rate and ordering costs to be paid by the appellant to the respondent under 17 Geo. II., c. 38, s. 4, was a good order, and could be enforced under tbis section. In Ex parte Fiction (/<•) it was held that where overseers go out of ofriee after an order for the payment of costs lias been made against them, an order may be made under this section against the succeeding overseers, although they were not respondents to the appeal. 19, — Nothing in this Act contained shall extend to Scotland or Ireland. [Sections 20 and 21 were repealed by the Statute Law Eevi- sion Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict,, c. 66).] (g) 21 L.J.M.C. 3. Vide also Reg. v. Hyde, 21 L.J.M.C. 94. (h) 20 L.J.M.C. 41 ; 1 L.M. & P. 606. (i) 3 E. & B. 172 ; 23 L.J.M.C. 106 ; 18 Jur. 745. (k) 2 E. & E. 712 ; 29 L.J.M.C. 205 ; 8 W.Ii. 432 ; 6 Jur. N.S. 822. 353 An Act for the more Economical Recovery of Poor Rates and other Local Rates and Taxes. (25 & 26 Vict., c. 82.) WHEREAS it is expedient to provide for the more economical recovery of poor rates and other local rates and taxes : Be it therefore enacted — 1. — Where any number of local rates and taxes, whether of consolidation the same or of different kinds, are due from the same person, for P the recovery the rates and taxes so due may be included in the same infor- mation, complaint, summons, order, warrant or other document required by law to be laid before justices or to be issued by justices ; and every such document as aforesaid shall, as respects each rate or tax comprised in it, be construed as a separate document ; and its invalidity as respects any one rate or tax shall not affect its validity as respects any other rate or tax comprised in it : No costs shall be allowed in respect of several informations, complaints, summonses, orders, warrants, or other such docu- ments as aforesaid, in cases where, in the opinion of the justices or court having jurisdiction over the said costs, one information, complaint, summons, order, warrant, or other document as aforesaid might have sufficed, regard being had to the provisions of this Act. 23 354 An Act to Amend the Law relating to Parochial Assessments in England. (25 & 26 Vict., c. 103.) WHEREAS it is expedient that more effectual (provision should be made for securing uniform and correct valuations of parishes in the unions of England : Be it enacted as follows : interpretation. 1, — The words used in this Act shall be construed in like manner as the words contained in the Act fourth and fifth of King William the Fourth, chapter seventy-six, and the word " Committee " shall signify the Assessment Committee provided for by this Act ; and this Act shall be termed " The Union Assessment Committee Act, 1862." Appointment 2. — The Board of Guardians of every Union, formed under of the Assess- ment com- the Act f ourth and fifth years of King William the Fourth, mittee by Board J ° of Guardians. cna pter seventy-six, shall, as soon as convenient after the passing of this Act, and in every subsequent year, at their first meeting after the annual election of guardians, appoint from among themselves any number not less than six nor more than twelve to be a committee, [consisting partly of ex-officio and partly of elected guardians^ to be called the Assessment Committee of the Union, for the investigation and supervision of the valuations to be made as hereinafter mentioned within such Union, and for the performance of such said acts and duties as hereinafter mentioned : [Provided always, that one-third at least of such committee shall consist of ex-officio guardians, in case there shall be an adequate number of such ex-officio guardians ; but in case an adequate number of such ex-officio guardians shall not exist, then the number so deficient shall be made up of elected guardians.^ Union Assessment Committee Act, 1862. 355 The words in brackets are repealed by the Local Government Act, 1894 25&26 Vict. (56 & 57 Vict., c. 73, s. 89). c - l03 - By 43 & 44 Vict., c. 7 (a), this Act applies to single parishes under separate boards of guardians. 3. — Where any Union shall have the same bounds as a where union J has the same municipal borough, the clerk to the Guardians of such Union ^™ d g 8 h M Mme8 shall, upon the appointment of the Assessment Committee, c f j^XTt^ if directed by the said Gruardians to do so, transmit in writing council. wC jim r\ "\ mav appoint the names of the persons so appointed to the lown Council additional x * A . i . members. of such borough, and such council may thereupon, if they think fit, appoint from themselves a certain number, not exceeding the number appointed by the Board of Guardians, who shall, until they respectively cease to be members of the Town Council, or decline to act, forthwith form part of the Assess- ment Committee for such Union ; and the said Council may from time to time supply any vacancies in the number of persons appointed by them. This section is repealed so far as relates to the Metropolis by 32 & 33 Vict, c. 67, s. 77. 4. — If the Guardians shall neglect or be prevented from Provision for ° t neglect to making such appointment at the meeting above specified, the appoint. Poor Law Board shall, by their order, appoint some other day on which the Guardians shall make such appointment. i The Local Government Board now exercise the powers of the Poor Law Board. vacancies. 5. — If any [ex-officio or elected] guardian, being a member provision for of the Committee, cease to be guardian, or resign his seat at such committee, or die, or become incapable of acting as such member, the Board of Guardians shall, with all convenient speed, appoint an [ex-officio or elected'] guardian [as the case may be], to supply the vacancy. The words in italics are repealed by the Local Government Act, 1894 (56 & 57 Vict., c. 73, s. 89). (a) Post p. 382. 23 a 356 Union Assessment Committee Aet, 1862. 25&26Vict. c. 103. As to con- tinuing members. 6. — During any vacancy in any Assessment Committee the other or continuing members of such committee may act, and shall have the same powers and jurisdiction as if no such vacancy had happened. Extent of Committee's authority. 7. — The authority of the Committee appointed for any union under this Act shall extend over every parish comprised in such union. First meeting, when to be held. 8. — The Committee shall hold their first meeting at the hoard room of the Union on a day to be fixed by the Board of Guardians, and the subsequent meetings of the Committee shall be holden at such times, and at such place, and upon such notice and requisition, as they shall from time to time appoint ; and any guardian of the Union may be present at any meeting of the Committee, but shall not be entitled to take part in the proceedings thereof. Quorum of meetings. 9. — All acts, orders, matters, and things by this Act authorised or directed to be made or done by the Committee, may be made or done by the major part of the members of such committee who shall be present at a meeting, the whole number present together at such meeting not being less than three, and not less in any case than one-third of the whole number of which such committee consists ; and when upon any question there shall be an equality of votes, the presiding chairman shall have a second or casting vote. Committee may employ clerk. 10. — The Committee shall employ the clerk or assistant clerk of the Board of Guardians as their clerk with such remunera- tion for his services as the Poor Law Board shall sanction. Proceedings to be entered in books and signed. Such entries evidence. 11. — The Committee shall cause a minute of their pro- ceedings, and of the names of the members who attend each meeting, to be duly made from time to time in books to be provided for that purpose, which shall be kept by their clerk under their superintendence, and every such entry shall be signed by the presiding chairman of the Assessment Committee Union Assessment Committee Act, 1862. 357 present at the meeting at which the proceeding took place ; 25&26Vict. and such entry, purporting to be so signed, shall be received Cj 10 as evidence in all courts, and before all judges, justices, and others, without proof of such meeting having been duly convened or held, or of the persons attending such meeting having been or being members of the Committee, or of the signatures of the members, all of which facts shall be presumed until the contrary be proved : and all such books shall, at all open to* be seasonable times be open to the inspection of every person mspec rated to the relief of the poor in any parish or place in the Union, without any fee being demanded for such inspection ; and all such persons shall be entitled at all seasonable times to take copies or extracts from the said books, without paying any fee for the same ; and if, on request made for that purpose, the clerk of the Committee refuse to permit any such person to inspect any such books, or to take copies or extracts therefrom, as aforesaid, such clerk shall for every such offence be liable to a penalty not exceeding five pounds, upon a summary conviction for the same before two justices of the peace. By 27 & 28 Vict., c. 39, s. 4 (6), the valuations are to be open to inspection. 12. — The Board of Guardians shall in the month of April Proceedings to be reported. in every year report the proceedings of their Assessment Committee to the Poor Law Board. The Local Government Board has taken the place of the Poor Law Board. 13. — The Committee by their order may from time to time Committee may ,i . , , .11 require returns require the overseers, assistant-overseers, constables, assessors, f rom overseers, collectors, and any other persons having the custody of any books of assessment of any taxes or rates, parliamentary or parochial, or of the valuations of any parish, or having the collection or management of any such taxes or rates, to make returns in writing to the Committee, at such times and places as they may appoint, of all such particulars as they may direct in relation to such taxes, rates, or valuations, or any property included therein, so far as relates to the Union for which they .(b) Post p. 378. etc; 358 Union Assessment Committee Act, 1862. 25 & 26 Vict. ac ^' anc ^ may require the persons having the custody of any Ci 103- suc } 1 books as aforesaid to make and transmit to the Committee copies of or extracts from such books, or to permit such copies or extracts to be made by such persons as the Committee may in that behalf direct ; and may from time to time require any persons having the custody of any such books, or the collection or management of any such taxes or rates as aforesaid, to attend before them at a time and place to be mentioned in the and may require order in this behalf, and to produce all parochial and public production of books, etc., and books of assessment, rates, rate books, valuations, apportion- examme ■*■ x m^beforethem men ts, tithe and other maps, plans, surveys, and other public documents in their custody or power, and may examine all persons who shall attend before them : Provided always, that nothing herein contained shall authorise the production of valuations or assessments which by any provision of law at present are not suffered to be made public. overseers to 14 — Subject to any order as hereinafter referred to which prepare Valua- •> ^ twn Lists. ma y i^ ma( ^ e by the Committee, the overseers of each parish in the Union shall, within three calendar months after the appointment of such committee, make a list of all the rateable hereditaments in such parish, with the annual value thereof respectively, in so much of the form shown in the schedule annexed to the Act sixth and seventh William the Fourth, chapter ninety-six, as is set out in the schedule to this Act ; and unless such overseers think that the valuation then last acted upon in assessing the rate for the relief of the poor correctly shows the full annual rateable value of all such hereditaments, they shall revise such valuation, and such overseers shall sign every list so made by them as aforesaid, and such list shall be styled " The Valuation List." This section is repealed so far as it relates to the Metropolis by 32 & 33 Vict., c. 67, s. 77. (c) It was decided in Rawlence v. Hursley Union (d) that where several fields formed one farm, they might be valued as a whole, and it was unnecessary to assign a value to each of the fields. (c) Post p. 432. (0) 3 Ex. D. 44; 47 L.J.M.C. 31 ; 37 L.T. 503 ; 26 W.R. 81. Union Assessment Committee Act, 1862. 359 15. — The gross estimated rental for the purpose of the 25& 26 Vict. schedule to this Act shall be the rent at which the hereditament might reasonably be expected to let from year to year, free of all usual tenants rates and taxes, and tithe commutation rent-charge, if any : Provided that nothing herein contained shall repeal or interfere with the provisions contained in the first section of the said Act (six and seven "William the Fourth, chapter ninety-six), defining the net annual value of the Definition of gross estimated hereditaments to be rated. rental. This section is repealed so far as it relates to the Metropolis by 32 & 33 Vict., c. 67, s. 77. For definition of net annual value the reader is referred to Title I., Article 2. 16. — The Committee by their order may from time to time Committee may enlarge time for enlarge the time within which the first Valuation Lists under making vaiua- tion Lists, and this Act shall be made by the overseers of all or any of the mfl y ? ive J J directions as to parishes in the Union, and for ensuring a uniform and correct an^may 18 ' et °" i , • o • i • j i xt • t l 1 1 i appoint persons valuation ot every parish m the U nion may direct that any to make same. existing valuation of the rateable hereditaments in any parish be revised, in whole or in part, or a new valuation of such hereditaments be made by the overseers ; or the Committee may, with the consent of the Board of Gruardians of the Union, after notice shall have been sent to every guardian thereof, in any case appoint some person for either of the purposes aforesaid, and may direct such person to make and sign the valuation list instead of the overseers ; and every Valuation List so made and signed shall be delivered by such person to the overseers of the parish to which the same relates. 17. — The Valuation List for each parish, made and signed Valuation Lists . to be deposited by the overseers, or delivered to them as hereinbefore provided, for inspection, L and afterwards shall be deposited by the overseers in the place in such parish ^committee in which rate books are deposited or kept, [and a copy of such valuation list shall be forthwith delivered to the Board of Gruardians], and the overseers shall give public notice of the deposit of such list on the Sunday next following the deposit of such list ; and such notice shall be given in the same manner, and all persons assessed or liable to be assessed 360 Union Assessment Committee Act, 1862. 25 & 26 Vict. to the relief of the P oor of such rarish sha11 have the Hke c. 103. ' r ight of inspecting, and of demanding, and taking copies of, ~ and extracts from such list, as in the case of a poor rate allowed by the justices ; and the overseers shall, at the expiration of fourteen days from the time of the notice given of the deposit of such list transmit the same to the Com- mittee ; and any overseer, or other ratepayer within the Union shall have the right of inspecting and taking copies of and extracts from any of the lists so transmitted. The 17 Geo. II., c. 3, s. 2 (e), provides for the inspection of the poor- rate by any inhabitant of the parish. The words of this section in brackets are repealed so far as relates to the Metropolis by 32 & 33 Vict., c. 67, s. 77. vaiuatk>n S List 18. Any overseer or overseers of any parish in any Union who shall have reason to think that such parish is aggrieved by the Valuation List of any parish within such Union, or any person who may feel himself aggrieved by any valuation list on the ground of unfairness or incorrectness in the valuation of any hereditaments included therein, or on the ground of the omission of any rateable hereditament from such list, may at any time after the deposit as aforesaid of such list, and before the expiration of twenty-eight days after the notice of the deposit as aforesaid, give to the Committee and to the overseers a notice in writing of his objection, specifying the grounds thereof, and, where the ground of any objection shall be unfairness or incorrectness in the valuation of any hereditament in respect of which any person, other than the person objecting, is liable to be rated, or the omission of such hereditament, also give notice in writing of such objection, and of the ground thereof to such other person. The effect of this section is to render void any valuation list which has been approved by the Assessment Committee before the expiration of twenty-eight days after public notice of the deposit of such list by the overseers, and also any rate made in conformity with such list. (/) Notice to one overseer is probably sufficient, (g) (e) Ante p. 293. ( f) Reigate Union v. South-Eastern Railway Co. (1894), 1 Q.B. 411 ; 63 L.J.M.C. 65 ; 70 L.T. 353 ; 42 W.E. 585 ; 58 J.P. 264. (g) Rex v. Warwickshire J J., 6 L.J.M.C. 113; Reg. v. Devon, 3 New S. Cases 96. Union Assessment Committee Act, 1802. -561 By the Poor Rate Assessment and Collection Act, 18(W (32 & 33 Vict., 25 & 26 Vict, c. 41, s. 13) (/;), " Every owner of any hereditament for the rates of which c. 103. he has become liable shall have the same right of appeal (subject to the ~ same conditions and consequences) against the valuation lists and the poor rates as if he were the occupier thereof." 19. — The Committee shall hold such meetings as thej' may committee to ° ./ ■/ hold meetings think necessary for hearing objections to the Valuation Lists, *° ^| ar ob ^ ec ' and shall, twenty-eight days at least before holding every meeting for hearing objections to Valuation Lists, other than meetings by adjournment, cause notice of such meeting to be given to the overseers of the several parishes to which such lists relate, and such overseers shall, on the Sunday next following the receipt of such notice publish the same in the manner in which notice of a rate allowed by justices is by law required to be given, and the Committee may at any such meeting hear and determine such objections or may from time to time adjourn any such meeting, and adjourn or postpone the hearing or further hearing and determination of any such objections, and may, where they think fit, direct notice of any such objections to be given by the overseers or by the persons objecting to third parties before the further hearing thereof : but the Committee shall not be required to hold a meeting for hearing objections to the Valuation List of any parish, unless such notice in writing as hereinbefore mentioned of some objection or objections thereto have been given to the Com- mittee ; and where a meeting is holden for hearing objections to the Valuation List of any parish the Committee shall not hear any objection to such Valuation List unless such notice as aforesaid of such objection have been given to the Com- mittee and to the overseers ; and, where the ground of such objection is unfairness or incorrectness in the valuation of any hereditament of any other person than the person objecting or the omission of such hereditament, also to such other person by the person objecting ; except where the overseers by them- selves or any other person on their behalf, and in the case aforesaid such other person as aforesaid, by himself or any (A) Post p. 391. 362 Union Assessment Committee Aet, 1862. 25 & 26 Vict. other person on his behalf, consent to the hearing of such c> 103- objection; and in such case the Committee may, if they see fit, hear the same ; and where the Committee see fit to hear the same they shall act in relation thereto in like manner as if notice of such objection had been duly given. Section 1 of 27 & 28 Vict., c. 39 (i), deals with the notice of objection that an appellant must give. The notes and decisions under that section must be read in conjunction with this section. In Reg. v. St. Mary Abbotts, Kensington (k), it was decided that an objector may appear by his agent, and that the Committee are bound to hear the agent, on the ground that the statute contains no provision prohibiting him from appearing by an agent. Committee may 20. — The Committee may, whether any objection be or be direct further valuation and no t maG L e to any such Valuation List, and either before or after correct Valua- J whe^corrected an y meeting for hearing objections, make such alterations in 8ame° ve e the valuation of any hereditaments included in any Valuation List, and insert therein any rateable hereditament omitted therefrom, and make such corrections in names, descriptions, and particulars in any Valuation List, and upon such infor- mation as to them may seem sufficient, and may with the consent of the Guardians as aforesaid, appoint or employ a person to survey and value the rateable hereditaments com- prised in any such Valuation List or any of them, or omitted therefrom, or may take such other means as they may think necessary for ascertaining the correctness thereof ; and when the Committee have heard and determined all such objections as aforesaid and have made such alterations, insertions, and corrections in any Valuation List as to them may seem proper, they shall approve the same under the hands of three members of the Committee present at the meeting at which the same is approved, with the date of such approval. valuation List 21. — Where the Committee make any alteration in the when altered to etc deposited ' valuation of any hereditaments included in, or insert therein any rateable hereditament omitted from, any such Valuation (?) Post p. 375. (k) (1891) 1 Q.B. 378; 60 L.J.M.C. 52 ; 64 L.T. 240; 39 W.R. 278 ; 55 J.P. 502. Union Assessment Committee Aet, 1862. 363 List, they shall cause such Valuation List, with such 25 & 26 Vict alteration or insertion, to he deposited for inspection in c - 103. manner hereinbefore provided concerning 1 the Valuation List made by or delivered to the overseers and shall cause the like notice to be given of such deposit as is required in the case of a Valuation List so made or delivered as aforesaid, and shall appoint a day, not less than seven days nor more than fourteen days from the re-deposit of such Valuation List, for the hearing of any objections to the Valuation List as so altered ; and when the Committee have heard and determined any such objections, or have made such further alterations, insertions, and corrections in such Valuation List, they shall approve the same in manner hereinbefore provided. In Reg. v. Chorlton Union (Z) it was decided that it is a condition precedent to the validity of a valuation list which has been altered by the Assessment Committee that it should have been deposited for inspection after the alterations, in accordance with the above section. In Reg. v. Edmonds (m) the Court held that the list need not be re- deposited under the above section where the alterations are made upon appeal. 22. — In case any ratepayer shall under the existing law if rate amended i n a • i a • /~\ ci • on appeal, list appeal to the special Sessions or Quarter Sessions against to be altered. any rate made for the relief of the poor in any parish, and the result of such appeal shall be to amend the rate appealed against, the Assessment Committee shall alter the Valuation List of the said parish in conformity with the decision so made. This section is repealed so far as it relates to the Metropolis by 32 & 33 Vict., c. 67, s. 77. 23. — Every Valuation List, when approved by the Committee, custody, etc., shall be delivered to the overseers of the parish to which the List after approval. same relates, and shall be preserved at the like place and in the like custody, and be subject to the like resort thereto, and be delivered over from time to time in like manner as the books are wherein rates and assessments for the relief of the poor for the same parish are entered, and shall be produced by the overseers before the justices, upon application, for the (/) L.R. 8 Q.B. 5 ; 42 L.J.M.C. 34. (w) L.R. 9 Q.B. 598; 43 L.J.M.C. 156 ; 31 L.T. 237 ; 22 W.R. 924; 38 J.P. 727. 364 Union Assessment Committee Act, 1862. 25&26Vict. allowance of rates, and at the Special or General or Quarter c. 103. Sessions when any appeal is to be heard, and also at such times and places as the Committee may from time to time direct. This section is repealed so far as it relates to the Metropolis by 32 & 33 Vict, c. 67, s. 77. what shall be 04 — Everv Valuation List approved by the Committee, and deemed Valua- " J . . tion Lists in delivered to the overseers of the parish to which the same force. ± relates, shall, with, and subject to the alterations and additions for the time being made therein or thereto by any supplemental Valuation Lists so approved and delivered, be the Valuation List in force in such parish, except in the case of any parish as is hereinafter referred to, in which the poor-rate, or assessment for the poor-rate, is made under the authority of a local Act, until a new Valuation List in substitution for the same be approved and delivered in like manner. This section is repealed so far as it relates to the Metropolis by 32 & 33 Vict., c. 67, s. 77. overseers to 05. — When and so often as any property not included in prepare Supple- «»«*• j i ± j valuation Lists the Valuation List in force in any parish becomes rateable, addftionttoor or where, by reason of any alteration in the occupation of alterations in . -. n , -, . , ■. -1 the rateable any property included in such list, such property becomes property of the , , . parish." liable to be rated in parts not mentioned m such list as rateable hereditaments, and separately valued therein, and when and so often as it shall appear to the overseers that any rateable property included in such list has been increased or reduced in value since the valuation thereof, whether by building, destruction of building, or other alteration in the condition thereof or otherwise, the overseers of the parish in each of the cases aforesaid shall, as soon as conveniently may be, make a Supplemental Valuation List showing the annual rateable value according to the judgment of the overseers of the property so become rateable, or of the parts so become liable to be rated separately, or of the property so increased or reduced in value, as the case may be. This section is repealed so far as it relates to the Metropolis by 32 & 33 Vict., c. 67, s. 77. Union Assessment Committee Act, 1862. 365 It was decided in Beg. v. Maiden (») that new houses completely finished 25&26Viot and ready for occupation, but not let or occupied at the time of returning c. 103. the valuation list of a parish, are rateable hereditaments and ought to be inserted in the list. 26. — The Committee by their order may from time to time £°™^| e t ™ ay where they see fit, upon the application of any person aggrieved ™iuadon?and W by the Valuation List in force in any parish, or where they supplemental themselves think the same expedient, direct a new valuation of all or any of the rateable hereditaments in such parish, and a new Valuation List in substitution for such Valuation List as aforesaid, or a Supplemental List in substitution for any part thereof or in addition thereto, to be made by the overseers ; or the Committee may, with such consent as aforesaid, appoint a person for such purposes ; and the Committee may, in directing such new valuation and the making of such new or Supplemental Valuation List, give and make all such or the like directions and provisions in relation thereto as they are authorised under this Act to give and make in relation to the valuations and Valuation Lists first directed and authorised to be made under the Act. This section is repealed so far as it relates to the Metropolis by 32 & 33 Vict., c. 67, s. 77. 27. — All the provisions of this Act in relation to signature, Act to apply to . -, . new and deposit, omections, approval and otherwise concerning the supplemental ' . . Valuation Lists. Valuation List first directed and authorised to be made under this Act of the rateable hereditaments in any parish shall be applicable to every new or Supplemental Valuation List to be made under this Act. This section is repealed so far as it relates to the Metropolis by 32 & 33 Vict., c. 67, s. 77. 28. — In every parish where a Valuation List under this Act J r After a v alua- has been approved and delivered to the overseers, no rate *pp r ^eVno for the relief of the poor, or other rate which by law is auoweduniess required to be based upon the poor-rate, shall be of any to such list. (w) L.R. 4 Q.B. 326; 10 B. & S. 323 ; 38 L.J.M.C. 125; 33 J.P. 645. 366 Union Assessment Committee Act, 1862. 25 & 26 Vict, force, unless the hereditaments included in such rate, except ! ' as hereinafter provided, be rated according to the annual rateable value thereof appearing in the Valuation List in force in such parish ; and instead of the declaration required by the second section of the said statute of the sixth and seventh years of William the Fourth, chapter ninety-six, the overseers shall, before the rate shall be allowed by the justices, sign a declaration according to the form set forth in the schedule hereunto annexed : Provided always that where by reason of any alteration in the occupation of any property included in such list such property has become liable to be rated in parts not mentioned in such list as rateable hereditaments and separately rated therein, such parts may, where a Supplemental Valuation List showing the annual rateable value of such parts has not been approved and delivered as hereinbefore required, and whether such list has or has not been made, be rated according to such amounts as shall be fair apportioned parts of the annual rateable value appearing in such Valuation List in force as aforesaid of the hereditaments out of which such parts have been constituted. This section, from the commencement of the words " hereunto annexed," is repealed so far as it relates to the Metropolis by 32 & 33 Vict., c. 67, s. 77. . . 29. — The provisions of section twenty-eight shall not apply Focal Acts der t° any poor-rate made by any vestry, trustees, guardians, commissioners, overseers or other persons authorised by any local Act to make the rate for the relief of the poor in any parish or the assessment on which such rate is made. This section is repealed so far as it relates to the Metropolis by 32 & 33 Vict., c. 67, s. 77. in computing 30. — When the Assessment Committee for any Union shall contributions to have approved Valuation Lists for all the parishes comprised common fund . ■. . XT . t n • n tt • the annual within such Union, the Guardians of such Union, m computing rateable value x to be taken ^he amount of contribution to the common fund for the several from approved. valuation Lists, p ar igh eS) g^n thenceforward take the annual rateable value of the property in such parishes respectively from the Valuation Union Assessment Committee Act, 1862. 367 Lists for the time being lastly approved of for such parishes 25 & 26 Vict. respectively, any statute to the contrary notwithstanding 1 : __c-_103. Provided that in case any parish comprised in any Union shall receive any sum of money as a contribution in aid of the poor-rate of such parish, for or in respect of government property within such parish, and used for public purposes the annual value of such property according to the estimate (if any) of such value on which the amount of the sum of money so received is computed, or, if there be no such estimate, then the annual value of such property estimated in the mode provided by the Act sixth and seventh William the Fourth, chapter ninety-six, for making an estimate of the annual rateable value of property liable to be rated to rates for the relief of the poor, shall be included by the overseer or overseers in the Valuation List of such parish, and shall be added to the annual rateable value of the property in such parish in computing the amount of contribution to the common fund for the several parishes in such Union. 31. — The Committee shall cause a copy of the Valuation copy of *■ Valuation Lists List for the time in force for every parish in the Union *° ! 3e deposited J i- in board room. to be made and deposited at the board room or other convenient place to be appointed by the Board of Gruardians in the custody of the clerk, which copy shall be open at seasonable times to the inspection of any of the Guardians of the Union, and of any overseer of any parish within the Union, without charge, and of any ratepayer within the Union on payment of one shilling, such fee to be carried to the account of the common fund. This section is repealed so far as it relates to the Metropolis by 32 & 33 Vict., c. 67, s. 77. 32. — If the overseer or overseers of any parish in any Union yPPj^*: shall have reason to think that such parish is aggrieved by the Valuation List of any parish within such Union, whether it be on the ground that the rateable hereditaments comprised in the Valuation List of such parish are valued at sums beyond the annual rateable value thereof, or on the ground that the gainst aluation List. 368 Union Assessment Committee Act, 1862. 25 & 26 Vict, rateable hereditaments comprised in the Valuation List of some c. 103. ther parish in such Union are valued at sums less than the annual rateable value thereof, it shall be lawful for such overseer or overseers, with the consent of a vestry summoned for the purpose of considering the expediency of giving such consent, to appeal to the Quarter Sessions for the county or borough in which the greatest number of parishes belonging to the Union is situate, or in case the number of parishes in any two or more such jurisdictions is equal, to the Quarter Sessions for the county or borough having jurisdiction over the parish in which the workhouse of the Union is situate, at the Sessions to be holden after the expiration of a month after the allowance of and deposit of such Valuation List as aforesaid, against such Valuation List of the parish which shall appear to be over-valued or under- valued ; and if in any case any such overseer or overseers appeal against the Valuation List of any other parish on the ground that the rateable hereditaments in such list are valued at less than the annual rateable value thereof, such overseer or overseers shall give fourteen clear days' notice in writing previous to the first day of the said Quarter Sessions at which the appeal is to be made of the intention to appeal, and the grounds thereof, to the overseers of the poor of such parish, and to the Gruardians of the Union comprising such parish ; and if any overseer or overseers of any parish appeal against the Valuation List of such parish on the ground that the rateable hereditaments in such list are valued beyond the annual rateable value thereof, such overseer or overseers shall give fourteen days' notice in writing previous to the Quarter Sessions at which the appeal is to be made of the intention to appeal, and the grounds thereof, to the G-uardians of the Union in which such parish is situate : the said Court shall be empowered to hear and determine such appeal, and either confirm such Valuation List or correct such irregularities or inaccuracies as shall be proved to exist therein as to them may appear fair and just ; but no such Valuation List shall upon such appeal be quashed or destroyed in regard to any other parish unless the Court deem it necessary to Union Assessment Committee Act, 1862. 369 proceed to the making of an entire new Valuation List as 25&26Vict. hereinafter provided. This section is repealed so Ear as it relates to the Metropolis by 32 & 33 Vict, c. 67, s. 77. 33.— It shall be lawful for the Court of Quarter Sessions He^and upon any such appeal, instead of hearing the said appeal, a PP eals - to adjourn the same, and to order, upon the application of the appellant or respondent in such appeal, a survey or valuation of any of the parishes in respect of which such appeal shall be made, and to fix the next or some subsequent Sessions for receiving such survey or valuation and for hearing and determining such appeal ; and such Court shall also thereupon appoint a proper person to make such survey or valuation ; and the person so appointed shall have power with or without assistants, to enter upon and survey, measure, and value all the hereditaments liable to be assessed to the rates for the relief of the poor within the parish or parishes mentioned in such order ; and such survey and valuation shall be reported to the Quarter Sessions on adjournment fixed as aforesaid for receiving the same, and the Court then and there assembled shall hear and determine the said appeal in the manner hereinbefore set forth. This section is repealed so far as it relates to the Metropolis by 32 & 33 Vict., c. 67, s. 77. 34.— The charges and expenses of any such survey and costs of new valuation so ordered shall be deemed costs in such appeal, appeal. and abide the event thereof ; and the Court before which any such appeal is heard and determined may order the costs in and about the appeal to be paid by either the appellant or respondent party, as they in their discretion may think fit ; but where any appeal is made on the ground that the rateable hereditaments of any parish comprised in the Yaluation List of such parish are valued beyond the annual rateable value thereof, if the Court on such appeal determine in favour of the appellants, such Court shall ascertain the costs and charges incurred by such appellants in and about such appeal, and 24 370 Union Assessment Committee Act, 1862. 25 & 26 Vict, shall order the Board of Guardians of the Union in which c - 103> such parish is situate to pay the same to the appellants out of the money raised for the common fund for the several parishes in such union. This section is repealed so far as it relates to the Metropolis by 32 & 33 Vict., c. 67, s. 77. Act not to 35. — Nothing herein contained shall be construed to prevent position for the owners of tenements from compounding for the rates to he rates. assessed on the same, in such manner as they were by any statute or statutes enabled to do before the passing of this Act. This section is repealed so far as it relates to the Metropolis by 32 & 33 Vict., c. 67, s. 77. The rating of owners of small tenements is now regulated by the Poor Rate Assessment and Collection Act, 1869 (32 & 33 Vict,, c. 41). (o) Saving of 36. — Nothing herein contained shall extend or be taken to exemptions and ° special rules of ren( j er liable to be rated any property, or any person in respect of any occupation not now by law rateable of any property, or to deprive any property, or the occupier of any property, of the benefit of any exemption, in whole or in part, to which such property or occupier is now by law entitled, from any poor-rate or other rate which by law is required to be based upon the poor-rate, or to render liable to be rated, according to the annual rateable value thereof, any property which under any local Act or otherwise is entitled to be rated upon a fixed amount, or according to any special or exceptional principle of valuation, whether such property shall or shall not be included in any Valuation List in force under this Act, or shall in anywise affect the provisions of " The Cambridge Award Act, 1856," or the Act of the seventeenth and eighteenth Victoria relating to the relief of the poor in the City of Oxford. This section is repealed so far as it relates to the Metropolis by 32 & 33 Vict, c. 67, s. 77. For property exempt from rating and the decisions on the subject the reader is referred to Title I., Art. 28. (p) (o) Vide p. 387. (p) Ante p. 72. Union Assessment Committee Act, 1862. 371 37. — The Committee may allow such compensation for any 25&26Vict. returns, copies, or extracts, or any valuation, or Valuation List, ' ! — or other act, matter, or thing to be made or done in pursuance allow com- p , , - . pensation for oi their order, and such expenses connected therewith, as to the returns, etc. Committee in each case seems just. 38. — The remuneration allowed by the Committee to their Remuneration J to clerk, etc., to clerk, and all expenses incurred by them for the common use com^onTund and benefit of the several parishes within the Union for which they are appointed, shall be paid by the guardians of the said Union, and be charged upon the common fund thereof. 39. — The expenses of making any valuation and Valuation Expenses of x ° " valuation, etc., List of any parish, or any of such expenses whether such ^ e of t p > l or pai(i valuation and Valuation List respectively be made by the ouTof common 11 overseers, or by any person appointed by the Committee, shall be charged upon the poor-rates of such parish if the valuation made by direction of the Committee shall exceed by one-sixth the amount of the valuation delivered to them by the overseers, and upon the common fund of the said union if the valuation so made as last mentioned shall not exceed by one-sixth the valuation so delivered as aforesaid. This section is repealed so far as it relates to the Metropolis by 32 & 33 Vict, c. 67 r s. 77. It was held in Reg. v. Richmond (g), where the overseers had been ordered by the Assessment Committee to send in their valuation list within ten days, but had failed to do so, and the Committee appointed a valuer to make out the valuation, and subsequently rejected a valuation list sent in by the overseers as unsatisfactory, that the cost of the valuation by the person appointed by the Committee could not be charged against the parish under this section. 40. — Every person who wilfully refuses to attend in penalty for . . non-attendance, obedience to any lawful order of any such committee, or to etc. give evidence, or refuses to produce any rate book, assessment, or valuation which may be lawfully required to be produced before such committee shall for every such offence be liable to a penalty not exceeding twenty pounds upon a summary (g) 6 B. & S. 541 • 34 L.J.M.C. 186 ; 29 J.P. 310. 24 a 372 Union Assessment Committee Act, 1862. j^ 25&26 Vict, conviction for the same before two justices of the peace ; and c> ° 3- every person who wilfully injures, defaces, conceals, or destroys injuring, etc., suc h ra te book, or who upon any examination before any such rate books, a misdemeanour. comm ittee wilfully gives false evidence, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanour. Authentication 41. — Every order and notice made or given by the Committee and service of . . orders and under this Act may be in writing or print, or partly in writing, notices of the J ° L x * " committee. an( j p ar Qy j n print, and shall be sufficiently authenticated if signed by their clerk, and may be served by the same or a copy thereof being delivered personally or sent by the post to the party on or to whom such order or notice purports to be made or given, or by being delivered at his usual place of abode. This section is repealed so far as it relates to the Metropolis by 32 & 33 Vict., c. 67, s. 77. service of 42. — Any notice or statement required to be served upon the committee, the Committee may be served by being left at the office of the clerk to the Board of Guardians, or sent through the Post Office addressed to the Committee at such clerk's office, or by being delivered personally to their clerk, or at his usual place of abode. This section is repealed so far as it relates to the Metropolis by 32 & 33 Vict., c. 67, s. 77. Provision as to 43. — In every parish, until a Valuation List has been rate. approved and delivered to the overseers under this Act, every rate made for the relief of the poor in such parish shall be made in the form and contain the particulars required by the said Act of the sixth and seventh years of King "William the Fourth ; and after such Valuation List has been so approved and delivered, every such rate, except in any parish where the poor-rate or the assessment for the same is made under the provisions of a local Act as aforesaid, shall show the annual rateable value of each hereditament comprised therein according to the Valuation List in force in such parish. This section is repealed so far as it relates to the Metropolis by 32 & 33 Vict., c. 67, s. 77. Union Assessment Committee Act, 1862. 373 44. — All the powers, authorities, clauses, and regulations 25 &26 Vict, now in force relating to the assessment, collection, and levying ! ! — „ ,i iiii Provisions as to of poor-rates (save so far as the same are here by repealed or assessments, etc., of poor- altered) shall he good, valid, and effectual for the purposes rates to apply ' ~ ' to rates under of assessing, levying, collecting, and enforcing the payment tllis Act - of such rate and for carrying this Act into execution. 45. — " And whereas there are divers Unions or incorporations Power for ^ Unions under for the relief of the poor formed under local Acts and under gJJJJ^, be the Act of the twenty-second year of King George the Third, ^^ chapter eighty-three, which may desire to adopt the provisions of this Act " : Be it enacted, that any such Union or incorpora- tion, on resolution to that effect of a majority at two successive meetings of the body, having under the constitution of such union or incorporation the management of the relief of the poor within the same, may, by writing under the hand of the presiding chairman of the second of such meetings, apply to the Poor Law Board to be included in this Act ; and such Union or incorporation, upon the consent of the Poor Law Board being given to such application under its seal, shall be so included; and such consents so signified shall be evidence that such application was in all respects duly made according to the provisions above-mentioned ; and such regulations shall thereafter be made from time to time by the said board, with the consent of such body as may be necessary to render the provisions of this Act conformable with the provisions of the Act under which the said Union or incorporation shall have been formed. This section is repealed so far as it relates to the Metropolis by 32 & 33 Vict, c. 67, s. 77. 22 Geo. III., c. 83, known as Gilbert's Act, was repealed by the Statute Law Revision Act, 1871. By the Union Assessment Act, 1880 (43 & 44 Vict., c. 7) (r), this Act applies to parishes not included in unions. The Local Government Board has taken the place of the Poor Law Board. 46.— This Act shall extend only to England. Extent of Act. (?) Post p. 382. 374 25 & 26 Vict, c. 103. Union Assessment Committee Act. 1862. SCHEDULE. vide sect. 14. Valuation List for [the parish or place for which the list is made] in the County of Name of Occupier. Name of Owner. Description of Property. Name of Situation of Property. Estimated Extent. Gross Estimated Rental. Rateable Value. Signed this day of A. B. CD. Overseers of the Poor of the parish aforesaid. DECLARATION TO BE ADDED TO THE RATE. We, the undersigned, do hereby declare that one of us, or some person on our behalf has examined and compared the several particulars in the respective columns of the above rate with the Valuation List made under the authority of the Union Assessment Committee Act, 1862, in force in this parish (or township), and the several hereditaments are, to the best of our belief, rated according to the value appearing in such Valuation List. Churchwardens. Overseers. 375 THE UNION ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE AMENDMENT ACT, 1864. (27 & 28 Vict., c. 39.) An Act to amend the Union Assessment Committee Act 1862. WHEREAS it is expedient to amend the Union Assessment Committee Act, 1862, in regard to appeals against poor rates, and to make further provisions for securing correct and uniform valuations of the property liable to be assessed to the relief of the poor : Be it therefore enacted — 1, — Before any appeal shall be heard by any Special or Notice of Quarter Sessions against a poor-rate made for any parish poor-rate to be given to the contained in anv Union to which the Union Assessment Com- Assessment J Committee of mittee Act, 1862, applies, the appellant shall give twenty-one union, days' notice in writing previous to the Special or Quarter Sessions to which such appeal is to be made of the intention to appeal, and the grounds thereof, to the Assessment Committee of such Union : Provided that after the first day of August next no person shall be empowered to appeal to any Sessions against a poor-rate made in conformity with the Valuation List Notice f approved of by such committee, unless he shall have given to such committee notice of objection against the said list, and shall have failed to obtain such relief in the matter as he deems just ; and which objection, after notice given at any time in the manner prescribed by the said Act with respect to objec- tions, the Committee shall hear, with full power to call for and amend such list, although the same has been approved of, and u s T. enc 376 The Union Assessment Committee Amendment Act, 1864. Failure to obtain relief. 27 & 28 Vict, no subsequent list has been transmitted to them, and if they — amend the same shall give notice of such amendment to the overseers, who shall thereupon alter their then current rate accordingly. This section is repealed so far as it relates to the Metropolis by 32 & 33 Vict., c. 67, s. 77. A ratepayer aggrieved by his assessment to the poor-rate gave notice of objection to the Assessment Committee under the above section. The Committee adjourned their decision, considering that a case pending in a superior Court would govern the case before them. The ratepayer appealed to Quarter Sessions. It was held that the Quarter Sessions had no jurisdiction as the appellant had not failed to obtain relief from the Assessment Committee, (a) The notice required by this section must contain all the grounds of appeal, though on some of those grounds the Assessment Committee may be unable to give relief. (&) A person who has once given to the Assessment Committee notice of objection against a valuation list and failed to obtain such relief as he deems just, may appeal to Quarter Sessions against any subsequent poor- rate made in conformity with the list, and the above section does not make it a condition precedent of such appeal that previously thereto he should again have given notice of objection against the list to the Assessment Committee. This was decided by Lord Coleridge, C.J., and Mathew, J., in Reg. v. Denbighshire Justices, (c) In that case great doubt was thrown upon the decision in Reg. v. Great Western Railway (d), where it was decided that notice of objection must be given to every rate objected to, notwith- standing that a previous appeal by the same appellant against the rate immediately preceding was pending, and the grounds of appeal were the same. It was decided in Reg. v. Langriville (e) that an amendment of the list is valid, although no notice of the meeting of the Committee was given to the overseers of the parish to which the lists relates, as required by 25 & 26 Vict, c. 103, s. 19. Smith, J., said : " In our judgment the words in section 1 of the Act of 1864, ' after notice given,' apply solely to the notice to be given by the objecting party to the Committee. If the con- tention of the overseers is correct, we must read the words thus : ' after notices given,' which we have no warrant for doing, so as to bring in the Grounds of appeal. Appeal against a second rate — ■ notice. Amendment. {a) Reg. v. Bedminster Union, 1 Q.B 13. 503 ; 45 L.J.M.C. 117; 34 L.T. 795 ; 40 J. P. 743. (b) Williams v. Bedminster Union, 30 L.T. 710; 22 W.R. 943. (r) 15 Q.B.D. 451 ; 54 L.J.M.C. 142 ; 53 L.T. 389; 33 W.R. 784. (d) L.R. 4 Q.B. 323 ; 10 B. & S. 318 ; 31 L.J.M.C. 89 ; 20 L.T. 481 ; 33 J. P. 598. Vide also Reg. v. Derbyshire, 25 L.T. 43 : 19 W.R. 934 ; Reg. v. Wiltshire, 4 Q.B.D. 32(5; 48 L.J.M.C. 142 ; 40 L.T. 681. («?) 14 Q.B.D. 83; 54 L.J.Q.B. 124; 52 L.T. 253; 33 W.R. 213; 49 J. P. 54. The Union Assessment Committee Amendment Act, 1864. 877 notice prescribed by s. 19 of the Act of 18G2, as well as the notice 27&28Vict. prescribed by s. 18 of the same Act." c ' ""• An Assessment Committee who have appeared as respondents at Special Appeal to Sessions are entitled to appeal to Quarter Sessions in the name of the Sessions by Guardians against the decision of Justices at such Special Sessions. (/) Q S j^™ t ent With regard to the time for appealing the reader is referred to Reg. v. Time for Biggleswade Union (cf) and Liverpool United Gas Light Co. v. Everten. (h) appeaJinjc. In the latter case the appellant from a poor-rate had failed before the Assessment Committee, and there were six days before the next Borough September Sessions beyond the twenty-one days required by this section. The Recorder considered that such six days were not sufficient to enable the appellant to determine as to appealing, and he was therefore of opinion that the September Sessions were not practicable Sessions, and he allowed the appeal to be entered at the next subsequent Sessions. The Court was of opinion that the six days were enough and that therefore the September Sessions were practicable ; and the Court made a rule for a prohibition against the Recorder trying the appeal. In Beg. v. London and North-Western Railway (i), it was held that Appeal in case where the appeal is on the ground of statutory exemption, the appellants exemption* have a right of appeal without first seeking relief from the Assessment Committee. As it is not an objection to the valuation list the Assessment Committee could give no relief. 2- — The Assessment Committee of such Union may, with committee d may, with the consent of the Guardians of such Union, after notice shall ^^ be have heen sent to every guardian, appear as respondents to c °- res P° ndents - such appeal, but in the name of the Guardians of such Union, in like manner, and with the same incidents, and subject to the same liabilities, and entitled to the same remedies and rights, as in the case of persons other than the overseers to whom notice of appeal may be given. In West Ham v. Essex Justices and the London County Council (Ic) it If no consent, was decided by the House of Lords that where the Assessment Committee of a Union receive notice of a poor-rate appeal under section 1 of this Act they have no authority to appear as respondents to the appeal unless they obtain the consent of the Guardians after sending notice to every guardian as required by the above section. If they do appear without such consent, and the appeal is dismissed " with costs to the respondents," they are not entitled to costs, although throughout the proceedings they receive notices to attend from the appellants and are treated by them as respondents. (/) Reg. y. Montgomeryshire Justices, 50 L. J.M.C. 52 ; 44 L.T. 310 ; 29 W.R. 806 ; 45 J. P. 407. (y) 21 L.T. 494 ; 18 W.R. 293. Ante p. 233. (A) L.R. 6 C.P. 414; 40 L.J.M.C. 104; 23 L.T. 818; 19 W.R. 412. Ante p. 239. («) 46 L.J.M.C. 102. (k) (1896) A.C. 443 ; 65 L.J.M.C. 231 ; 75 L.T. 1 ; 60 J.P. 756. 378 The Union Assessment Committee Amendment Act, 1864. 27&28Vict c. 39. Provision as to costs of Com- mittee on appeals. 3, — The costs which the Committee may incur in consequence of becoming respondents to such appeal, or of having received notice thereof, shall, if not recovered from the appellants, as well as any costs the Committee may be ordered to pay to the appellants, be paid by the Guardians and charged to the common fund of the Union, unless the Court before whom such appeal is heard shall direct that such costs, or any part thereof, shall be charged to the parish the rate of which is appealed against. Valuation to be made in writing, and open to inspection. 4 —Where a valuer is appointed by the Assessment Com- mittee he shall make his valuation in writing, showing the particulars of the several hereditaments comprised therein, and the amounts at which he has valued the same respectively, and shall sign such valuation, which shall be open to inspection in like manner and with the same incidents with respect to the taking of copies or extracts as the minute books of the Com- mittee. In Rawlence v. Hursley Union (I) it was decided that fields constituting a farm need not be valued separately. Notice of assessment to be given to certain companies. Transmission by post. 5. — Within fourteen days after the transmission to the Assessment Committee of any Valuation or Supplemental Yaluation List the Committee shall give notice to every rail- way, telegraph, canal, gas and water company named in such list as the occupier of any property included therein, and not having any office or place of business in the parish to which such list relates, of the sum or sums set down as the rateable value of the property purporting to be occupied by such company or companies, and such notice may be served by being transmitted through the post to the principal office of the company, or one of their principal offices when there shall be more than one. justices in 6. — No justice of the peace shall be disqualified for acting in certain cases . . , , ■ not disqualified the determination of any appeal against a poor-rate at any for hearing appeals. . . (/) 3 Ex. D. 44 ; 47 L.J.M.C. 31 ; 37 L.T. 503 ; 26 W.R. 81 . The Union Assessment Committee Amendment Act, 1864. -579 Quarter or Special Sessions by reason of such justice being 27 & 28 Vict rated, or being liable to be rated, in some other parish in the 1 Union than that for which the rate appealed against is made. This section does not repeal section 1 of 16 Geo. II., c. 18. Justices in Special Sessions can hear appeals against rates made by a parish, though they are themselves ratepayers in the same parish, (m) 7. — When the overseers of any parish incur any expense in Expenses of J L ■/ x overseers making out any Valuation List or Supplemental List, or in consento"' 111 revising or valuing any of the rateable hereditaments of such allowed by parish, under the provisions of the Union Assessment Com- Committee may lie charged on mittee Act, 1862, with the consent of the vestry given by poor-rates. express resolution, after due notice, they may charge such expense so far as the same may be authorised by the vestry, upon the poor-rate ; and if no vestry meeting be held, or no decision arrived at on the subject, then to the extent which the Assessment Committee shall allow : Provided that, as regards the valuation of the property no expense shall be so charged upon the poor-rate unless the consent of such committee to the procuring of such valuation by the overseers shall have been given previously to the same being made. The consent of the vestry is sufficient, though given after the expenses have been incurred. (?i) 8. — If the Assessment Committee order a valuation with the Power t0 consent of the Board of Guardians, to be made of all the theSTofthe rateable hereditaments of any parish, the Guardians of the Board, to tt • -pi • i n -r> borrow money U nion may, it they think fit, apply to the Poor Law Board for for valuation an order to enable them to borrow the requisite amount to pay the cost of such valuation ; and if the said Board shall issue their order, the said Guardians may borrow the same and charge the poor-rates of the several parishes in the Union with the repayment of the same by not more than five equal annual (m) Reg. v. Bolingbroke (1893), 2 Q.B. 347; 62 L.J.M.C. 180; 69 L.T. 717 ; 42 W.E. 128; 5 E. 536 ; 58 J.P. 118. Ex parte Working- ton (1894), 1 Q.B. 416; 70 L.T. 143; 42 W.R. 177 ; 9 [>'. 135 ; 58 J.P. 381. (n) Reg. v. Chorlton-upon-Mcdlock, 1 Q.B.D. 62 ; 45 L.J.M.C. 33 ; 33 L.T. 526 ; 24 W.R. 110. Fide also Reg. v. CumberUge, 2 Q.B.D. 366 ; 46 L.J.M.C. 214 ; 36 L.T. 700. How charge- able. 380 The Union Assessment Committee Amendment Act, 1864. 27 & 28 Vict, instalments : and where the parish for which the valuation is _ made shall, by reason of any provision in the said Union Assessment Committee Act or this Act, he liable to pay the cost of such valuation, the said Guardians shall charge the annual instalments and the interest payable therewith, to such parish, and may recover the same as and with the usual contributions. The Local Government Board has now replaced the Poor Law Board. cierks of 9, — The clerk of every Assessment Committee shall send Assessment committees to anima n v i n the month of December copies of the totals of the furnish clerks J L withtotaisof gross estimated rental and rateable value of the property valuation Lists. included in the Valuation Lists of the several parishes within the Union, and where such totals have been altered by any Supple- mental Valuation List or Lists then of such totals as altered, to the clerk or respective clerks of the peace of the county or counties within which such parishes respectively may be situate. This section is repealed so far as it relates to the Metropolis by 32 & 33 Vict., c. 67, s. 77. Islelsment 10- — ^ there be no map or plan of any parish available for undeTordlr of the use or sufficient for the purposes of the Assessment Com- to°order'map a or mittee, the Committee may, with the consent of the Guardians, made. after notice as aforesaid, and under the authority of an order of the Poor Law Board, appoint a competent person to make a Cost of map or plan of such parish, and the cost thereof shall be charged either to the common fund, or to the parish, as may be directed by the Poor Law Board. The Local Government Board has now replaced the Poor Law Board. Penalty on overseers omit- ting to make declaration or making false declaration. 11. — Any overseer who wilfully omits to make the declara- tion required to be made by the Union Assessment Committee Act, 1862, or makes the same falsely, knowing the same to be untrue, shall be liable for every such offence to a penalty not exceeding five pounds, upon a summary conviction for the same before two justices of the peace. The Union Assessment Committee Amendment Act, 1864. 381 This section is repealed so far as it relates to the Metropolis by 32 & 33 27&28Vict. Vict, c. 67, s. 77. c - 39> The declaration is required to be made by s. 28 of 25 & 20 Vict., c. 103. (o) 12.— The provisions of the Union Assessment Committee f & mju*., Act, 1862, shall, so far as the same are not contrary hereto, be ££&,. incorporated herewith, and the terms used herein shall be construed in like manner as in that Act. 13.— This Act may be cited as "The Union Assessment short title. Committee Amendment Act, 1864." (o) Ante p. 365. 382 THE UNION ASSESSMENT ACT, 1880. (43 & 44 Vict., c. 7.) An A ct to extend the Union Assessment Committee Acts to Single Parishes under Separate Boards of Guardians WHEREAS under section forty-five of the Union Assessment Committee Act, 1862, as amended by subsequent Acts, it is provided that on the application of the body having the management of the relief of the poor in any Union or incorporation under a local Act, the Local Government Board may order such Union or incorporation to be included in the Union Assessment Committee Act, 1862, and it is expedient to make the like provision with respect to single parishes which are not included in any Union of parishes either under a local Act or under the Poor Law Amendment Act, 1834. Be it therefore enacted as follows — short title. 1.— This Act may be cited as "The Union Assessment Act, 1880," and together with the Union Assessment Committee Act, 1862, and the Union Assessment Committee Amendment Act, 1864, may be cited as "The Union Assessment Acts, 1862 to 1880." Application of 2.— Section forty-five of the Union Assessment Committee c ?io3, s. 45,"to Act, 1862, shall apply to a parish which is not included in a single parishes . , under separate Union of parishes, and in which the relief of the poor is Boards of r Guardians. administered by a Board of Guardians elected under the Poor Law Amendment Act, 1834, or under any local Act, in like The Union Assessment Act, 1880. 383 manner as near as may be as it applies to any Union or 43 & 44 Vict. C 7 incorporation for the relief of the poor formed under a local _ Act, and the Union Assessment Committee Act, 1862, and the Acts amending the same, shall he construed accordingly ; and in relation to any such single parish the expression " common fund " in the said Acts shall he construed to mean the money applicable for the relief of the poor. 3. — This Act shall not extend to the Metropolis as defined Extent of Act by the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869. c - 67 - 384 An Act to enable Her Majesty's Postmaster- General to Acquire, Work, and Maintain Electric Telegraphs. (31 & 32 Vict., c. 110.) short title. 1.— This Act may be cited as " The Telegraph Act, 1868.' Postmaster- General to pay rates, etc. 22. — All land, property, and undertakings purchased or acquired by the Postmaster-Greneral under this Act shall be assessable and rateable in respect to local, municipal, and parochial rates, assessments, and charges at sums not exceeding the rateable value at which such land, property, and under- takings were properly assessed or assessable at the time of such purchase or acquisition. Premises which It was decided in St. Gabriel, Fenchurch, v. Williams (a) that where be used for ° premises taken over for telegraph purposes had ceased to be used as such, telegraph purposes. exceeding the rateable value at which the premises could have been the occupier of such premises is not liable to be assessed in any sum exceeding the rateable value at which the properly assessed at the time of the purchase. («) 16 Q..B.D. 649 ; 55 L.J.M.C. 14 ; 54 L.T. 270. 385 An Act to Exempt from Rating Sunday and Bagged Schools. (32 & 33 Vict., c. 40.) WHEEEAS for many years and until lately buildings used as Sunday and Eagged Schools for gratuitous education enjoyed an exemption from poor and other rates, and it is expedient that they should be exempted from such liability. Be it therefore enacted as follows — 1. — From and after the thirtieth day of September, one From 30th ^ September, thousand eight hundred and sixty-nine, every authority having ^* R s a "^ y power to impose or levy any rate upon the occupier of any fxSStedfrom building or part of a building used exclusively as a Sunday f poor, r etc. ie School or Eagged School may exempt such building or part of a building from any rate for any purpose whatever which such authority has power to impose or levy : Provided that nothing in this Act contained shall prejudice or affect the right of exemption from rating of Sunday or Infant Schools, or for the charitable education of the poor in any churches, district churches, chapels, meeting houses, or other premises, or any vestry rooms belonging thereto, or any part thereof, by virtue of an Act passed in the third and fourth years of the reign of King William the Fourth, chapter thirty, intituled " An Act to exempt from Poor and Church Eates, all Churches, Chapels, and other Places of Eeligious Worship." Until the decision in the Mersey Docks Cases (a) the buildings to which this Act applies were exempt. In Bell v. Crane (b) it was decided that the rating authority is not bound to exempt, but has a discretion. (a) 11 H.L.C. 443 ; 35 L.J.M.C. 1 ; 20 C.B. N.S. 56 ; 12 L.T. 643 ; 13 W.R. 1069 ; 11 Jur. N.S. 746. (b) L.K. 8 Q.B. 481 ; 42 L.J.M.C. 122 ; 29 L.T. 207 ; 21 W.E. 911. 25 386 Sunday and Ragged Schools Exemption Act. 32 & 33 Vict. 2. — A "Sunday School" shall mean any school used for ! ! giving religious education gratuitously to children and young Interpretation r^i i in p ±i l i j • i> i of terms. persons on Sunday, and on week days tor the holding ot classes and meetings in furtherance of the same object, and without pecuniary profit being derived therefrom. A " Eagged School " shall mean any school used for the gratuitous education of children and young persons of the poorest classes, and for the holding of classes and meetings in furtherance of the same object, and without any pecuniary benefit being derived therefrom, except to the teacher or teachers employed. Extent of Act. 3. — This Act shall not extend to Ireland. short title. 4. This Act may be cited as the " Sunday and Eagged Schools (Exemption from Eating) Act, 1869." 387 An Act for Amending the Law with respect to the Rating of Occupiers for Short Terms, and the Making and Collecting of the Poors Rate. (32 & 33 Yict., c. 41.) WHEBEAS it is expedient to amend the law relating to the collection of poor-rates assessed upon occupiers of hereditaments held for short terms, and to the making and collecting of the poor-rate : Be it therefore enacted as follows : 1. — The occupier of any rateable hereditament let to him for occupiers of a J tenements let a term not exceeding three months shall be entitled to deduct ^^urtThe the amount paid by him in respect of any poor-rate assessed C r ^nts. r ° m upon such hereditament from the rent due or accruing due to the owner, and every such payment shall be a valid discharge of the rent to the extent of the rate so paid. 2. — No such occupier shall be compelled to pay to the over- Amount of rate payable by seers at one time or within four weeks a greater amount of the occupier. rate than would be due for one quarter of the year. 3. — In case the rateable value of any hereditament does not Owners may agree to pay the exceed twenty pounds, if the hereditament is situate in the ^ w a e n d d a b ^ om . Metropolis, or thirteen pounds if situate in any parish wholly or u^ 381011 - partly within the borough of Liverpool, or ten pounds if situate in any parish wholly or partly within the city of Manchester or the borough of Birmingham, or eight pounds if situate else- where, and the owner of such hereditament is willing to enter into an agreement in writing with the overseers to become liable to them for the poor-rates assessed in respect of such hereditament, for any term not being less than one year from the date of such agreement, and to pay the poor-rates whether 25 a 388 The Poor Rede Assessment and Collection Act, 1869. 32&33Vict. the hereditament is occupied or not, the overseers may, subject ! ! nevertheless to the control of the vestry, agree with the owner to receive the rates from him and to allow to him a commission not exceeding twenty-five per cent, on the amount thereof. In Reg. v. Dodd (a) it was held that an owner who compounds is entitled, in ascertaining the rateable value of the tenement, to the full deduction in respect of rates, in like manner as if the tenement had not been com- pounded for. vestries may 4. — The vestry of any parish may from time to time order order the owner " ■/ J. «/ instlado^the that the owners °^ a U rateable hereditaments to which section occupier. three of this Act extends, situate within such parish, shall be rated to the poor-rate in respect of such rateable hereditaments, instead of the occupiers, on all rates made after the date of such order ; and thereupon and so long as such order shall be in force the following enactments shall have effect : (1.) The overseers shall rate the owners instead of the occu- piers, and shall allow to them an abatement or deduction of fifteen per centum from the amount of the rate : (2.) If the owner of one or more such rateable heredita- ments shall give notice to the overseers in writing that he is willing to be rated for any term not being less than one year in respect of all such rateable hereditaments of which he is the owner, whether the same be occupied or not, the overseers shall rate such owner accordingly, and allow to him a further abatement or deduction not exceeding fifteen per centum from the amount of the rate during the time he is so rated : (3.) The vestry may by resolution rescind any such order after a day to be fixed by them, such day being not less than six months after the passing of such resolu- tion, but the order shall continue in force with respect to all rates made before the date on which the resolu- tion takes effect : (a) L.R. 1 Q.B. 16 ; 35 L.J.M.C. 97 ; 6 B. & S. 903 ; 12 Jur. N.S. 159. The Poor Rate Assessment and Collection Aet, 1869. 389 Provided that this clause shall not be applicable 32 & 33 Vict, to any rateable hereditament in which a dwelling- — 2l — L_ house shall not be included. In Norwood Overseers v. Salter (b) it was held that the vestry of a parish are only entitled to order the owner of a hereditament to be rated to the poor-rate instead of the occupier where the rateable value of such heredita- ment does not exceed the limits specified by section 3 of this Act. A married woman rated as an owner under this section is liable to be ****£«£ woman imprisoned on non-payment of parochial rates in default of sufficient imprisonment, distress, (c) The notice given by an owner under this section does not constitute an ^^^ an agreement between such owner and the overseers, (c) 5. — When an owner who has become liable to pay the poor- Owners omit- tinjEf to psy rate omits or neglects to pay, before the fifth day of June, in ^g*™ the any year, any rate or any instalment thereof which has become J c ™'~ due previously to the preceding fifth day of January, and has been duly demanded by a demand-note delivered to him or left at his usual or last known place of abode, he shall not be entitled to deduct or receive any commission, abatement, or allowance to which he would, except for such omission or neglect, be entitled under this Act, but shall be liable to pay and shall pay, such rate or instalment in full. to forfeit commission. if 13 & 14 Vict. 6.— The statute thirteenth and fourteenth Victoria, chapter Repea^ o ninety-nine, with respect to the rating of small tenements, and <=• 99, etc so much of any local statute as relates to the rating of owners instead of occupiers, are hereby repealed, so far as the same apply to any poor-rate made after this Act comes into operation. 13 & 14 Vict., c. 99, commonly called the Small Tenements Act, is wholly repealed by the Statute Law Revision Act, 1875. 7. — Every payment of a rate by the occupier, notwithstand- constructive „ , . payment of ing the amount thereof may be deducted from his rent as the rate, herein provided, and every payment of a rate by the owner, whether he is himself rated instead of the occupier, or has {b) (1892) 2 Q.B. 118; 61 L.J.M.C. 193 ; 67 L.T. 376. (c) Allen (Elizabeth), In re (1894), 2 Q.B. 924; 63 L.J.M.C. 267; 43 W.R. 141 ; 59 J.P. 229 ; 10 R. 514. 390 The Poor Rate Assessment and Collection Act, 1869. 32 & 33 Vict, agreed with the occupier or with the overseers to pay such rate, c and notwithstanding any allowance or deduction which the overseers are empowered to make from the rate, shall be deemed a payment of the full rate by the occupier for the purpose of any qualification or franchise which as regards rating depends upon the payment of the poor-rate. In Marsh v. Estcourt (d), where labourers resided in the cottages of their employer, who paid the rates, and the names of the labourers appeared in the rate-book as occupiers, the Court held that the labourers, as house- holders, possessed a burgess qualification. where owners 3 — Where an owner who has undertaken, whether by agree- omit to pay •/ o payfngthesame men t with the occupier or with the overseers, to pay the poor- amountVrom rates, or has otherwise become liable to pay the same, omits or neglects to pay any such rate, the occupier may pay the same and deduct the amount from the rent due or accruing due to the owner, and the receipt for such rate shall be a valid dis- charge of the rent to the extent of the rate so paid. Owners to give 9. — Every owner who agrees with the overseers to pay the lists of occu- . i j piers and liable poor-rate, or who is rated or liable to be rated for any heredita- to penalty for x J omSion. ment instead of the occupier, shall deliver to the overseers, from time to time, when required by them, in writing, a list contain- ing the names of the actual occupiers of the hereditaments comprised in such agreement, or for which he is so rated or liable to be rated : and if any such owner wilfully omits to deliver such list when required to do so, or wilfully omits there- from or mis-states therein the name of any occupier, he shall for every such omission or mis-statement be liable, on summary conviction, to a penalty not exceeding two pounds. Notice to occu- 10. — Section twenty-eight of "The Representation of the piers of rates ,, man-ear. reople Act, 1867, with respect to notice to be given of rates in arrear, shall apply to occupiers of premises capable of con- ferring the parliamentary franchise, although the owners of such premises have become liable for the rates assessed thereon under the provisions of this Act. id) 24 Q.B.D. 147 ; 59 L.J.Q.B. 100; 38 W.R. 495; 54 J.P. 294. The Poor Rate Assessment and Collection. Act, 1869. 391 11. — Where the owner has become liable to the payment of 32&33Vict. c 41 the poor-rates, the rates due from him, together with the costs and charges of levying and recovering the same, may be levied owner under on the goods of the owner and be recovered from him in the same way as poor-rates may be recovered from the occupier. 12. — Notwithstanding the owner of any such rateable here- Recovery of " "* rates unpaid by ditament as aforesaid has become liable for payment of the the owner - poor-rates assessed thereon, the goods and chattels of the occupier shall be liable to be distrained and sold for payment of such rates as may accrue during his occupation of the premises at any time whilst such rates remain unpaid by the owner, subject to the following provisions : — (1.) That no such distress shall be levied unless the rate has been demanded in writing by the overseers from the occupier, and the occupier has failed to pay the same within fourteen days after the service of such demand. ('2.) That no greater sum shall be raised by such distress than shall at the time of making the same be actually due from the occupier for rent of the premises on which the distress is made. (3.) That any such occupier shall be entitled to deduct the amount of rates for which such distraint is made, and the expense of distraint, from the rent due or accruing due to the owner, and every such payment shall be a valid discharge of the rent to the extent of the rate and expenses paid. 13. — Every owner of any hereditament for the rates of 0wner . ma ? t J J appeal against which he has become liable shall have the same right of appeal andrate. 11 List (subject to the same conditions and consequences) against the Valuation List and the poor-rates as if he were the occupier thereof. 14. — The overseers of every parish when they make a poor- overseer to rate shall set forth in the title of the rate the period for which which poor-rate ii.. . . . ^ 3 ma de. the same is estimated, and if the same is payable by instalments the amount of each instalment and the date at which each 392 The Poor Rate Assessment and Collection Act, 1869. 32 & 33 Vict, instalment is payable; provided that if the necessities of the - parish shall require it another rate may be made before such Proviso. period shall have elapsed. Overseers may make poor-rate payable by instalments. 15. — The overseers who make the poor-rate for a period exceeding three months may declare that the same shall be paid by instalments at such times as they shall specify, and thereupon each instalment only shall be enforceable as and when it falls due, and the payment of any such instalment shall, as respects any qualification or franchise depending upon the payment of the poor-rate, be deemed a payment of such rate in respect of the period to which such instalment applies. Provision for successive occu- piers, and for occupiers coming' into unoccupied hereditaments. 16. — If the occupier assessed in the rate when made shall cease to occupy before the rate shall have been wholly dis- charged, or if the hereditament being unoccupied at the time of the making of the rate become occupied during the period for which the rate is made, the overseers shall enter in the rate-book the name of the person who succeeds or comes into the occupation, as the case may be, and the date when such occupation commences, so far as the same shall be known to them, and such occupier shall thenceforth be deemed to have been actually rated from the date so entered by the overseer, and shall be liable to pay so much of the rate as shall be proportionate to the time between the commencement of his occupation and the expiration of the period for which the rate was made, in like manner, and with the like remedy of appeal, as if he had been rated when the rate was made ; and an outgoing occupier shall remain liable in like manner for so much and no more of the rate as is proportionate to the time of his occupation within the period for which the rate was made ; and the twelfth section of the statute 17 Geo. II., c. 38, shall be repealed. It was decided in Werburgh Overseers v. Hutchinson (e) that this section does not relieve an occupier who is assessed to a poor-rate but ceases to occupy before the rate has been wholly discharged, from his liability to pay the whole rate, unless there is some tenant who succeeds to the occupation (e) L.E. 5 Ex. D. 19 ; 49 L.J.M.C. 23 ; 28 W.R. 153. Vide also Hare v. Putney, 7 Q.B.D. 223 ; 50 L.J.M.C. 81 ; 45 L.T. 337 ; 29 W.R. 721 ; 46 J.P. 100. The Poor Rate Assessment and Collection Act, 1869. 393 of the hereditament, so us to become liable to pay a proportionate part of 32 & 33 Vict the rate. This decision has been annulled by section 3 of the Poor Hate C. 41. Assessment Act, 1869, Amendment Act, 1882. (/) 17. — A poor-rate shall be deemed to be made on the day when the poor- rate deemed to when it is allowed by the justices, and if the justices sever bemade - in their allowance, then on the day of the last allowance. 18. — The production of the book purporting to contain a Evidence of making- and poor-rate, with the allowance of the rate by the justices, shall, publication if the rate is made in the form prescribed by law, be prima facie evidence of the due making and publication of such rate. 19. — The overseers in making out the poor-rate shall in overseers to . ,, insert names of every case, whether the rate is collected from the owner or »u occupiers in J m the rate. occupier, or the owner is liable to the payment of the rate instead of the occupier, enter in the occupiers column of the rate-book the name of the occupier of every rateable here- ditament, and such occupier shall be deemed to be duly rated for any qualification or franchise as aforesaid ; and if any penalty for overseer negligently or wilfully and without reasonable cause omits the name of the occupier of any rateable hereditament from the rate, or negligently or wilfully mis-states any name therein, such overseer shall for every such omission or mis-state- ment be liable on summary conviction to a penalty not exceed- ing two pounds : provided, that any occupier whose name has been omitted shall, notwithstanding such omission and that no franchises, claim to be rated has been made by him, be entitled to every qualification and franchise depending upon rating, in the same manner as if his name had not been so omitted. In Cross v. Alsop(g~) it was held that this section only applies where Tms sect ion is there has been an agreement in writing under section 3, between the over- of general ° ° , application. seers and the owner of the premises, to receive the rates from him, or where there has been an order by the vestry for rating - the owner instead of the occupiers under section 4. This decision was questioned in Smith v. Seghill (/?), where it was held that this section was of general application and not confined to the cases mentioned in sections 3 and 4. (/) Post p. 395. iff) L.E. 6 C.P. 31.5 ; 40 L.J.C.P. 53 ; 23 L.T. 589 ; 19 W.R. 131. (A) L.E. 10 Q.B. 422 ; 44 L.J.M.C. 114 ; 32 L.T. 857 ; 23 W.R. 745. 394 The Poor Rate Assessment and Collection Act, 1869. „„ „,y t To remove any doubt on this point section 14 was inserted in the C. 41. ' Parliamentary and Municipal Registration Act, 1878, wherein it is provided " that the above section " shall not be deemed to apply exclusively to cases where an agreement has been made under section 3 of the same Act, or where an order has been made under section 4 of the same Act, but shall be of general application." interpretation 20.— The word " overseer " shall include every authority that makes an assessment for the poor-rate ; the words " poor rate " shall mean the assessment for the relief of the poor, and for the other purposes chargeable thereon according to law, and in the Metropolis shall extend to every rate made by the over- seers, and chargeable upon the same property as the poor-rate ; the word " owner " shall mean any person receiving or claiming the rent of the hereditament for his own use, or receiving the same for the use of any corporation aggregate, or of any public company, or of any landlord or lessee who shall be a minor, a married woman, or insane, or for the use of any person for whom he is acting as agent ; the word " parish " shall signify every place for which a separate overseer can be appointed ; the word " vestry " shall include not only the vestry of a parish existing under the authority of some general or special Act of Parliament, or by special custom or otherwise, but also the meeting of the inhabitants of any township, vill, or place having a separate overseer, and for which a separate poor-rate is made, held after notice given in like manner as is required by law in regard to the meetings of vestries ; and the word " Metropolis " shall include only the Metropolis as denned by the Metropolis Management Act, 1855. Extent of Act. 21. — This Act shall not extend to Scotland or to Ireland. short title. 22. — This Act may be cited as " The Poor Rate Assessment and Collection Act, 1869," and shall come into operation on the commencement twenty-ninth of September, 1869 : Provided that the vestry of any parish may before that day order that the owners shall be rated instead of the occupiers under this Act ; but no such order shall take effect until after the said twenty-ninth of September, 1869. of Act 395 An Act to Amend the Poor Rate Assessment and Collection Act, 1869. (45 & 46 Vict., c. 20.) Be it enacted as follows : 1. — This Act shall be called the Poor Rate Assessment and short title. Collection Act, 1869, Amendment Act, 1882. 2. — This Act and the Poor Pate Assessment and Collection interpretation. Act, 1869, as amended, shall be read as one Act. 3. — The provisions of the sixteenth section of the Poor Rate p aymen t of Assessment and Collection Act, 1869, so far as regards the going occupier jmyment of rates by an outgoing occupier, shall extend and tionate to time apply to any outgoing occupier assessed in the rate, and such outgoing occupier shall only be liable to pay so much of the rate as shall be proportionate to the time of his occupation within the period for which the rate was made, notwithstanding he may not be succeeded in his occupation by an incoming tenant. 4. — In a parish in which there is no church or chapel of the Publication of lip pi • p ral - e wnere no parish, a poor-rate, whether made before or after the passing of parish church. this Act, shall be deemed to have been duly published if, within fourteen days after the making of the rate notice thereof has been given by affixing such notice in some public and con- spicuous place or situation in the parish. " Chapel " in this- section is a Church of England chapel. If a dissenting "chapel." chapel were included, it would he so expressed (6 & 7 Vict., c. 18, s. 23). This section was inserted in the Act on account of the decision in Reg. v. Dyott (a), where it was decided that where there was no church or chapel in which to give public notice of a rate within 17 Geo. II., c. 3, s. 1, no rate could be collected. (a) 9 Q.B.D. 47 ; 51 L.J.M.C. 104 ; 30 W.K. 799 ; 47 J.P. 54. 396 An Act to provide for Uniformity in the Assessment of Rateable Property in the Metropolis. (32 & 33 Vict., c. 67.) WHEREAS it is expedient to provide for a common basis of value for the purposes of government and local taxation and to promote uniformity in the assessment of rateable property in the Metropolis : Be it enacted as follows — Act to be con- strued as one with 25 & 26 Vict., c. 103, and 27 & 28 Vict., c. 39. Short title. Extent of Act. 18 & 19 Vict. c. 120. Preliminary. 1. — The Union Assessment Committee Act, 1862, is in this Act referred to as " the principal Act," and the principal Act, and the Union Assessment Committee Act, 1864 (amending the same), shall for the purposes of this Act, and so far as is consistent with the tenor thereof, be incorporated with this Act ; and the expression " this Act " in the principal Act, and any expression referring to the principal Act which occurs in the said Act amending the same or in any other Act or document, shall, as regards places to which this Act extends, be construed to mean the principal Act as incorporated with this Act. 2. — This Act (including the Acts incorporated herewith) may be cited as the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869. 3. — This Act shall extend only to unions and parishes not in union, which are for the time being either wholly or for the greater part in value thereof respectively situate within the jurisdiction of the Metropolitan Board of Works appointed under the Metropolis Management Act, 1855. The Valuation {Metropolis) Act, 1869. 397 32 & 33 Vict. ^c.67. 4. — In this Act unless the context otherwise requires, — Definitions. The term "Metropolis" means the unions and parishes to " Metropolis." which this Act extends : The term "parish" means any place for which a separate " Parish -" poor-rate is or can be made, or for which a separate overseer is or can be appointed : The term "union" means any union of parishes, and any " Union -" parish for which there is a separate Assessment Committee under this Act and the Acts incorporated herewith : The term "ratepayer" means every person who is liable to "Ratepayer." any rate or tax in respect of property entered in any valuation list: The term "year" means the twelve months commencing "Year." with the sixth of April and ending with the succeeding fifth of April ; and words referring to a year refer to the same period : The term " surveyor of taxes " means any surveyor of taxes, « surveyor of inspector of taxes, or other officer appointed or to be appointed by the Commissioners either of Inland Revenue or of her Majesty's Treasury for the purposes of any tax in respect of which a valuation list is by this Act made conclusive : The term "overseers" includes any person or body of " 0verseers -' persons performing the duties of overseers so far as regards the assessment, making, and collection of rates for the relief of the poor : The term "vestry clerk" means the vestry clerk, if any, "Vestry elected under the Act of the session of the thirteenth and fourteenth years of the reign of her present Majesty, chapter fifty-seven, or under a local Act ; or, if there is no such clerk, the vestry clerk appointed under " The Metropolis Management Act, 1855 ": The term " hereditament " means any lands, tenements, ■< Hereaita- hereditaments, and property which are liable to any rate or tax in respect of which the valuation list is by this Act made conclusive : 398 The Valuation {Metropolis) Act, 1869. 32&33Vict. The term "gross value" means the annual rent which a c - 67, tenant might reasonably he expected, taking one year with " Gr08S value -" another, to pay for an hereditament, if the tenant undertook to pay all usual tenant's rates and taxes and tithe commutation rent-charge, if any, and if the landlord undertook to hear the costs of the repairs and insurance and the other expenses, if any, necessary to maintain the hereditament in a state to command that rent : "Rateable -phe term "rateable value" means the gross value after value." deducting therefrom the probable annual average cost ol the repairs, insurance, and other expenses as aforesaid : The Acts specified in the first schedule to this Act are in this Act referred to by the short title placed opposite to them in that schedule. Assessment Committee. Election of 5. — Where, in any parish Avhich is not included in any union committee in formed under the Poor Law Amendment Act, 1834, and the single parish . where there is a Acts amending the same, there is for the time being a vestry vestry. ° _ elected according to the provisions of the Metropolis Manage- ment Act, 1855, but no Assessment Committee under the principal Act, the following provisions shall have effect : — (1.) Where in any such parish there is a Board of Guardians having power under any local Act to assess or make the rates for the relief of the poor, that Board of Guardians shall appoint an Assessment Committee : (2.) Where any two of such parishes are united under a local Act for the purpose of assessing or making the rates for the relief of the poor, the Guardians for such united parishes elected in pursuance of the Poor Law Amendment Act, 1834, and the Acts amending the same, shall appoint an Assessment Committee : (3.) In cases other than those before mentioned the vestry of such parish shall appoint an Assessment Com- mittee : The Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869. 399 (4.) In the first year after the passing of this Act and every 32 & 33 Vict. subsequent year, the body who appoint an Assessment . Committee under this section shall, on a day fixed by such body, between the fifteenth and twenty-ninth of April in that year or some other date fixed by the Poor Law Board [a], hold a meeting, and appoint from among themselves an Assessment Committee (consisting of not less than six nor more than twelve in number) in the same manner, as near as may be, as if the parish or united parishes were an union and the appointing body a Board of Guardians within the meaning of the principal Act. [a] The Local Government Board are substituted for the Poor Law Board (34 & 35 Viet., c. 70). All the provisions of this Act and the Acts incorporated herewith shall : — (a) In cases where the Assessment Committee is appointed by Guardians under this section be construed as if such Guardians, and the monies applicable by such Guardians for the relief of the poor, were the Guardians mentioned in the principal Act and the common fund ; and (b) In cases where the Assessment Committee is appointed by the vestry be construed, so far as is consistent with the tenor thereof, as if the terms vestry, members of the . vestry, vestry clerk, assistant vestry clerk, and monies applicable to the pay- ment of the expenses of a vestry under the Metropolis Management Act, 1855, were respec- c 8 i2o. tively substituted for the terms, Board of Guardians, Guardians, clerk of the Board of Guardians, assistant clerk of the Board of Guardians, and common fund, but nothing in such Acts relating to ex-officio Guardians shall have any application in the case of a vestry. 400 The Valuation {Metropolis) Art, 1869. 32&33Vict c. 67. Making of Valuation Lists. Making of Valuation Lists. 6. — The overseers of every parish to which this Act extends, within the time in this Act mentioned, shall make and sign a Valuation List of their parish in duplicate, in accordance with this Act. Valuation Lists to be dealt with under 25 & 26 Vict. , c. 103, ss. 17 to 21. Remuneration of clerk. 7- — After the Valuation List is signed by the overseers the same proceedings shall be had as are directed by the seven- teenth, eighteenth, nineteenth, twentieth, and twenty-first sections of the principal Act, subject to the alterations made by this Act. It was decided in Reg. v. Oumberlege (a) that a special payment may be made by the vestry of a Metropolitan parish to the vestry clerk for preparing the valuation list required by this Act. Duplicate sent to the surveyor of taxes. 8. — The overseers shall send one duplicate of the Valuation List to the surveyor of taxes of the district at the same time that the other duplicate is deposited by them. The surveyor of taxes shall insert in the duplicate so sent to him the amount in his opinion of the gross value of the hereditaments comprised in such list where such amount differs from the amount inserted by the overseers, and shall transmit the duplicate to the Assessment Committee within twenty-eight days after he has received the same. Notice to occupier of alteration of value, etc. 9. — In each of the following cases, namely, (1.) Where the overseers of the parish insert in the Valuation List some hereditament not previously assessed or raise the gross or rateable value of some hereditament above the value stated in the Valuation List for the time being in force or (where there is no Valuation List) in the then last assessment to the poor-rate, or (2.) Where the Assessment Committee (otherwise than in determining an objection) alter a Valuation List by inserting therein some hereditament, or by raising the (a) 2 Q.B.D. 366 ; 46 L.J.M.C. 214 : 36 L.T. 700. The Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869. 401 gross or rateable value of some hereditament com- 32 & 33 prised therein, the overseers shall immediately after 'L '. — _! the deposit or re-deposit of the list (as the case may be) serve on the occupier of such hereditament a notice of the gross and rateable value thereof inserted in the Valuation List. In Reg. v. Middlesex JJ. (b) Blackburn, J., said : "The valuation list is where persons made conclusive as to the value of all hereditaments contained in it, and notf C( f ot hil the rate must be made in accordance with it ; whether or no the valuation is binding on persons who have had no notice under section 9 we are not called upon to decide, and I express no opinion, though it would seem but mst that it should not affect them." 10. — The notice of the deposit and re-deposit of the Valua- Notice to state . . , time and mode tion List published by the overseers shall state the times at of objection. which and the mode in which objections are to be made. 11. — Objections may be made before the Assessment Com- Grounds on J J which persons mittee by any person authorised by this Act and the Acts mayobject incorporated herewith to object who feels himself aggrieved by committee!' reason of the unfairness or incorrectness of the valuation of any hereditament, or by reason of the insertion or incorrectness of any matter in the Valuation List, or by reason of the omission of any matter therefrom, or by reason of such a Valuation List as is required by this Act not having been transmitted by the overseers to the Assessment Committee. The notice of objection shall specify the correction which the objector desires to be made. It was decided in Reg. v. St. Mary Abbotts, Kensington (c), that an objector may appear by his agent and that the Committee are bound to hear the agent, on the ground that the statute contains no provision prohibiting him from appearing by an agent. 12. — A surveyor of taxes, and any ratepayer in the parish purveyor of ma shall have the same right of inspecting, copying, taking ^spect^copy, Valuation List. (b) L.R. 7 Q.B. 653 ; 26 L.T. 902 ; 20 W.R. 774. Vide also Reg. v. Price, 62 L.J.M.C. 71 ; 68 L.T. 171 ; 57 J. P. 294. (c) (1891) 1 Q.B. 378 ; 60 L.J.M.C. 52 ; 64 L.T. 240 ; 39 W.R. 278 ; 55 J.P. 502. 26 402 The Valuation {Metropolis) Act, 1869. 32 & 33 'extracts from, and objecting to any Valuation List which relates Vict., c. 67. to j^ district or parish as is given to any person by this Act and the Acts incorporated herewith. if overseers do 13. — If the overseers of any parish fail to transmit such a not transmit . . „. list, committee Valuation List as is required by this Act, the Assessment Oom- to appoint a person to do so. m ittee shall appoint some person to make a Valuation List and may allow such person such remuneration in addition to his expenses as they think fit ; and all expenses incurred by the Assessment Committee in pursuance of this section shall be paid by the Guardians and charged by them to such parish. The person so appointed shall have for the purposes of this section the same powers and duties as overseers, and the Valuation List so made shall be dealt with in like manner as if it had been duly made and transmitted by the overseers. valuation List 14. — The Assessment Committee, within the time in this to be revised, certified, and ^ c t mentioned, shall revise the Valuation List in accordance sent to over- seers, etc. w ^ t ^ g ^. and ^ e Acts incorporated herewith. When they have finally approved such Valuation List, they thall cause the totals of the gross and rateable value in such list to be ascer- tained and inserted in the list, and three members of the Committee present at the meeting at which the list is finally approved shall sign at the foot thereof such declaration of approval and certificate of compliance with this Act as is contained in part one of the second schedule to this Act. One duplicate, so certified, shall be sent to the clerk of the managers of the Metropolitan Asylum District, and the other duplicate to the overseers of the parish to which it relates. Deposit of 15. — The overseers of the parish, on receiving the duplicate duplicate of list . in each parish. f the Valuation List so sent to them by the Assessment Committee, shall immediately deposit it in the place in which the rate books of the parish are kept, and shall publish notice of such deposit, and of the time and mode of making appeals, and of the grounds on which an appeal is allowed by this Act to be made. The Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869. 403 16.— The certified Valuation List so sent to the clerk of the 32 & 33 managers of the Metropolitan Asylum District by the Assess- _ ment Committee shall be deposited at the office of such at office of the , . . managers of managers, and within the time in this Act mentioned shall be Metropolitan Asylum returned by such clerk to the same Assessment Committee. District. 17 — The clerk of the managers of the Metropolitan Asylum Printing and ° it/ distribution of District shall, within the time in this Act mentioned, cause the ^^gjgg* totals of the gross and rateable values of all the Valuation Lists valuation List . to be printed, and a printed copy of all such totals to be sent to every Assessment Committee, and the overseers of every parish in the Metropolis and in every county in which any parish to which any of such totals relate is situate, to the clerks of the peace for every such county, to the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, the Corporation of the City of London, the Metropolitan Board of Works, every district board in the Metropolis, and the Poor Law Board. Every Assessment Committee, overseer, and ratepayer within the Metropolis and every such county shall respectively be entitled to have printed copies of such totals on payment of one penny for each copy of all the said totals. The Local Government Board lias now replaced the Poor Law Board. Appeals. — Special Sessions. Holding of 18. — In every Petty Sessional Division in the Metropolis the special sessions .... i 11 • to hear appeals. Justices of the Peace acting m and for such division shall, 111 every year at the time mentioned in this Act, hold a Special Sessions for hearing appeals under this Act against the Valuation Lists of the several parishes within such division. 19. — Any ratepayer and any overseers of a parish, so far as J^™ 8 ^ respects the Valuation List of such parish, and any surveyor of 1™%^° taxes, so far as respects the Valuation List of any parish in the Se8S10ns - Petty Sessional Division, may, if he or they feel aggrieved by any decision of the Assessment Committee on an objection made with respect to the unfairness or incorrectness of the valuation of any hereditament included in such list, but not otherwise, appeal against such decision to the Special Sessions. 20 a 404 The Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869. 32 & 33 The right to appeal to Special Sessions shall not deprive a _ 1C "' " person of any other right of appeal conferred on him by this Act. Extent of jurisdiction of Special Sessions. 20. — The Justices in Special Sessions under this Act shall not hear any appeal touching any matter with respect to which notice of appeal to the General Assessment Sessions has been served in manner prescribed by this Act, and shall not hear any appeal touching any part or alter any part of the Valuation List except the part relating to the value of an hereditament ; and a decision of such justices and an alteration by them of the value of an hereditament in the Valuation List of any parish shall affect only the rights of the ratepayers of such parish among themselves, and shall not of itself in any way alter the totals of the gross or rateable value of such list as settled by the Assessment Committee, but may form a reason for appeal against such totals to the Assessment Sessions and superior Court as hereinafter mentioned. Powers of Special Sessions. 21. — The Justices in Special Sessions under this Act may adjourn their Court from time to time as may be necessary for the performance of their duties under this Act. They shall have with respect to the attendance and examination of witnesses, the taking of evidence, the keeping order in Court, the enforcing their orders, and all matters necessary for the execution of their duties under this Act, the same powers and jurisdiction as if they were assembled in Petty Sessions. s°edai by 22.— The Justices in Special Sessions shall send a written of eS sittT g ? f time notice of the time and place at which they will hold a Special Sessions for the purpose of hearing appeals with respect to any parish to the overseers of such parish, who shall publish it as soon as it is received by them. Appeals : — Assessment Sessions. court of 23. — For the purpose of hearing appeals under this Act menTsessfons?" against any Valuation List in the Metropolis, the justices of the peace appointed as hereinafter mentioned shall at the time The Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869. 405 mentioned in this Act assemble and hold a Court of General 32 & 33 • p i i ii k l Vict., c. 67. Assessment Sessions (m this Act referred to as the Assessment Sessions) . The General Assessment Sessions are replaced by the London Quarter Sessions by the Local Government Act, 1888 (51 & 52 Vict., c. 41, s. 42 (10).) 24.— The justices who are to form the Court of General ^°^*^ f nt of Assessment Sessions shall be appointed annually as follows : — menfsLtionl. 8 " (1.) Three justices of the peace of the County of Middlesex (of whom the assistant judge of the Court of the Sessions of the Peace of the said county shall be one) shall be appointed by the Court of General Quarter Sessions or General Sessions of the Peace for the County of Middlesex : (2.) Two justices of the peace of the County of Surrey shall be appointed by the Court of General or Quarter Sessions of the Peace for the County of Surrey : (3.) Two justices of the peace of the County of Kent shall be appointed by the Court of General Sessions for the County of Kent : (4.) Two justices of the peace of the City of London shall be appointed by the Court of the Mayor and Aldermen of the City of London in the Inner Chamber. The said justices shall be appointed in the month of October in every year, or at such other time as may be from time to time fixed by the appointing body. They shall hold office for twelve months, beginning on the first of November, and any casual vacancy may be filled up by the appointing body. 25. — The justices in Assessment Sessions mav from time officers of _ * General Assess- to time appoint, with the consent of the Poor Law Board, a ment sessions. clerk, and other persons to assist them in the performance of their duties under this Act, and may assign him or them such remuneration and such duties as the Poor Law Board may approve. 406 The Valuation {Metropolis) Act, 1869. 32 & 33 26. — The justices in Assessment Sessions may from time to Vict. c. 67. . . . . — - — time appoint one of their own number to act as their chairman, quorum, and who shall have a second or casting vote, and they may from powers of . . . . General Assess- time to time determine on their quorum so that it be not ment Sessions. less than three. The Court of General Assessment Sessions may adjourn from time to time, as may be necessary for the performance of their duties under this Act, and (for the purpose of giving judgment only) from place to place in the Metropolis. They shall with respect to the attendance and examination of witnesses, to the taking of evidence, to the keeping of order in court, to contempt of court, to the enforcement of their orders, and to all matters necessary for the execution of their duties under this Act, have the same jurisdiction and powers and be in the same position as a Court of Quarter Sessions ; and, subject to the express provisions of this Act, shall conduct their proceedings, be convened, and be in the same position, as near as may be, as if they were a Court of Quarter Sessions. on appeals. orders as to 27. — The justices in Assessment Sessions may, with the proceedings and recognizances approval of one of her Majesty's Principal Secretaries of State, make orders from time to time for the purpose of regulating the proceedings on appeals to them under this Act, and for determining the recognizances (if any) to be entered into by appellants in the case of appeals either to Special Sessions or to the Assessment Sessions. under Act. Pees on appeals 28. — The justices in Assessment Sessions may make a table of the fees which in their opinion should be paid to the clerks of Special Sessions and to the clerk of Assessment Sessions in the case of appeals under this Act, and shall lay such table before one of her Majesty's Principal Secretaries of State in the same manner as the justices at Quarter Sessions may make and lay before such Secretary of State a table of fees, and all the provisions of section thirty of the Act of the Session of the eleventh and twelfth years of her Majesty's reign, chapter forty-three (which section relates to a table of fees and The Valuation {Metropolis) Act, 1869. 407 to the prohibition of clerks taking other fees), shall apply in 32 & 33 the case of a table of fees made, and the business done by the _ said clerks under this Act. All fees paid in the case of appeals to the Assessment Sessions shall be paid to the account of the receiver of the Metropolitan Common Poor Fund, and shall be so paid and taken and accounted for in such manner as the Poor Law Board may from time to time by order prescribe. 29. The justices in Assessment Sessions shall from time Places for ^^ to time appoint the place in the Metropolis where the appeals relating to each parish in the Metropolis are to be heard, and may, if they think tit, divide the Metropolis into districts for the purpose of appeals, and appoint one or more places for every such district. 30. — The justices in Assessment Sessions shall cause public E^tf^o^J notice to be given of the several times at which they will sit J,'™£ 8 t0 be at the several places appointed for the hearing of appeals ; such notice may be given under the hand of their clerk, and shall be given by advertisement in some newspaper circulating generally in the Metropolis, and by sending a copy of such notice to every surveyor of taxes in the Metropolis, to every Assessment Committee which would have a right to appeal at such Court, and to the overseers of every parish to which any appeal relates and to all the parties to the appeal. The overseers shall publish the notice as soon as it is received by them. 31. — The justices in Assessment Sessions may order any summons of certain officers clerk to the Commissioners of Taxes, any surveyor of taxes, hs witnesses. clerk of Assessment Committee, overseer, assistant overseer, or like officer in the Metropolis, to produce any documents relating to rates or taxes which such justices may consider necessary for determining an appeal, and do not relate to profits of trade or of concerns in the nature of trade. Any person who refuses, after tender of a reasonable sum for his expenses, to obey any order under this section shall be 408 The Valuation {Metropolis) Act, 1869. 32 & 33 liable (on summary conviction before the justices in Assess- 1C '' C ' : ment Sessions or any other two justices) to a penalty not exceeding five pounds. Persons entitled 32. — Any ratepayer and any surveyor of taxes, and any to appeal to " pi p i • • i i. Assessment overseer, with the consent of the vestry ot his parish, who Sessions. _ may feel aggrieved by any decision of the Assessment Com- mittee, on an objection made before them to which he was a party, or by any decision of Special Sessions, whether he was a party or not, may appeal against such decision to the Assessment Sessions. Any Assessment Committee in the Metropolis, or in the county in which the parish to which the appeal relates is situate, any overseers in the Metropolis or such county, with the consent of the vestry of their parish, any ratepayer in the Metropolis or such county, and any body of persons authorised by law to levy rates or require contributions payable out of rates in the Metropolis or such county, may appeal to the Assessment Sessions, if they or he feel aggrieved by reason — (1.) Of the total of the gross value of any parish being too high or too low ; (2.) Of the total of the rateable value of any parish being too high or too low ; or (3.) Of there being no approved valuation list for some parish. Appeal against In London County Council v. St. George's Union (fZ), the House of Lords totals. hgld t h at persons who are " aggrieved " within the meaning of the above section, by reason of the total of the gross or rateable value of any parish being too high or too low, are not entitled to ohtain an alteration of the totals on the ground that particular hereditaments are assessed below their true value. In Eeq. v. Woolwich Union (e) it was decided that the reduction, on Reduction m v ' . . ' specific rateable appeal, of the value of the specific hereditaments composed in the afteTtotafgross. valuation lists of the parishes did not alter the total gross and rateable values appearing in such fists, as the total values could only be altered by appealing against them. Xo appeal had been brought against the totals of the valuation fists, and no alterations in those totals had been made by the Quarter Sessions. (d) (1894) A.C. 600 ; 64 L.J.Q.B. 48 ; 71 L.T. 409 ; 59 J.P. 116 ; 6 R. 310. (e) (1891; 2 Q.B. 712; 60 L.J.Q.B. 665; 68 L.T. 4b0 ; 4u W.R. 155; do J.P. 552. The Valuation {Metropolis) Act, 1869. 409 Proceedings on Appeals. 32 & 33 Vict, c. 67. 33. — Notice in writing of every appeal, whether to Special Noticeo f a p pea j Sessions, or the Assessment Sessions, specifying the correction As^sment r which the appellant desires to have made in the Valuation List must be served, within the time in this Act mentioned, on the following persons, namely, In all cases on the surveyor of taxes of the district to which the appeal relates, and on the clerk of the Assessment Committee which approved the list wholly or partly questioned by the appeal : When the appeal relates to the unfairness or incorrectness of the valuation of, or to the omission of an hereditament occupied by any person other than the appellant, or to the incorrectness of any matter stated in the list with respect to any such heredita- ment, then on such person : If an Assessment Committee or a surveyor of taxes is the apjDellant, then also on the overseers of the parish to which the appeal relates. Provided that it shall not be necessary to serve any notice of appeal on the surveyor of taxes in any case in which the appeal relates only to the rateable value of any hereditament. The clerk of the Assessment Committee, on receiving notice of an appeal, shall forthwith serve notice thereof on the clerk of the Special Sessions or of the Assessment Sessions, as the case may require. In Reg. v. General Assessment Sessions (f) the Assessment Committee Notice of ar)t)ea i of a Union appealed under section 32 of this Act to the General Assess- to ratepayers— AY lit? II HGC6S- ment Sessions against the valuation list of the respondent parish, and sm-.v. against the total gross and rateable values appearing therein on the ground that those values were too low, and the appellants sought to have the total values increased by shewing that the assessments in the valuation list of a large number of specified hereditaments were too low. The Court held that the appeal did not " relate to the unfairness or incorrectness of the valuation of any hereditament occupied by any person other than the (/) 17 Q.B.D. 394 ; 35 W.R. 12 ; 50 J.P. 721. 410 The Valuation {Metropolis) Act, 1869. 32 & 33 appellant " within the meaning of section 33 ; that those words only Vict., C. 67. applied to appeals in which it was objected that the valuation of particular ~ hereditaments was unfair or incorrect so far as it affected the assessment of the ratepayers of a parish inter se ; and therefore that the appellants need not give notice of appeal under s. 33 upon the occupiers of the specified hereditaments. By the Local Government Act, 1888 (51 & 52 Vict., c. 41), s. 42 (10), the Quarter Sessions for the County of London are substituted for the General Assessment Sessions. Sessions to hear anil determine appeals and alter list accordingly. 34. — The justices in Special Sessions and in Assessment Sessions respectively shall, in open court, hear and determine all appeals brought before them in snch order as they may respectively from time to time appoint. They may adjourn the hearing from time to time, and to any day not later than the day before which all appeals to them are required by this Act to be heard ; and in the case of Assessment Sessions for the purpose of obtaining the decision of any superior Court to any day necessary for that purpose ; and if from accident or mistake due notice of appeal has not been given, or if an additional notice of appeal appears to be required, they may, if they think it just, order notice of appeal to be given. They may confirm or alter the Valuation List, so far as it is questioned by the appeal, in such manner as they think just ; but shall not make any alteration in contravention of this Act. The clerk of the Assessment Committee, or some deputy allowed by the Assessment Committee, shall attend the Court with the Valuation List to which the appeal relates, and any alteration shall be made by the justice acting as chairman of the Sessions in that list, and the said justice shall place his initials against such alteration. Making of Valuation List where none approved. 35- — If it appears to the justices in Assessment Sessions on any appeal that there is no approved Valuation List for some parish, they may appoint some proper person (with such remuneration as they may appoint) to make a Valuation List. Such person shall have for that purpose the same powers and duties as overseers. The Valuation List so made shall be deposited and otherwise made known to the persons interested The Valuation {Metropolis) Act, 1869. 411 in such manner as the Court may direct, but in manner as near 32 & 33 as may be as is provided in this Act with respect to the list Vlct ' Cl 67, originally made. The costs of making such Valuation list shall he paid by the Assessment Committee who failed to approve the list, and shall be deemed part of their expenses under the principal Act. 36.— If any of the parties to the appeal apply to the justices f*^£ e ^ y in Assessment Sessions to direct a valuation of any heredita- ^^f on ment with respect to which any appeal may be made, and if v Xation. der such applicant or applicants give such security as the Court think proper to pay the costs of the valuation, the Court may, in their discretion, appoint some proper person to make such valuation. 37. — Where the Court appoint a person to make a Valuation Adjournment to •*• L x receive Valua- List or a valuation, they may fix some subsequent day, either t ^ a L ^ j s t n or before or after the day before which all appeals are required by this Act to be heard, for receiving such Valuation List or valuation, and may adjourn the hearing to that day. 38. — The person so appointed to make a valuation shall JJSgSJ.* be make his valuation in writing signed by him, showing the particulars of the hereditaments comprised therein, and the amounts at which he has valued the same respectively. Such person may at all reasonable times, with or without f t ^havepowlr assistants, enter upon any of the hereditaments directed to be valued, and may do thereon all acts necessary for completing the valuation. 39. — The costs of any appeal, including the costs of any Costs of a w eal - such valuation as aforesaid, shall be in the discretion of the justices in Special or Assessment Sessions (as the case may be) and shall be awarded by them to be paid by such parties to the appeal, and in such proportions, as they think just. Costs (including the costs of making a valuation) so ordered to be paid may be recovered as if they had been awarded by a 412 The Valuation {Metropolis) Act, 1869. 32 & 33 Court of Quarter Sessions, and when ordered to be paid by Vict., C. 67. p ar ti es other than a ratepayer shall be paid as in this Act mentioned. Appeal from decision of Assessment Sessions on points of law. 40. — The same proceedings may be had by special case and certiorari or otherwise, for questioning any decision of the justices in Assessment Sessions, as may be had for questioning any decision of the justices in Greneral or Quarter Sessions, provided that every such certiorari shall be sued out within three months after the decision is given. At any time after notice given of appeal under this Act to the Assessment Sessions, it shall be lawful for the parties, by consent and by order of any judge of one of the superior Courts of Common Law at Westminster, to state the facts of the case in the form of a special case for the opinion of any of those Courts, and to agree that a judgment in conformity with the decision of that Court, and for such costs as that Court may adjudge, may be entered on the application of either party at the meeting of the justices in Assessment Sessions next or next but one after such decision has been given and such judgment may be entered accordingly, and shall be of the same effect in all respects as if the same had been given by the Assess- ment Sessions upon an appeal duly brought before them and adjourned ; and the justices shall, if necessary, hold a Sessions or an adjourned Sessions for this purpose. Notice in writing of the decision of any superior Court in pursuance of this section shall be served by the clerk of the Assessment Sessions on the Assessment Committee which approved the list questioned on the appeal to such Court. Notice of altera- 41. — Notice of every alteration in the Valuation List, which tion of list to be , ... . , p , . . i sent to over- alteration is made m consequence of any decision on any appeal seers. to the Special Sessions, Assessment Sessions, or a superior Court, shall as soon as possible be sent in writing by the clerk of the Assessment Committee to the overseers and surveyor of taxes of the parish and district respectively to which the list which is so altered relates, and such alteration shall be entered The Valuation {Metropolis) Act, 1869. 413 bv the clerk of the Assessment Committee and by the overseers 32 & 33 J -1-11 Vict., c. 67. on the duplicates respectively deposited with them. Notice of every alteration in the total of the gross and rateable value of any Valuation List, which alteration is made in consequence of any decision on any appeal to the Assessment Sessions or a superior Court, shall as soon as possible be sent in writing by the clerk of the Assessment Committee to the clerk of the managers of the Metropolitan Asylum District, and the clerk of such managers shall send in writing such altered total to every person and body of persons who has power to levy or make any rate or assessment or require any contribution based on such total. Times for Proceedings. 42.— With respect to the times within which proceedings Timers ^^ d under this Act and the Acts incorporated herewith are to be y^SfSf done, the following provisions shall have effect ; that is to say, are t0 be done - (1.) The overseers shall make and deposit the Valuation List before the first of June in the first year after the passing of this Act : (2.) The overseers shall transmit the Valuation List to the Assessment Committee not sooner than fourteen and not later than seventeen days after notice is given of the deposit of such list : (3.) Notice of any objection by any person other than the surveyor of taxes and the overseers shall be given before the expiration of twenty-five days after the list is deposited : (4.) The Assessment Committee shall revise the Valuation List before the first of October in the same year, and before the same day, but not less than sixteen days .after the transmission of the list to them by the overseers, shall hold a meeting for hearing objections to such list : (5.) The Assessment Committee shall give notice of a meeting for hearing objections to a list not less than sixteen days before such meeting : 414 The Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869. 32 & 33 (6.) Notice of objection with respect to any list by the Vict c 67 '1 ! ' surveyor of taxes and by the overseers shall be given not less than seven days before the meeting at which objections to such list will be heard by the Assessment Committee : (7.) The Assessment Committee shall send the Valuation List to be re-deposited within three days after it is approved by them, and shall appoint a day not less than fourteen nor more than twenty-eight days after such re-deposit for hearing objections to the altera- tions, of which objections seven days' notice shall be given by the objector : (8.) The Assessment Committee shall finally approve and send the Valuation List to the overseers and the clerk of the managers of the Metropolitan Asylum District before the first of November in the same year : (9.) Notices of appeal to Special Sessions shall be given on or before the twenty-first of November in the same year. (10.) The justices may hold the Special Sessions at any time after the thirtieth of November in the same year, which will enable them to determine all appeals before the ensuing first of January : (11.) The clerk of the said managers shall send out the printed totals before the first of December in the same year, and shall return the Valuation List to the Assessment Committee not sooner than fourteen nor later than twenty-one days after the totals are sent out: (12.) Notices of appeals to Assessment Sessions shall be given on or before the fourteenth of January in the same year : (13.) The justices may hold the Assessment Sessions at any time after the first of February in the same year, which will enable them to determine all appeals (except where a Valuation List or valuation is ordered) before the ensuing thirty-first of March : The Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869. 415 (14.) Notice of the times at which the Assessment Sessions 32 & 33 will be held at each place shall be given by the clerk ten days at least before the first Court is held. It was decided in Req.x. Tnqallig) that delay in making, depositing, Effect of non- a •' w/ v . compliance transmitting, and approving the valuation list within the times prescribed with this by this section did not make it a nullity, on the ground that the provisions be of the section are directory and not imperative. In Rig. v. Loudon JJ. and London County Council (h) it was held that the Court of Quarter Sessions may in cases in which the requisite formalities have been complied with, hear and determine all appeals remaining to be heard upon March 31 in any year, if the Court has been unable through press of business or other unavoidable cause to hear and determine them by that date. Effect of Valuation List. 43. — The Valuation List as approved by the Assessment Duration of , Valuation List. Committee, and, if altered on any appeal under this Act to any Sessions or a superior Court, as so altered, shall come into force at the beginning of the year (commencing on the sixth of April) succeeding that in which it is made, and shall last for five years, subject to any alterations that may be made by any supplemental or provisional list as hereinafter mentioned. In Reg. v. Marsham (i) the Court of Appeal held that the rates are to R ate to be paid be paid notwithstanding that an appeal is pending. pending appeal. 44. — Notwithstanding any appeal under this Act which may Ra te to be „ . , T7 , levied notwith- be pending at the commencement of the year, the V aluation standing appeal. List shall come into force unaltered, and every assessment contribution rate and tax in respect of which the Valuation List is conclusive shall be made required levied and paid in accordance with such Valuation List ; and where in consequence of the decision on any appeal under this Act to Assessment Sessions or a superior Court an alteration in such Valuation List is made which alters the amount of the assessment contribution rate or tax levied thereunder, the difference, if too much has (g) 2 Q.B.D. 199; 46 L.J.M.C. 113 ; 35 L.T. 552 ; 25 W.K. 57. (h) 63 L.J.Q.B. 148 ; 69 L.T. 682 ; 58 J. P. 69 ; 9 R. 14. [This case went to the House of Lords on another point under name of London County Council v. St. George'' s Union."] (i) 60 L.T. 142; 32 W.R. 157. 416 The Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869. 32 & 33 been paid, shall be repaid, or allowed, and, if too little, shall _ 1 ! ' be deemed to be arrears of the assessment contribution rate or tax (except so far as any penalty is incurred on account of arrears) and shall be paid and recovered accordingly. valuation List 45, — The Valuation List for the time being in force shall be to be conclusive for purposes of d eeme d to have been duly made in accordance with this Act certain rates, J (luuinicutions. and the Acts incorporated herewith, and shall for all or any of the purposes in this section mentioned be conclusive evidence of the gross value and the rateable value of the several heredita- ments included therein, and of the fact that all hereditaments required to be inserted therein have been so inserted ; that is to say, (1.) For the purpose of any of the following rates which are made during the year that the list is in force, namely, the county rate, the Metropolitan police rate, the church rate, the highway rate, the poor rate, the police, sewers, consolidated and other rates in the city of London, the sewers, lighting, general, and other rates levied by order of district boards or vestries, the main drainage improvement and other rates, and sums assessed on any part of the Metropolis by the 30 & 31 Vict., Metropolitan Board of Works, assessments for con- tributions under the Metropolitan Poor Act, 1867, and every other rate assessment and contribution levied made and required in the Metropolis on the basis of value : (2.) For the purpose of any of the following taxes which become chargeable during the year that the list is in force ; namely, 14 & 15 vict., (a) The tax on houses levied under the House Tax Act, 1851, and the Acts therein incorporated or referred to : 5 & 6 vict., (/>) Any tax assessed in pursuance of the Income Tax Act, 1842, and any Acts continuing or amend- ing the same, on any lands tenements and hereditaments, in all cases where the tax is charged on the gross value, and not on profits : c. 76. 30&31 Vict. c. C. The Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869. 417 (3.) For the purpose of determining so far as it is applicable, 32 & 33 the value of any hereditament included therein for Vict, c. 67. the purposes of the Acts relating to the sale of excisable liquors, to the qualification of a juror, to the qualification of a vestryman and an auditor of accounts under the Metropolis Management Act, cfiio. 9Vict " 1 855, and to the qualification of a guardian and of a manager under the Poor Law Amendment Act, 1834, or the Metropolitan Poor Act, 1867, at any time at which such value is required to be ascertained : And in construing the Metropolitan Police Act, 1829, ™£°- IV -' and the Acts amending the same, the last valuation for the time being acted upon in assessing the county rate shall be deemed to mean the valuation list for the time being in force : And in construing the County Rates Act, 1852, and Acts 15 & 10 vict., referring to the valuation, estimate basis, or standard for the county rate, the valuation estimate basis or standard shall be deemed to be the rateable value stated in such list : And in construing the House Tax Act, 1851, and the ^ 3 ^ 6 ^J ict -' Acts therein incorporated or referred to, the full and just yearly rent shall be deemed to be the gross value stated in such list : And in construing the Income Tax Act, 1842, and any 5 & evict., m c. 35, etc. Acts continuing or amending that Act, with respect to Schedules A. and B. thereof, annual value shall be deemed to mean the gross value stated in such list. Revision of Valuation List. 46. — Every Valuation List shall be revised in manner directed Mode of ^ revising \ iilua- by this Act, and such revision in every period of five years tion Li3t - (the first of such periods beginning with the sixth of April, one thousand eight hundred and seventy-one) shall be con- ducted as follows : (1.) In each of the first four years of such period a Supple- mental List shall, if necessary, be made out in the 27 418 The Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869. 32 & 33 same form as the Valuation List, and shall show all Vict, c. 67. ^he alterations which have taken place during the preceding twelve months in any of the matters stated in the Valuation List, but shall contain only the hereditaments affected by such alterations. If no alteration has taken place which makes a Supple- mental List necessary, the overseers shall send a certificate to that effect to the Assessment Committee in place of such list, which certificate may be in the form contained in the second schedule to this Act : (2.) In the fifth year of every such period the overseers shall make a new Valuation List : (3.) The same regulations shall be observed and the same proceedings shall be had in the case of a Supple- mental List and a new Valuation List as are directed by this Act and the Acts incorporated herewith in the case of the Valuation List made in the first year after the passing of this Act : (4.) A Supplemental List and a new Valuation List shall come into force at the beginning of the year succeeding that in which they are respectively made, in the same manner and subject to the same conditions as the Valuation List made in the first year after the passing of this Act : (5.) In each of the last four years of such period the Valuation List which was in force on the day before the commencement of each such year, together with and as altered by the Supplemental List, if any, which comes into force at the commencement of such year, shall be the Valuation List which is in force during that year : (6.) A new Valuation List when it comes into force shall supersede the Valuation List which was in force during the fifth year of such period. increase in In Reg. v. New River Co. (Jc) it was held that where the mains and pipes value of water f waterwor k s company have been inserted in the quinquennial valua- company by r j connection with t ; on ij s + a supplemental valuation list under this and the next section newly -built rr ^__ houses. (A) 4 Q.B.D. 309 ; 48 L.J.M.C. 123; 40 L.T. 322 ; 27 W.E. 785. The Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869. 419 may be made during such period of five years, so as to include an increase 32 & 33 in the value of the same mains by reason of their having been connected Vict., C 67. with newly-built houses since the date of the last valuation. It was decided in Ren. v. Poplar (I) that where a diminution in income How rateable x v ' , . value m Supple- has been established, and the property has therefore to be entered in a mental List is to supplemental list, the rateable value of the hereditament has to be ascer- be ascertamed - tained, not by opening up the value in the previous quinquennial or supplemental list, but by assuming the value in the list then in force to be the correct value at the commencement of the twelve months preceding, and by deducting from it the diminution in value during that period. 47. — If in the course of any year the value of any heredita- ^>™»>n for^ ment is increased by the addition thereto or erection thereon ti^timeTat 11 of any building, or is from any cause increased or reduced in valuation List value, the following provisions shall have effect : (1.) The overseers of the parish in which such hereditament is situate, may, and on the written requisition of the Assessment Committee or of any ratepayer of the Union or of the surveyor of taxes for the district shall, send to the Assessment Committee a Provisional List containing the gross and rateable value as so increased or reduced of such hereditament : (2.) A copy of the requisition shall be sent by the person making it to the clerk of the Assessment Committee, and if within fourteen days after the requisition has been served on the overseers they make default in sending such Provisional List he shall forthwith summon the Assessment Committee, and the Assess- ment Committee shall appoint a person to make such Provisional List, in the same manner as is in this Act provided in the case of the overseers failing to transmit a Valuation List : (3.) On the receipt of the list the clerk of the Assessment Committee shall serve on the surveyor of taxes for the district a copy of the list, and shall serve on the occupier of any hereditament to which the list relates a copy of so much thereof as relates to that heredita- ment. Every copy shall be accompanied by a notice (l) 13 Q.B.D. 364 ; 53 L.J.M.C. 97 ; 51 L.T. 97 ; 48 J.P. 564. 27 a 420 The Valuation {Metropolis) Act, 1869. 32 & 33 specifying a day, being not less than fourteen days Vict., c. 67. after the date of the service of the notice on or before which any objection to the Provisional List may be made, and stating the mode in which an objection is to be made. Such copy and notice shall be served in the same way as notices by an Assess- ment Committee are served : (4.) An objection may be made to any such Provisional List by the said occupier, and by the surveyor of taxes or by either of them, by notice thereof in writing being served on the clerk of the Assessment Committee, on the overseers, on the surveyor of taxes, and on the occupier, or on such of them as the case may require : (5.) The clerk of the Assessment Committee, on the receipt of the notice of any objection, shall forthwith summon a meeting of the Committee, and give notice of the time and place of such meeting to the overseers, to the surveyor of taxes, and the occupier : (6.) The Committee shall hear and determine on the objection in the same manner as if it were an objection to a Valuation List, and may make such order as they think just : (7.) If no objection is made, then on the expiration of the time for making objections, or if an objection is made then as soon as the Assessment Committee have determined on the objection, the Assessment Committee shall cause a copy to be made of the Provisional List with any alteration made in it by the Committee, and shall return the list and the copy thereof, after being dated and signed by their clerk, to the overseers : (8.) A Provisional List, signed as aforesaid, shall have operation from the date of the service by the clerk of the Assessment Committee of a copy of the list and notice on the occupier, and shall continue in force until the first list (supplemental or other) which is subsequently made comes into force : The Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869. 421 (9.) Upon a Provisional List coming into operation the 32 & 33 overseers shall make such entries in the rate book - for the then current poor-rate as will bring the same into conformity with such list, and shall also enter therein the date at which such list is to come into operation, and shall charge the occupier of such hereditament with a proper proportion of such current poor-rate, regard being had to the time which has elapsed between the making of such rate and the said date and to the rateable value stated in such Provisional List, and such occupier shall be considered as actually rated for such sum from the said date, and be liable to pay the same, and the same may be enforced accordingly : (10.) A Provisional List during the time that it is in force shall be deemed to form part of the Valuation List for the time being in force, and shall (so far as is necessary) be substituted for so much of that Valuation List as relates to the same hereditament, and every rate and tax in respect of which the Valuation List is conclusive, which are respectively made or charged after the Provisional List comes into force, and the proportion of the current rate charged as before provided in this section, shall be levied accordingly ; but if when the next revision of the Valuation List takes place the list as approved and altered on appeal contains a smaller value for the hereditament com- prised in a Provisional List than the value stated in such Provisional List, the amount of rate or tax which has been overpaid in consequence of the larger value having been stated shall be repaid or allowed : (11.) Nothing in this section shall affect the value on which any rate is made or sum is assessed or contribution required which is made, assessed, or required on the totals of the gross or rateable value of parishes or unions. 422 The Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869. 32 & 33 It was held in Reg. v. St. Mary, Islington (m), that the words "from any V lCt., C. o7. cail s e increased or reduced in value " are not confined to an increase or Diminution of reduction caused by structural alterations in the hereditament ; that a the°Tear-^ mg substantial diminution in profits and income is within the meaning of the Assessment section ; and that where a prima facie case of such a diminution is made bound to make out the Assessment Committee is bound on default of the overseers, to out Provisional . . ..... List. appoint a person to make out a provisional list. The overseers, however, are not bound to comply with the requisition if they are of opinion that no such alteration in value has taken place, and a mandamus will not be granted to compel them to do so. (>i) Provisional List The Court held in Fulkam Union v. Wells (o) that an appeal does not lie to Special Sessions from the determination of the Assessment Committee on an objection to a provisional list. Expenses. costs of appeal, 48. — The costs of an appeal awarded against or incurred by any Assessment Committee or overseers shall be deemed to be expenses incurred under this Act and the Acts incorporated herewith, and shall be raised and paid accordingly. Any costs or expenses awarded against or incurred by any surveyor of taxes shall be defrayed in the same manner as expenses are directed to be defrayed by the Acts relating to the taxes in respect of which the Valuation List is made conclusive. Allowances by 49. — The Commissioners of Inland Revenue may make such Inland Revenue ^ for expenses, allowances as they think fit for remunerating any person employed by them in the execution of this Act, and for the discharge of any costs or expenses incurred by him. Expenses. gQ_ — TJhe expenses of the Assessment Sessions and such remuneration as the Poor Law Board may from time to time allow to the clerk of the managers of the Metropolitan Asylum District, the clerk of the Assessment Sessions, and persons (m) 19 Q.B.D. 529; 56 L.J.Q.B. 597; 57 L.T. 270; 35 W.R. 664; 61 J.P. 789. (») Beg. v. St. Mary, Bermondseij, 14 Q.B.D. 351; 54 L.J.M.C. 68; 33 W.R. 414; 49 J.P. 38.' (o) 20 Q.B.D. 749; 57 L.J.M.C. 112; 59 L.T. 103; 36 W.R. 858; 52 J.P. 663. The Valuation (Metropolis) Art, I860. 423 appointed to assist the Assessment Sessions as provided by this 32 & 33 Act, and such costs and expenses incurred by such clerks and Vict., C. 67. persons under this Act as the Poor Law Board may allow, after such audit as the Poor Law Board may direct, shall be paid by the receiver of the Metropolitan Common Poor Fund out of any monies for the time being in his hands and shall be paid at such times and in such manner and upon such precept of the Poor Law Board as the Poor Law Board may from time to time prescribe, and the Poor Law Board may require con- tributions for the purpose of raising such remuneration, expenses, and costs. The Poor Law Board is now replaced by the Local Government Board. Eules for Formation or Valuation List. 51. — The Valuation List shall be made out in the form given Form and contents of in the second schedule to this Act. valuation List. The overseers shall not include in such Valuation List any hereditaments (except tithes or payment in lieu of tithes) which are charged according to rule two in section sixty of the Income 5 & 6 vict.,c.35. Tax Act, 1842, but shall include tithes, any payments in lieu of tithes, and every hereditament in their parish, and shall enter every hereditament in the Valuation List in accordance with the classes mentioned in the third schedule to this Act, so that the deductions to be made in ascertaining the rateable value may be calculated in accordance with that schedule. 52. — The percentage or rate of deductions to be made from Deductions for the gross value in calculating the rateable value for the pur- poses of this Act shall not exceed the amounts in the third schedule to this Act, so far as the same are applicable. 53. — When a surveyor of taxes gives notice of objection or Amountof of appeal the amount specified in the notice as being in his ^Sdbythe judgment the gross value of any hereditament referred to in taxes to be ._. 11A inserted, unless the notice shall be inserted m the Valuation List by the Assess- disproved, ment Committee, Special Sessions, or Assessment Sessions, 424 The Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869. 32 & 33 unless it is proved to the satisfaction of the Assessment Com- vict., c. b7. m ittee, Special Sessions, or Assessment Sessions, that such amount ought not to be so inserted. saving of 54 — Nothing contained in this Act or the Acts incorporated exemptions and ° * prScipTeTof herewith shall affect any exemption or deduction from or valuation. n j c j_ j_ij_ • 'i £ allowance out of any rate or tax whatever, or any privilege oi or provision for being rated or taxed on any exceptional prin- ciple of valuation. Eeturns. Occupier to 55- — In the first year after the passing of this Act, and in make returns. . . . every subsequent year in which a new Valuation List is made, or in the month of March preceding any such year, every person who is liable to be charged with any rate or tax in respect of which the Valuation List is made conclusive shall, when required, make to the overseers of his parish such statement or return as a person chargeable under the Income Tax Act, 1842, and the Acts amending the same is bound to make. surveyor of 56. — For the purpose of securing the proper making of such taxes to supply x x . notices and returns, the surveyor of taxes shall in the month of February forms for *> *> seers n who arT" preceding send to the overseers of each parish in his district a sufficient number of printed forms and notices, and the over- seers, within a month after the receipt thereof, shall serve a notice and form on every person in their parish required by this Act to make a return ; and every person required by this Act to make a return shall make it within twenty-one days after the service of a notice and form on him. The forms and notices shall be such as are prescribed by the 5 *6 Vict., Income Tax Act or the Acts amending the same, or as the Commissioners of her Majesty's Treasury may from time to time prescribe, and any such form duly filled up and signed shall be deemed to be a sufficient return. The return shall be delivered to the overseers of each parish, and together with the Valuation List shall be sent by them to the surveyor of taxes, and by the surveyor of taxes to the Assessment Committee. to serve them. 35, etc. The Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869. 425 57. — An Assessment Committee may, by order, require any 32 & 33 . . „, . i n Vict, c. 67. person who is the owner or occupier or reputed owner or __ occupier of any hereditament in their Union to send them committee may ... . require returns a return in writing: of all or any of the following things : viz., from owner and ° ^ occupier. of the rent receivable or payable by him (as the case may be) for such hereditament and of the person entitled to any tithe rent-charge charged on such hereditament, and of the amount of the same, and of the several persons by whom any tithe rent-charge is paid to him, and of the amount paid by each such person, and of any other particulars respecting such here- ditament as are required for the due execution of this Act and the Acts incorporated herewith. And every such owner or occupier shall obey such order within fourteen days after the service thereof on him. 58. — If any person wilfully refuses or neglects to make any penalty for no x .or false returns. return lawfully required under this Act within the times respec- tively limited by this Act in that behalf, he shall be liable, on summary conviction, to a penalty not exceeding five pounds. If any person wilfully makes or causes to be made a false return, he shall be liable, on summary conviction, to a penalty not exceeding ten pounds. Miscellaneous. 59. — With respect to any parish which is not included in Provision for . . ~D 1 .C cases wnere nc anv Union of parishes, and in which there is no Board of guardians and J *- where no Guardians, the following provisions shall have effect: overseers. (1.) The Assessment Committee of the adjoining Union shall act as the Assessment Committee of that parish, and where there is more than one such adjoining Union the Poor Law Board shall determine the Assessment Committee which is to act for such parish : (2.) Every such parish shall, for the purposes of this Act and the Acts incorporated herewith, but not for any other purpose, be deemed to be within the Union of the Assessment Committee which acts for it : 426 The Valuation {Metropolis) Act, 1869. 32 & 33 (3.) The masters of the bench, treasurer, governors, or other Vi°t. , c. 67. body of persons in such parish, may, at the time appointed for the election of an Assessment Com- mittee appoint a person to be a member of such Assessment Committee in addition to the number elected under this Act and the Acts incorporated herewith : (4.) Where there are no overseers the Assessment Committee shall appoint some person to perform the duties of the overseers under this Act and the Acts incorporated herewith, and may award him such remuneration as they think fit; and the person so appointed shall perform those duties, and shall, for that purpose, have all the powers of overseers : (5.) A proportionate share of the expenses of the Assessment Committee under this Act and the Acts incorporated herewith, and any remuneration paid to or expenses incurred by the person appointed by them under this or any other section to make a Valuation List, shall be charged on such parish, and the sum so charged shall be paid by the masters of the bench, treasurer, governor, or other body of persons ; and sections sixtv-six, sixty-seven, and sixty-eight of the Metro- 30 & 31 Vict., J , -, i c e. politan Poor Act, 1867, shall apply to such sums in the same manner as if the Assessment Committee and their clerk were the Poor Law Board and the receiver mentioned in those sections. The Poor Law Board is now replaced by the Local Government Board. Provision where 60. — Where the vestry or the Gruardians of any parish per- overseers. form the duties of overseers with respect to a Valuation List under this Act the list shall be signed by the vestry clerk or the clerk to the Gruardians. Guardians may 61. — The Gruardians may, upon the application of the Assess- vai P u°er 1 to a assist ment Committee, after notice sent in the manner required by committee. the principal Act, appoint some competent person to assist the The Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869. 427 Committee in the valuation of the hereditaments in the Union 32 & 33 Vict. c. 67. for such period as they see fit, at a salary or other settled remuneration, to be paid out of the common fund. 62. — Every Assessment Committee, with the consent of the Assessment J Committee ami Guardians, and every overseer, with the consent of the vestry of °^ e rs s e e e c r u 8 n ^ or his parish, may, for the purposes of any application for a valua- valuation. tion on any appeal, give security for paying the costs of such valuation. An Assessment Committee may give such security, and may appear on any appeal by their clerk, and shall in- demnify the said clerk against all monies, losses, and costs paid or incurred by him in consequence of such security or appearance. It was held in Reg. v. London J J. (p) that this section does not give the clerk a right to he heard on hehalf of the Assessment Committee to consent to an alteration in the list hefore the Assessment Sessions. The Court of Appeal in the same case decided that rule 10 (q), requiring all consents to be signified by counsel in open Court, was not ultra vires. With reference to this section, Lord Esher, M.B., said : " The object of the section appears to me to be that, instead of its being necessary for the individual members of the Committee to appear in Court, the clerk may appear for all of them." 63. — Any room maintained out of the proceeds of any rate use of public levied wholly or partly in the Metropolis may (with the consent appeals, etc. of the person or body corporate having the control of it) be used for hearing appeals, and for other purposes of this Act. 64. — A Valuation List may be proved by the production of a Evidence ... . , ,. n , . -i of Valuation duplicate or copy of such list purporting to be certified to be a List, etc. duplicate or a true copy by the clerk of the Assessment Com- mittee that approved it, and such certificate shall state that the alterations (if any) made in the list in consequence of the decision on any appeal under this Act have been correctly made in the duplicate or copy so produced, and the clerk on applica- tion shall furnish a copy to any overseers on payment of a sum not exceeding the rate of three shillings for every hundred (p) (1896) 1 Q.B. 659 ; 65 L.J.M.C. 120 ; 74 L.T. 523 ; 44 W.R. 486 ; 60 J. P. 420. (q) Ante p. 281. 428 The Valuation {Metropolis) Act, 1869. 32 & 33 entries numbered separately. A Provisional List may be proved Vict , c. 67. -fay the production of a duplicate or copy thereof purporting to be certified to be a true copy by the clerk of the Committee who signed it. service of 65. — All orders and notices under this Act and the Acts notices, etc., by 1 i-i i ■ • • • it • post, etc. incorporated herewith shall be m writing or print, or partly m writing and partly in print, and if made or given by an Assess- ment Committee shall be sufficiently authenticated if signed by their clerk ; and all orders, notices, and documents required by the same Acts to be served on or sent to any person or body of persons corporate or unincorporate may be either delivered to such person or the clerk of such body, or left at the usual place of abode of such person or clerk, or at the office of such clerk or body, or (if such abode or office cannot on reasonable inquiry be discovered) at the premises to which the order, notice, or document relates. They may also be served and sent by post, by a prepaid letter, addressed to such person, or to the office of such body or to their clerk, and, if sent by post, shall be deemed to have been served and received respectively at the time when the letter containing the same would be delivered in the ordinary course of post, and in proving such service or sending it shall be sufficient to prove, that the letter containing the notice was properly addressed and prepaid and put into the post. publication of 66. — Any notice required by this Act to be published by the overseers. overseers shall, on the Sunday next following the receipt of such notice, or the document to which the notice refers, and the two following Sundays, be published by them in the manner in which notice of a rate allowed by justices is required to be published. inspection, etc., 67- — Where any documents are required by this Act to be of documents . . ....,., I-, deposited with deposited m the same place in a parish m which rate books are rate books. L ± . kept, every ratepayer shall be at liberty to inspect and take copies of or extracts from such documents at any reasonable time, without fee or charge. The Valuation {Metropolis) Act, 1869. 429 68. — The duplicate of the Valuation List, approved hy the 32 & 33 Assessment Committee, and sent to the overseers, as directed by this Act, the notices of alterations made on any appeal under to be equivalent to rate books of this Act, and any Provisional List, shall for all purposes be parish. deemed to he part of the rate books of the parish, and shall be produced by the overseers before the justices upon any applica- tion for allowance of rates, and on any appeal under this or any other Act, and on any other occasion if so required, on which they are bound to produce such rate books, and any overseer who fails to produce such list in accordance with the provisions of this section shall be liable on summary conviction to a penalty not exceeding five pounds. The duplicate of the Valuation List returned to the Assess- ment Committee by the clerk of the managers of the Metropolitan Asylum District, tind other documents in the possession of the Assessment Committee in pursuance of this Act, shall be kept at the board room or other convenient place from time to time appointed by the Guardians of the same Union, but shall be deemed to be in the possession of the Assessment Committee, and shall be produced by their clerk to the district auditor whenever required by him. 69. — Any ratepayer, overseer, clerk of an Assessment Com- j^y^pe' ct etc " mittee, or surveyor of taxes in the Metropolis may, at all ^ hands of e C "' reasonable times, without payment, inspect and take copies of managers or . Assessment and extracts from all Valuation Lists and documents which m Committee. pursuance of this Act are under the control of the clerk of the managers of the Metropolitan Asylum District, or of the clerk of the Assessment Sessions. Any surveyor of taxes and any Guardian and any overseer in a Union, without payment, and any ratepayer in a Union on payment of a fee not exceeding one shilling (to be carried to the common fund), may at any reasonable time inspect and take copies of and extracts from any Valuation Lists, notices of objection, returns and other documents in the possession or under the control of the Assessment Committee of that Union. 430 The Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869. 32 & 33 Any clerk of an Assessment Committee in the Metropolis Vict, c. 67. ma y i nS p ec t an d take extracts from any Valuation Lists in the possession or under the control of the Assessment Committee of any other Union in the Metropolis. Any person who hinders a ratepayer, overseer, clerk of an Assessment Committee, or surveyor of taxes from so inspecting or taking copies of or extracts from any A^aluation List or document, or demands where not authorised by this Act a fee for allowing him so to do, shall be liable on summary conviction to a penalty not exceeding five pounds for each offence. 70. — [This section is repealed and superseded by Act of 1884 (47 & 48 Viet., c. 5), s. 2]. (r) Amendment of 71. — Any person who feels aggrieved by reason of any two justices. clerical or arithmetical error in a rate in the Metropolis may apply to two justices of the peace or a magistrate sitting at any police court in the Metropolitan Police District, who, after the applicant has given such notice to the overseers who made the rate and such persons as such justices or magistrates think just, may hear the case in like manner as in the case of summary proceedings, and amend the rate so far as respects such error. omissions from 72. — Whenever the name of any person liable to be rated at the rate. J x the time the rate is made is omitted from' any rate in the Metropolis, or if any person is described in any such rate by a wrong name, the overseers may, after giving to such person seven clear days' notice of their intention, apply to any two justices or any police magistrate as aforesaid, who may hear the case in like manner as in the case of summary proceedings, and insert the name so omitted, or correct the name so wrongly entered, and every such insertion and correction shall operate as if it had been part of the original rate : Provided that any person whose name is so inserted or corrected in any such rate may appeal against the same at the General Quarter Sessions of (r) Post p. 438. The Valuation {Metropolis) Act, 1869. 431 the Peace which is holden next after such insertion or cor- 32 & 33 rection, in like manner as he might have appealed against the 1C ■' Cl 1 rate. 73. — Every poor-rate made in the Metropolis after the fifth a rli declaration. of April, one thousand eight hundred and seventy-one, shall contain the particulars specified in the fourth schedule to this Act, together with such other particulars as the Poor Law Board may from time to time by order direct, and the overseers shall sign the form of declaration which is given in that schedule before the rate is allowed by the justices. And the justices shall not allow any rate at the foot of which the said declaration has not been added and signed. Any overseer who wilfully omits to make the said declaration or makes the same falsely shall be liable on summary con- viction to a penalty not exceeding five pounds. 74.— The entry of the proceedings of the Assessment ftfivffi, * Committee at any meeting, and of the names of the members c " who attend that meeting may be signed by the chairman of the next meeting of the Committee, and every entry and minute purporting to be so signed shall be received in evidence in the same manner as if such entry or minute had been signed by the chairman of the meeting at which the proceedings took place, and the members were present. 75.— Nothing in this Act shall in any way alter or affect saving of ^^ the mode of valuing or taxing any hereditament which is not Kded il°a included in any Valuation List, or which is chargeable according to the profits and not according to the gross value, or the mode of charging the occupiers of land subject to a tithe rent-charge in respect of such tithe rent-charge. 76.— Where for the purposes of the Acts relating to the duty ^^ nt of on inhabited houses, or to the duties charged under Schedule B JJUgStK* of the Income Tax Act, 1842, or to the sale of exciseable liquors, ^Tome t£ it is necessary to make a separate valuation of any hereditament Acts. 432 The Valuation {Metropolis) Act, 1869. 32 & 33 D y reason of its not being separately valued in any Valua- Vict., c. b7. f.j on List, the value of such hereditament shall be ascertained in the same manner as if this Act had not passed. Repeal of Acts herein described. Repeals of Acts. 77. — [The enactments specified in the fifth schedule to this Act, and'] so much of any [other] Acts, whether public or local and personal, as authorises any valuation of hereditaments to be made for the purposes of any rate or tax in respect of which the Valuation List is by this Act made conclusive, are hereby repealed, where they relate only to the Metropolis absolutely, and in other cases so far as they relate to the Metropolis : [Provided : — (1.) That the provisions of the Acts so repealed shall remain in force until the provision or provisions substituted for them by this Act -shall respectively come into operation : (2.) That this repeal shall not affect the validity or invalidity of anything done or suffered wider any of the said provision* while they remain in force, or any right or title acquired or accrued under any of the said pro- visions while they remain in force, or any remedy or proceedings in respect thereof] The parts of this section in brackets were repealed by the Statute Law Eevision Act, 1883 (46 & 47 Vict., c. 39). SCHEDULES. FIRST SCHEDULE. DATE OF ACT. [Sees. 4. j 10 Geo. IV., c. 44. 5 & 6 Vict., c. 35. 14 & 15 Vict., c. 36. 15 & 16 Vict., c. 81. SHORT TITLE USED IN THIS ACT. The Metropolitan Police Act. The Income Tax Act. The House Tax Act. The County Eate Act. The Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869. 433 SECOND SCHEDULE. 32 & 33 Vict., c. 67. Part I. Valuation List for [the parish or place for which the list is [sees. 51.] made] in the Metropolitan Union of [or not being Union] in the county of 3 01 03 .3 -S 03 a o3 g > s 03 tt X! 03 0) « a rt . m'3 03 03 S p a 03 -S >."*' o Signed this day of A. B. \ Overseers of the Poor of C. D. ) the parish aforesaid. We do hereby approve the above Valuation List, and certify that in determining the gross and rateable value of the above hereditaments the provisions of the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869, have been duly com- plied with. Signed this day of ( Members of the Assessment I Committee of the Union. A. B. CD. E. F. Note : — The two last of the above columns (for gross and rateable value as determined by Assessment Committee) must be filled up, and the totals of these columns must be added up after the objections to the alterations have (if any) been heard, and before the list is finally approved. Part II. Form of Certificate where no Supplemental List is sent. We, the Overseers of the parish of , do hereby certify j- See B> ^j that no alteration has taken place in the matters stated in the Valuation List of this parish which renders a supplemental list necessary. A. B. ) Overseers of the parish C. D. \ of 28 434 The Valuation {Metropolis) Act, 1869. 32 & 33 Vict, c. 67. [See 9. 52.] THIRD SCHEDULE. Showing the several classes into which the hereditaments inserted in a Valuation List under this Act are to be divided. Class 1. — Houses and buildings, or either of them, without land other than gardens where the gross value is under £20 2. — Houses and buildings without land other than gardens and pleasure grounds valued therewith for the purpose of inhabited house duty where the gross value is £20 and under £40 „ 3. — Houses and buildings without land other than gardens and pleasure grounds valued therewith for the purpose of inhabited house duty where the gross value is £40 or upwards ,, 4. — Buildings without land which are not liable to inhabited house duty and are of a gross value of £20 and under £40 5. — Buildings without land which are not liable to inhabited house duty and are of a gross value of £40 or upwards 6. — Land with buildings not houses 7. — Land without buildings 8. — Mills and manufactories 9.— Tithes, tithe commutation rent-charge, and other payments in lieu of tithe ,, 10. — Railways, canals, docks, tolls, waterworks, and gasworks „ 11. — Rateable hereditaments not included in any of the foregoing classes The maximum rate of deductions prescribed in this schedule shall not apply to houses or buildings let out in separate tenements ; but the rate of deductions in such cases shall be determined as in Classes 9, 10 and 11. Maximum Rate of Deductions. Per cent, or propor- tion. 25 or ith. 20 or |th. 16| or |th. 20 or ith. 16f or |th. 10 or ilth. 5 or 2T,th. 33| or ird. To be deter- mined in each case according to the circum- stances and the general princi- ples of law. The Valuation {Metropolis) Act, 1869. 435 FOURTH SCHEDULE. 32 & 33 Vict, c. 67. Form of Rate. Rate for the relief of the poor of the parish of , in the Union, and for other purposes chargeable thereon, according to law, made this day of , in the year of our Lord 18 , after the rate of in the pound, which is estimated to meet all the expenses for the above purposes which will be incurred before the of next. Name of Occupier. Name of Owner. Description of Property Rated. Name or Situation of Property. Rateable Value. Rate at in the Pound. Declaration to be Added to the Rate. We, the undersigned, do hereby declare that one of us, or some person on our behalf, has examined and compared the several particulars in the respective columns of the above rate with the Valuation List made under the authority of the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869, and now in force in this parish {or township), and the several hereditaments are, to the best of our belief, rated according to the value appearing in such Valuation List, and do declare that the total of the above rate amounts to pounds shillings and pence. > Churchwardens. > Overseers. FIFTH SCHEDULE, (a) 43 Geo. III., c. 161... In part, namely — So much as relates to the mode of ascertaining the value of houses with respect to the value of which the Valuation List is conclusive. 48 Geo. III., c. 55 ...In part, namely — So much as relates to the mode of ascertaining the value of houses with respect to the value of which the Valuation List is conclusive. (s) The enactments in this schedule are only repealed so far as they relate to the Metropolis. 28 a 436 The Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869. 32 & 33 Fifth Schedule — (continued). Vict., c. 67. 57 Geo. III., c. 25 ...In part, namely — So much as relates to the mode of ascertaining the value of houses with respect to the value of which the Valuation List is conclusive. 10 Geo. IV., c. 44 ...In part, namely — So much of sections thirty and thirty-two as relates to the ascertaining the value of any hereditaments with respect to the value of which the Valuation List is made conclusive. 6 & 7 Will. IV., c. 96. ..In part, namely — Sections one, two, six, seven, and nine. 5 & 6 Vict., c. 35 ...In part, namely — Section sixty. No. I. No. II., par. 1, 3. No. IV., par. 2, 4. No. V. (so far as respects the deductions allowed hy this Act.) Section sixy-three. No. X., par. 1, 2, 3, 4 Sections sixty-four, sixty-five, sixty-six, sixty- seven, sixty-eight, seventy-eight, eighty-one, eighty-two, eighty-seven, and any other part which relates to the ascertaining of the value of lands, tenements and hereditaments with respect to the value of which the Valuation List is made conclusive. 14 & 15 Vict., c. 3G ...In part, namely — So much as relates to the mode of ascertaining the value of houses with respect to the value of which the Valuation List is conclusive. 15 & 10 Vict., c. 81 ...In part, namely — So much of the sections one to twenty, both inclusive, as relates to the preparation of a basis or standard of county rate for any part of the Metropolis, and sections forty to forty-three, both inclusive. 16 & 17 Vict., c. 34 ...In part, namely — Sections thirty-two and forty-seven, and so much of the rest of the Act as relates to the mode of ascertaining the value of any hereditaments with respect to the value of which the Valua- tion List is conclusive. The Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869. 437 OQ Br, QQ Fifth Schedule — (continued). Vict c 67 18 & 19 Vict., c. 120. ..In part, namely— So much of sections one hundred and seventy-five and one hundred and seventy-nine as relates to ascertaining the value of any hereditaments with respect to the value of which the Valua- tion List is conclusive. 20 & 21 Vict., c. (34 ...In part, namely— Sections eleven and twelve. 21 & 22 Vict., c. 33 ...In part, namely— Section one. 25 & 26 Vict., c. 102... In part, namely— So much of sections six, seven, and thirteen as authorises or relates to the ascertaining the value of any hereditament with respect to the value of which the Valuation List is conclusive, and so much of any Act as applies the pro- visions hereby repealed. 25 & 26 Vict., c. 103. ..The Union Assessment Committee Act, 18(32. In part, namely — Sections three, fourteen, fifteen ; the following words in section seventeen, " and a copy of " such Valuation List shall be forthwith de- " livered to the Board of Guardians ;" sections twenty-two, twenty-three, twenty-four, twenty- five, twenty-six, twenty-seven, section twenty- eight down to " schedule hereunto annexed ; " sections twenty-nine, thirty-one, thirty-two, thirty-three, thirty-four, thirty-five, thirty-six, thirty-nine, forty-one, forty-two, forty-three, and forty-five. 438 THE VALUATION (METROPOLIS) AMENDMENT ACT, 1884. (47 Vict., c. 5.) An Act to Amend the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869, by giving greater facilities for Appeal to Owners and Lessees of Houses paying Rates and Taxes in the Place of the Occupiers. WHEREAS the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869, does not sufficiently provide for objections to and appeals against Valuation Lists in the case of owners and lessees who by contract or arrangement pay tenants rates and taxes, more especially when such houses are sub-divided into tenements, separately rated as hereditaments in such Valuation Lists : Be it enacted as follows : short title and 1- — This Act maybe cited as " The Valuation (Metropolis) Amendment Act, 1884," and shall be read and construed as one Act with the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869 (hereinafter called "the principal Act"). Enabling 2. — Section seventy of tliH principal Act is hereby repealed, owners and . . , . . lessees to and in lieu thereof it is enacted as follows : Where the owner appeal. or lessee of any hereditament is liable to be assessed for any rate or tax in the place of the occupier or tenant, or does in fact pay any such rate or tax in his place under any contract or arrangement with him, such owner or lessee shall for the purposes of this Act and the Acts incorporated therewith be deemed to be the occupier of such hereditament, and the The Valuation (Metropolis) Amendment Act, 1884. 489 person referred to as the ratepayer in sections nineteen and 47 Vict., c. 5. thirty-two of the principal Act, and the person who is to make to the overseers of his parish the statement or return referred to in the fifty-fifth section of the principal Act. Provided that any form of return, order, notice, or documenl required to be given to or served on the occupier under the principal Act shall, except where the owner or lessee is liable to be assessed to or to pay any rate or tax in the place of the occupier, be deemed to be sufficiently given or served, not- withstanding this Act, if addressed to such occupier and left on the premises to which the return, order, notice, or document relates. The Acts incorporated with the principal Act are the Union Assessment Acts, 1862 and 1864. 3 — Where any occupier or ratepayer or any owner or lessee one notice or L . . . objection may deemed to be an occupier or ratepayer within the meaning of j^^ ^^ section two of this Act, shall object to the Valuation List in gStnante. respect of any hereditaments, whether consisting of a house or houses sub-divided into tenements separately assessed as hereditaments or of separate houses or tenements not so sub- divided, it shall be lawful for him to include in any one notice made in pursuance of section thirty-three of the principal Act or otherwise, or in any one objection, appeal, or other proceeding under the principal Act and the Acts incorporated therewith, the whole or any one or more of the hereditaments separately assessed and comprised in one Valuation List of which he is or is deemed to be the occupier or ratepayer. 440 An Act to Amend the Law respecting the Liability and Valuation of certain Property for the purpose of Rates. (37 & 38 Vict., c. 54.) Short title. Extent of Act. 1.— This Act may be cited as " The Eating Act, 1874." 2.— This Act shall not apply to Scotland or Ireland. rating. Abolition of 3.— Whereas by the Act of the forty-third year of the reign tfo r ns l from emp " of Queen Elizabeth, chapter two, intituled "An Act for the Relief of the Poor," it is provided that a poor-rate shall be raised in every parish by taxation of, amongst other persons, every occupier of certain hereditaments in such parish ; and it is expedient to extend the said Act, and the Acts amending the same (which Act and Acts are in this Act referred to as the Poor Eate Acts), to hereditaments other than those mentioned in the said Act: Be it therefore enacted that: — From and after the commencement of this Act the Poor Eate Acts shall extend to the following hereditaments in like manner as if they were mentioned in the recited Act of the forty-third year of the reign of Queen Elizabeth: that is to say (1.) To land used for a plantation or a wood, or for the growth of saleable underwood, and not subject to any right of common ; (2.) To rights of fowling, of shooting, of taking or killing game or rabbits, and of fishing, when severed from the occupation of the land ; and (3.) To mines of every kind not mentioned in the recited Act. The Rating Act, 1874. 441 4. — The gross and rateable value of any land used for a 37 & 38 plantation or a wood, or for the growth of saleable underwood, — 1 Valuation of shall be estimated as follows : — land used as plantation, etc. (a.) If the land is used only for a plantation or a wood, the value shall be estimated as if the land, instead of being a plantation or a wood, were let and occupied in its natural and unimproved state : (b.) If the land is used for the growth of saleable under- wood, the value shall be estimated as if the land were let for that purpose : (c.) If the land is used both for a plantation or a wood and for the growth of saleable underwood, the value shall be estimated either as if the land were used only for a plantation or a wood, or as if the land were used only for the growth of the saleable underwood growing thereon, as the Assessment Committee may determine. In Earl of Westmoreland v. Souihwick and Oundle (a), it was held that Woodlands— .„,..,. condition, woodlands were not to be rated on an assumption of an alteration in their condition. Where a right of sporting exists in connection with the woodlands, such right must be taken into account in estimating the rateable value of the land in its natural and unimproved state, (b) 5. — Where the rateable value of any land used for a Deduction of plantation or a wood, or both for a plantation or wood and for of plantation, the growth of saleable underwood, is increased by reason of the same being estimated in accordance with this Act, the occupier of that land under any lease or agreement made before the commencement of this Act, may, during the con- tinuance of the lease or agreement, deduct from his rent any poor or other local rate, or any portion thereof, which is paid by him in respect of such increase of rateable value, and every Assessment Committee, on the application of such occupier, shall certify in the Valuation List or otherwise the fact and amount of such increase. (a) 36 L.T. 108. Ante p. 214. (b) Eytou v. Mold, 6 Q.B.D. 13; 50 L.J.M.C. 39: 43 L.T. 472; 29 W.R. 122 ; 45 J.P. 54. 442 The Rating Act, 1874. 37 & 38 6.— (1.) Where any right of fowling or of shooting, or of Vict c. 54 — ! '- taking or lulling game or rabbits, or of fishing (hereinafter Valuation and „ , . , „ , . in , 1 rating of lights referred to as a right of sporting), is severed from the of shooting, etc. . pi occupation of the land and is not let, and the owner of such right receives rent for the land, the said right shall not be sc] ({irately valued or rated, but the gross and rateable value of the land shall be estimated as if the said right were not severed ; and in such case if the rateable value is increased by reason of its being so estimated, but not otherwise, the occupier of the land may (unless he has specifically contracted to pay such rate in the event of an increase) deduct from his rent such portion of any poor or other local rate, as is paid by him in respect of such increase ; and every Assessment Com- mittee, on the application of the occupier, shall certify in the Valuation List or otherwise the fact and amount of such increase. (2.) Where any right of sporting, when severed from the occupation of the land, is let, either the owner or the lessee thereof, according as the persons making the rate determine, may be rated as the occupier thereof. (3.) Subject to the foregoing provisions of this section the owner of any right of sporting, when severed from the occupation of the land, may be rated as the occupier thereof. (4.) For the purposes of this section, the person who, if the right of sporting is not let, is entitled to exercise the right, or who, if the right is let, is entitled to receive the rent for the same, shall be deemed to be the owner of the right. Lessee may be In Kenrick v. GuiUfield (c) it was decided that where, under sub-section of sporting? ^ of the above section, the owner of land lets the right of sporting over part of the land which he retains in his own occupation, the lessee may be rated in respect of the right of sporting. rateabie'vaiue ^ ' — ^Vhere a tin, lead, or copper mine is occupied under a coppM- m a mes. nd l ease or leases granted without fine on a reservation wholly or partly of dues or rent, the gross value of the mine shall be (c) L.R. 5 C.P.D. 41 ; 49 L.J.M.C. 27 ; 41 L.T. 624; 28 W.R. 372. Ante p. 218. Vide also Reg. v. Battle Union, L.R. 2 Q.B. 8 ; 8 B. & S. 12 ; 36 L.J.M.C. 1 ; 15 L.T. 180 ; 15 W.R. 57. The Rating Act, 1874. 443 taken to be the annual amount of the whole of the dues 37 & 38 payable in respect thereof during the year ending on the '1—1 '. thirty-first day of December preceding the date at which the Valuation List is made, in addition to the annual amount of any fixed rent reserved for the same which may not be paid or satisfied by such dues. The rateable annual value of such mine shall be the same as the gross value thereof, except that where the person receiving the dues or rent is liable for repairs, insurance, or other expenses necessary to maintain the mine in a state to command the annual amount of dues or rent, the average annual cost of the repairs, insurance, and other expenses for which he is so liable shall be deducted from the gross value for the purpose of calculating the rateable value. In the following cases, namely, — (1.) Where any such mine is occupied under a lease granted wholly or partly on a fine ; and (2.) Where any such mine is occupied and worked by the owner ; and (3) In the case of any other such mine which is not excepted from the provisions of this Act and to which the foregoing provisions of this section do not apply ; the gross and rateable animal value of the mine shall be taken to be the annual amount of the dues or dues and rent at which the mine might be reasonably expected to let without fine on a lease of the ordinary duration, according to the usage of the country, if the tenant undertook to pay all tenants rates and taxes and tithe rent-charge, and also the repairs, insurance, and other expenses necessary to maintain the mine in a state to command such annual amount of dues or dues and rent. The purser, secretary, and chief managing agent for the time being of any tin, lead, or copper mine, or any of them, may, if the overseers or other rating authority think fit, be rated as the occupier thereof. 444 The Rating Act, 1874. 37 & 38 In this section, — Vict., c. 54. The term " mine," when a mine is occupied under a lease, includes the underground workings, and the engines, machinery, workshops, tramways, and other plant, buildings (not being dwelling-houses), and works and surface of land occupied in connexion with and for the purposes of the mine, and situate within the boundaries of the land comprised in the lease or leases under which the dues or dues and rent are payable or reserved : The term " dues," means dues, royalty, or toll, either in money or partly in money and partly in kind ; and the amount of dues which are reserved in kind means the value of such dues : The term " lease," means lease or sett, or license to work, or agreement for a lease or sett, or license to work : The term " fine," means fine, premium, or foregift or other payment or consideration in the nature thereof. Works in Where a tramway and smelting works situate in a different Union from fi-om^niijie 111011 tne mme ) form part of the mine, a deduction must be made from the gross dues in respect of such tramway and smelting works in order that the rateable value of the mine may be ascertained, (d) Deduction of 8. — Where any poor or other local rate which at the corn- rate by tenant of mine. mencement of this Act any lessee, licensee, or grantee of a mine is exempt from being rated to in respect of such mine, becomes payable by him in respect of such mine during the continuance of his lease, grant, or license, or before the arrival of the period at which the amount of the rent, royalty, or dues is liable to revision or re-adjustment he may (unless he has specifically contracted to pay such rate in the event of the abolition of the said exemption) deduct from any rent, royalty, or dues payable by him, one-half of any such rate paid by him : Provided that he shall not deduct any sum exceeding what one-half of the rate in the pound of such poor or other local rate would amount to if calculated upon the rent, royalty, or dues so payable by him. (d) Snailheach Mine Co. v. Forden, 35 L.T. 514. Ante pp. 197, 208. The Rating Act, 1874. 445 In Duke of Devonshire v. Berrow Hematite Steel Co(e), it was held that 37 & 38 a covenant in a lease of iron mines to pay rent " free of all rates, taxes, Vict., C. 04. and deductions whatsoever, parliamentary, parochial, or of any other covenant to nature," is not " a specific contract to pay the poor-rate, in the event of the ^es^&c.* 68 ' abolition of the exemption " within the above section. In Chalotier v. Bolclww (/) the House of Lords held that a covenant to ' pay all rates and taxes imposed by Parliament, or otherwise, free from all deductions whatsoever, and to pay all taxes which now are or which shall at any time hereafter be imposed, was not a specific contract within the above section "to pay such rate in the event of the abolition of the exemption." 9. — Where any occupier, lessee, licensee, grantee, or other General pro- • • j_ • vision as to person is authorised by this Act to deduct any rate or sum m deduction of respect of a rate from any rent, royalty, or dues payable by him ; then — (1.) Any payment so authorised to be deducted shall be a good discharge for such amount of rent, royalty, or dues as is equal to the amount of such payment, and shall be allowed accordingly. (2.) Any payment so authorised to be deducted may be recovered as an ordinary deht from the person to whom the rent, royalty, or dues may he payable. (3.) The person receiving the rent, royalty, or dues shall have the same right of appeal and objection with reference to the rate and to the valuation of the hereditament in respect of which the rate is payable, as he would have if he were the occupier of such hereditament. 10. — After the commencement of this Act, the heredita- Liabilityof ments to which the Poor Eate Acts are extended by this Act, ^tes^weUas and which are thus made rateable to the relief of the poor, shall be rateable to all local rates in like manner as if the Poor Eate Acts had always extended to such hereditaments. {e) 2 Q.B.D. 286 ; 46 L.J.Q.B. 435 ; 36 L.T. 355 ; 25 W.E. 469. Ante^. 198. (/) 3 App. Cas. 933 ; 47 L.J.C.P. 562 ; 39 L.T. 134 ; 26 W.R. 541. Ante p. 198. Commencement of Act 44b' The Eating Act, 1874. 37 & 38 11. — This Act, for the purpose of enabling any hereditament Vict., c. 54. tf) ^ e ^k^ed in or omitted from or valued for the purposes of a Valuation List or a Supplemental or Provisional Valuation 1 ,ist which will come into force after the sixth day of April, one thousand eight hundred and seventy-five, shall come into operation on the passing thereof; but save as aforesaid, or a- is otherwise expressly provided by this Act, shall come into operation on the sixth day of April, one thousand eight hundred and seventy-five ; and the expression " commencement of this Act" shall in this Act be construed accordingly. J* aSSSSta 12- — The provisions of the Sanitary Acts, as defined by the XaSvIE Public Health Act, 1872, with respect to any special assess- ment of wood lands for the purpose of any rate under those Acts shall be deemed to extend to and include land used for a plantation or a wood, or for the growth of saleable underwood, or for both such purposes, and made rateable by this Act to the poor-rate. The Public Health Act, 1872 (35 & 36 Vict., c. 7 ( J). was repealed by the Public Health Act. 1875. saving as to 13.— Nothing in this Act shall apply to a mine of which dues payable in the royalty or dues are for the time being wholly reserved kind. J J .in in kind, or to the owner or occupier thereof. Where the royalty is payable "in kind," or at the option of the landlord in money, the landlord is rightly rated under this section, (g) Repeal of 14-— So much of the Act of the forty-third year of the tSabie 2 ' S reign of Queen Elizabeth, chapter two, intituled "An Act for the Relief of the Poor," as relates to the taxation of an occupier of saleable underwoods is hereby repealed as from the date at which the provisions of this Act with respect to the taxation of occupiers of land used for the growth of saleable underwood come into operation. underwood. (g) Van Mining Co. v. Llanidloes, L.R. 1 Fx. D. 310 : 45 L.J.M.C. 138 : 34 L.T. 642. Ante p. 206. The Rating Act, 1874. 447 Provided that this repeal shall not affect anything duly 37 & 38 Vict, c 54 done or suffered before the said date, or any right acquired — ! ! or liability accrued before the said date, or any legal pro- ceeding or remedy in respect of any such right or liability, and every such legal proceeding or remedy may be carried on and enforced in like manner as if this repeal had not been enacted. 15. — In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires, — teiSse^sect mi 11 l ,i . 15 of 25 & 20 The term "gross value has the same meaning as gross Vict., c. nb), estimated rental in the Union Assessment Committee Act, 1862: The term " local rate " means any county rate, borough rate, highway rate, and other local rate, leviable upon property rateable to the relief of the poor: The term " Valuation List " means, as regards any parish or place for which there is no Valuation List, the poor-rate ; The term " Assessment Committee " means, in relation to any parish or place where there is no Assessment Committee, the persons having power to make and assess the poor-rate in such parish or place. The definition of "gross estimated rental" in the Union Assessment Act, " Gross esti- 1862, is " the rent at which the hereditament might reasonably Vie expected to let from year to year, free of all usual tenants' rates and taxes, and tithe commutation rent-charge, if any." 448 An Act to Amend the Law with respect to Rating Places used for Advertisements. (02 & 53 Vict., c. 27.) short title. 1. — This Act may be cited as the Advertising Stations (Eating) Act, 1889. Before this Act it had been decided in Reg. v. St. Pancras (a) that a wall used for advertisements was not rateable. Definitions. 2- — In this Act the term " owner " means the person for the time being receiving or entitled to receive the rack-rent of the lands or premises in connection with which the word is used, whether on his own account or as agent or trustee for any other person, or who would so receive or be entitled to receive the same if such lands or premises were let at a rack rent ; and the word " person " shall be deemed to include any body of persons whether corporate or unincorporate. Rating land used for adver- tisements and not otherwise occupied. 3. — Where any land is used temporarily or permanently for the exhibition of advertisements, or for the erection of any hoarding, frame, post, wall, or structure used for the exhibition of advertisements but not otherwise occupied, the person who shall permit the same to be so used, or (if he cannot be ascer- tained) the owner thereof, shall be deemed to be in beneficial occupation of such land or part thereof, and shall be rateable in respect thereof to the relief of the poor and to all local rates, according to the value of such use as aforesaid. In Chappell v. St. Botolph (b), where a contractor erected a hoarding round land vested in the Postmaster-General, and allowed the hoarding to be used for advertisements, it was held he was rightly rated within this section. (a) 2 Q.B.D. 581 ; 46 L.J.M.C. 243 ; 37 L.T. 126 ; 25 W.R. 827. {b) (1892) 1 Q.B. 561 ; 65 L.T. 581 ; 40 W.R. 192 ; 56 J.P. 310. The Advertising Stations (Eating) Act, 1889. 449 4. — Where any land or hereditament occupied for other 52 & 53 purposes and rateable in respect thereof to the relief of the poor _^J and local rates, is used temporarily or permanently for the hlS^nte exhibition of advertisements, or for the erection thereon or advertisements, attachment thereto of any hoarding, frame, post, wall, or structure used for the exhibition of advertisements, the gross and rateable value of such land or hereditament shall be so estimated as to include the increased value from such use as aforesaid. 5. — Where, under any power vested in them by any local or useof^oarding general Act, any corporation, board, vestry, urban sanitary or advertisements. other authority shall grant a licence for the temporary erection of any hoard, gantry, scaffold, or other structure upon or over any part of any public highway or upon or over any lands or hereditaments the property of such corporation, board, vestry, sanitary or other authority, such corporation, board, vestry, sanitary or other authority may include in such licence a condition or conditions prohibiting the affixing of any adver- tisement to any such hoard, gantry, scaffold, or other structure, or sanctioning the affixing of advertisements thereto upon payment of such sum and on such conditions as the corporation, board, vestry, sanitary or other authority granting the licence may determine. And any person using any such hoard, gantry, scaffold, or other structure otherwise than as permitted by such licence shall for every offence be liable to a penalty not exceeding five pounds and a further sum not exceeding forty shillings for every day during which such offence shall be continued after notice in writing to discontinue such use shall have been given to such person by such corpora- tion, board, vestry, sanitary or other authority, which penalties may be recovered in a summary way by such corporation, board, vestry, sanitary or other authority. The amount of any payments received or penalties recovered under this section shall be applied by the corporation, board, vestry, sanitary or other authority receiving the same in aid of the rate levied for the repair of the highway. 29 450 The Advertising Stations {Bating) Act, 1889. 52&53 Vict., c. 27. Application of Act to Ireland. 6. — In the application of this Act to Ireland — (1.) Any land used temporarily or permanently for the exhibition of advertisements, or for the erection of any hoarding, frame, post, wall, or structure used for the exhibition of advertisements, shall be deemed to be a rateable hereditament within the meaning of the several Acts relating to the valua- tion of rateable property in Ireland, and shall be separately valued accordingly under the provisions of the said Acts : (2.) The expression " local rates " shall include grand jury cess : (3.) Section four shall be read and construed as if after the words " shall be so estimated " there were in- serted the words "for the purposes of the several Acts relating to the valuation of rateable property in Ireland." Commencement of Act. 7. — This Act shall come into operation on the twenty- ninth day of September, one thousand eight hundred and eighty-nine. 451 An Act to Amend the Laws relating to the Rating of Orchards for Sanitary Purposes. (53 & 54 Vict., c. 17.) WHEREAS it is enacted by section two hundred and eleven 38&39Vict., (1.) (b.) and section two hundred and thirty of the Public Health Act, 1875, that "the occupier of any land used as arable, meadow, or pasture ground only, or as woodlands, market gardens, or nursery grounds," shall be assessed to the general district rate in an urban district or to a separate rate levied in respect of special expenses within the meaning of the said Act in a rural district, in the proportion of one-fourth part only of the net annual value or rateable value of such land : And whereas doubts have arisen whether orchards are or are not included among the lands to which the aforesaid exemptions apply : And whereas it is expedient to remove such doubts, and to render the practice of assessment uniform, and to relieve orchards from all liability to be assessed for sanitary purposes at a higher rate than other cultivated lands : Be it therefore enacted : 1. — From and after the first day of October, one thousand Amendment ^.t eight hundred and ninety, section two hundred and eleven, ^ij^j^a sub-section one, and section two hundred and thirty of the s ' Public Health Act, 1875, shall be read and construed as if the word " orchards " was inserted in each of those sections after the word " woodlands " : Provided that nothing in this Act shall apply to any rate made under either of the said sections on or before the first day of October one thousand eight hundred and ninety. 2. — This Act may be cited as the Public Health (Eating of Short tit i e . Orchards) Act, 1890. 29 a 452 An Act to Amend the Laws relating to the Rating of Allotments for Sanitary Purposes. (54 & 55 Vict., c. 33.) WHEREAS it is enacted by section two hundred and eleven, sub-section (1.) (b.), and section two hundred and thirty of the Public Health Act, 1875, that "the occupier of any land used as arable, meadow, or pasture ground only, or as woodlands, market gardens, or nursery grounds," shall be assessed to the general district rate in an urban district or to a separate rate levied in respect of special expenses within the meaning of the said Act in a rural district, in the proportion of one-fourth part only of the net annual value or rateable value of such land : And whereas doubts have arisen whether allotments are or are not included among the lands to which the aforesaid exemptions apply : and whereas it is expedient to remove such doubts, and to render the practice of assessment uniform, and to relieve allotments from all liability to be assessed for sanitary purposes at a higher rate than other cultivated lands : Be it therefore enacted : Amendment of 1. — From and after the first day of October, one thousand 38 & 39 Vict., c- 65, : Bs. 211 eight hundred and ninety-one, section two hundred and eleven, sub-section one, and section two hundred and thirty of the Public Health Act, 1875, shall be read and construed as if the word " allotments " was inserted in each of those sections after the word " woodlands " : Provided that notbing in this Act shall apply to any rate made under either of the said sections on or before the first day of October one thousand eight hundred and ninety-one. Definition of 2. — " Allotment " means any parcel of land of not more than "allotment." , , . , , two acres in extent and let as an allotment, and cultivated as a garden or a farm, or partly as a garden and partly as a farm. hen title 3. — This Act may be cited as the Allotments Rating Exemp- tion Act, 1891. of Act 453 An Act to Amend the Lain with respect to the Rating of Occupiers of Agricultural Land in England, and for other purposes connected therewith. (59 & 60 Vict., c. 16.) Be it enacted as follows— 1. — (1.) During the continuance of this Act, that is to say, Exemption of the period of five years after the thirty-first day of March next land from half of rates. after the passing of this Act, the occupier of agricultural laud iu England shall be liable in the case of every rate to which this Act applies, to pay one-half only of the rate in the pound payable in respect of buildings and other hereditaments. (2.) This Act shall apply to every rate as defined by this Excepted rates. Act, except a rate — (a.) Which the occupier of agricultural land is liable, as compared with the occupier of buildings or other hereditaments, to be assessed to or to pay in the proportion of one-half or less than one-half, or (/>.) Which is assessed under any commission of sewers or in respect of any drainage, wall, embankment, or other work for the benefit of the land. Section t) gives a definition of "agricultural land." By the same section •• Agricultural id " — ccupier." the word " occupier " includes " owner " where the latter is rated in place . l .' ( 1 ' ( l . of the " occupier." It was held in Stevens v. Gourley (a) that a shop made all in wood Building. without the use of any brickwork was a " building." By s. 211 of the Public Health Act, 1875 (38 & 31) Vict., c. 55), the Where land . •, ]■ , . , n , i , ii ] assessed to one- occupier in an urban sanitary district of any land used as arable, meadow, half or less or pasture ground only, or as woodlands, market-gardens, or nursery- ll,;ni " ue " lm - grounds is to be assessed in respect of the same to the "general district rate" in the proportion of one-fourth part only of the net annual value thereof. Section 233 of the same Act contains a similar provision as to rural districts. (a) 7 C.B. N.S. 99 ; 29 L.J.C.P. 1 ; 1 L.T. 33 ; 6 Jur. N.S. 147. 454 The Agricultural Rates Act, 1896. 59&60 Vict., c. 16. Allotments. Orchards. Library rate — allowance. Lighting and Watching Act. By ;")4 and 55 Vict., c. '■'>'■'< (b), allotments are brouffht within the exemp- tion contained in s. 211 of the Public Health Act ; and by 53 & 54 Vict., c. 17 (c), orchards are brought within the exemption contained in the same section. By the Public Libraries Act, 1892 (55 & 5G Vict., c. 53). s. 18, sub-s. (1) (c),it is provided that where the library district is a parish every person assessed to the poor-rate in the said parish in respect of lands used as arable, meadow, or pasture ground only, or as woodlands or market- gardens, or nursery-grounds, shall be entitled to an allowance of two-thirds of the sum assessed upon him in respect of those lands for the purposes of the library rate. By the Lighting and Watching Act. 1833 (3 & 4 Will. IV., c. 93), s. 33, owners and occupiers of h luses, buildings, and property other than land are rated at a rate three times greater than the owners and occupiers of "land " are rated at. Payment oat of Local Taxation Account in respect of deficiency arising from exemption. 2. — (1). In respect of the deficiency which will arise from the provisions of this Act in the produce of rates made by the spending authorities in England, as hereinafter defined, there shall during the continuance of this Act — (a.) Be paid to the local taxation account an annual sum (in this Act referred to as " the annual grant ") of such amount as is certified under the provisions hereinafter contained, and (b.) Be issued from the local taxation account by half-yearly payments out of the annual grant to each such spending authority a share of that grant of such amount as is certified under the provisions hereinafter contained. Inland Revenue payments. First payment on 31st March, 18S7. (2.) The Commissioners of Inland Revenue, in such manner, by such payments, and under such regulations, as the Treasury direct, shall pay to the local taxation account, out of the proceeds of the estate duty derived in England from personal property, the annual sum required by this section to be paid to that account. (3.) The first of those payments shall be made during the six months ending on the thirty-first day of March next after [b] Ante p. 152. (<■) Ante p. 451. The Agricultural Rates Act, 1896. t55 the passing of this Act, so as to make up a half-yearly payment y^* 6 -$. to meet the issues to spending authorities on account of the six - ensuing months. The " local taxation account " is <.-r.-at.-«l by section 20 of the Loral ( iovcrn- " Local Taxa- ._.. r „, ,, . ,. t i i ti' m Account. ment Act, 1HS8 (51 & 52 Vict., c. 41). The Commissioners ot Inland Revenue are directed to pay into a " local taxation account" at the Bank of England the proceeds in each county of certain " local taxation licences" which proceeds arc to be paid under the direction of the Local Goyernmenl Board to each county council in proportion to the amount of duties collected in each county. 3. — (1.) Where any spending authority require in any half- Contributions year or other period to raise from two or more parishes a sum ^.-^ ne by a rate to which this Act applies, they shall, in determining the net amount to be so raised, deduct the sum issuable to them in respect of the said rate on account of their share of the annual grant for the said half-year or other period, and the net amount after that deduction shall, where it would otherwise be raised in proportion to the rateable value, be raised in propor- tion to the assessable value of those parishes. (2.) For the purposes of this section the assessable value of a parish shall be the rateable value thereof reduced by an amount equal to one-half of the rateable value of the agri- cultural land in the parish. 4. — (1.) The Local Government Board shall, as soon as may L , Pl , lH4ovem . be after the passing of this Act, certify the amount — certify annual sums payable in (a.) Of the annual grant to be paid to the local taxation g^J account; and (b.) Of the share of such grant to be paid annually to each spending authority, under this Act, and for that purpose shall determine in the prescribed manner the amount which for the purposes of this Act is to be taken as having been raised during the last year before the passing of this Act by any rate to which this Act applies for the expenditure of each spending authority. {'2.) Such proportion of the whole amount so taken to be raised in respect of any hereditaments or parishes as the Local 456 The Agricultural Rates Act, 1896. 59&60 Vict, c. 16. Annual grant and share. Inquiries. Amendment of certificate. Finality. Provisional certificates. Government Board estimate to be the proportion of the total rateable value of those hereditaments or parishes which represents the value of agricultural land, shall be taken for the purposes of this Act as the amount raised during the said year, by the said authority, by the said rate, in respect of agricultural land, and one-half of that amount shall be taken as the deficiency which will arise from the provisions of this Act in the produce of the said rate. (3.) A sum equal to the total amount of the deficiencies thus estimated for all the spending authorities in England shall be the amount of the annual grant, and a sum equal to the deficiency thus estimated in the case of each spending authority shall be the share of that spending authority in the annual grant, and the Local Government Board shall certify the same accordingly. (4.) The Local Government Board, in acting under this section, shall obtain such information and make such inquiries, and in such manner as they think fit. (5.) The Local Government Board may in case of error amend, or for the purpose of meeting any alteration in an area or authority to which a certificate relates may vary, a certificate under this section, and any such amendment or variation shall have effect from the date of the original certificate, or any later date fixed by the Board; but, save as aforesaid, a certificate shall be final and binding on all persons. (6.) The Local Government Board may give provisional certificates, if they think necessary for the purpose of enabling the first payments to and out of the local taxation account under this Act to be made, before they have sufficient information to enable them to give final certificates. Separate statement in valuation lists, etc., of value of agricultural land. 5. — In every valuation list and in the basis or standard for any county rate, and in any valuation made by the council of a borough or any other council for the purpose of raising the borough or other rate — (a.) Where separate hereditaments are specified therein the value of agricultural land shall be stated separately from that of any building or other hereditament ; and The Agricultural Rates Act, 1896. 457 (/>.) In every case the total rateable value of the agricultural 59 &60 land in each parish shall be stated separately from vici.,c. id. the total rateable value of the buildings or other hereditaments in such parish' ; and whenever a copy of the total of the rateable value of any parish is required to be sent to any person, such copy shall state both the above-mentioned totals ; and (c.) Where any hereditament consists partly of agricultural 3^* not land and partly of buildings, the gross estimated <£ structural rental of the buildings, when valued separately, in pursuance of this Act, from the agricultural land shall, while the buildings are used only for the cultivation of the said land, be calculated not on structural cost, but on the rent at which they would be expected to let to a tenant from year to year, if they could only be so used ; and the total gross estimated rental of the hereditament shall not be increased by the said separate valuation. 6. — (1.) For the purposes of this Act returns shall be made gSiGwrem- to the Local Government Board in accordance with the pre- ^f e ndh™ ld by . authorities. scribed regulations — (a.) By every spending authority in relation to the sums actually received by them or their predecessors during the year next before the passing of this Act from any rate to which this Act applies ; and (b.) By every Assessment Committee or council whose duty it ^'"™*^' t is to revise or make a valuation list, basis, standard, Committees, or other valuation for any parish, in relation to the gross estimated rental and rateable value of that parish, and the proportion thereof which represents agricultural land ; and (c.) By any such authority, committee, or council in relation to any other prescribed information. (2.) For the purpose of the returns, statements showing the J^j^S" of gross estimated rental and rateable value of the agricultural ^%£f££? land in a parish, and, in the case of any hereditament 458 The Agricultural Rate* Act, 1896. 59 & 60 separately valued which consists in part of agricultural land !U 1 and in part of buildings or other hereditaments, of each such part, shall he made by the overseers of every parish, and corrected by the Assessment Committee, and sent to the surveyor of taxes, and be subject to objection or appeal by the said surveyor and overseers before the Assessment Com- mittee, and the Justices in Special Sessions, and the Court of Quarter Sessions, and subject to the right of any aggrieved ratepayer to be heard upon the said appeal, in such form, within such times, and generally in such manner, and subject to such provisions, as may be prescribed. These provisions shall conform as nearly as circumstances will permit to the existing statutory law respecting valuation lists, as regards notices, rights to inspect and take extracts, the hearing of objections, and otherwise. orders of Local (3.) Tlie Local Grovernment Board may by order make Board. " regulations for the purpose of this section, and also generally for carrying into effect this Act, and those regulations shall be laid before both Houses of Parliament, and if neither House of Parliament within ten days passes a resolution adverse to the said order, they shall be binding in law until varied in the same manner, shall have effect as if they were enacted in this Act, and shall amongst other matters provide — (a.) for fixing, with the concurrence of the Treasury, for the purpose of the division in the statements of agri- cultural land from buildings or other hereditaments, the minimum gross estimated rental and rateable value of the buildings or other hereditaments ; (b.) for giving effect to a notice of objection or appeal by the surveyor of taxes unless it is proved that such notice is unfair or incorrect ; (c.) for the temporary adoption by the county council or any other council, of the division in the return between the total rateable value of agricultural land and that of buildings and other hereditaments ; {(I.) for the alteration of the valuation list in accordance with the statements as finally settled and sending copies of The Agricultural Bates Act, 1896. 159 tlif returns to spending authorities and for applying 59 & 60 Vict., c. 16. and adapting any statutory torm or procedure respect- ing the valuation list or poor-rate ; and (e.) for adapting this Act to eases where there is no valuation list or where a sum is raised by rate from an area no1 a parish. (4.) The regulations may also provide fines for the breach ^ e ^° rbreacb thereof not exceeding forty shillings, or in case of any §£$hS continuing offence not exceeding forty shillings a day during the continuance of the offence, and any such fine may be recovered as a crown debt or to an amount not exceeding one hundred pounds before a Court of Summary Jurisdiction. 7. — (1.) Where the spending authority are a school board ^ to spending ■ \ / jr - o ./ authorities. for a school district which is a parish, or the surveyors of highways, the amount which otherwise would be payable under this Act to the spending authority may be paid to the Guardians of the Poor Law Union in which the parish is situate, and if so paid, shall be paid or credited by them to the spending authority. (2.) Every sum paid under this Act out of the local taxation account to any spending authority in respect of any rate, shall, for the purpose of its application, of account, and of audit, be deemed to have been raised by the said rate. (3.) For the purposes of section ninety-seven of the Elemen- 33434 Vict., tary Education Act, 1870, any amount paid or credited under this Act out of the local taxation account to a school board shall be deemed to have been actually paid by the rating- authority, and the amount which would have been raised or been produced by a rate of threepence in the pound on the rateable value shall be calculated in like manner as if this Acl had not passed. 8.— A limit imposed by any enactment on a rate shall be JJ«[*™g£ construed as being only a limit on the amount to be raised byg^^gSfS? that rate, and where by that limit or otherwise the sum to be es 460 The Agricultural Rate* Act, 1896. 59&60 raised or expended by a local authority is limited by any Vict., c. 16. enac t m ent by reference to a rate, the limit shall be varied so as to enable the local authority to raise or expend the same sum as they might have done if this Act had not passed, and in the case of a spending authority receiving any sum paid under this Act out of the local taxation account in respect of such rate that sum shall be deemed to be part of the sum raised thereby. Definitions. " Rate." " Rateable value." " Valuation list." " Spending authority." " Occupier." " Local taxa- tion account.' ; Prescribed. " AgricultuH land." 9. — In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires : — The expression "rate" means a rate made during the continuance of this Act, the proceeds of which are applicable to public local purposes, and which is leviable on the basis of an assessment in respect of the yearly value of property, and includes any sum which, though obtained in the first instance by a precept, certificate, or other instrument requiring payment from some authority or officer, is or can be ultimately raised out of a rate as before defined : The expression "rateable value" in the case of the county rate, or any other rate, levied according to any annual value not being rateable value as stated in the valuation list, means that annual value : The expression " valuation list " means a valuation list under the Union Assessment Committee Acts, 1862 and 1864, or, in the Metropolis, under the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1889 : The expression " spending authority " means any of the local authorities in England mentioned in the schedule to this Act: The expression " occupier " includes owner where the owner is rated in place of the occupier : The expression "local taxation account" has the same meaning as in the Local Government Act, 1888 : The expression " prescribed " means prescribed by order of the Local Government Board : The expression " agricultural land " means any land used as arable, meadow, or pasture ground only, cottage gardens exceeding one quarter of an acre, market gardens, nursery The Agricultural Bates Act, 1896. 461 grounds, orchards, or allotments, but does not include land 59 & 60 occupied together with a house as a park, gardens, other than Vict '' Cl ' as aforesaid, pleasure grounds, or any land kept or preserved mainly or exclusively for purposes of sport or recreation, or land used as a race-course : The expression "cottage" means a house occupied as a "Coi dwelling by a person of the labouring classes : The expression "year" means the local financial year, that is "Year." to say, the twelve months beginning on the first day of April, or where the spending authority do not make up their accounts to that day on the nearest day thereto to which they do make up their accounts or on any other prescribed day. In Purser v. Worthing Local Board (d) a market gardener and nursery- Land used as a man was the occupier of a piece of land upon which were built sixteen ^Sar^ greenhouses or glasshouses which practically covered the surface of the grounds. land ; they were built on brick foundations and were used for the purpose of growing fruit and vegetables for sale in the course of his business. The Court of Appeal held that the land with the greenhouses upon it con- stituted a market garden or nursery ground within the meaning of the Public Health Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict., c. 55), s. 211, and that the gardener was liable to be rated to the general district rate in the proportion of one-fourth part only of the net annual value of the property. 10.— This Act may be cited as "The Agricultural Eates short title. Act, 1896." SCHEDULE. Spending Authorities. County councils, councils of county boroughs, councils of [sec s. 9.] boroughs, and other urban districts and of rural districts, boards of guardians, the receiver of the Metropolitan Police District, school boards, highway boards, surveyors of high- ways. {d) 18 Q.B.D. 818; 56 L.J.M.C. 78 ; 35 W.R. 682 ; 51 J. P. 596. 462 AGRICULTURAL RATES ORDER, 1890. [July 28, 1896.] Co tfjc County Councils of the several Administrative Counties in England ; — To the other Spending Authorities, as defined hy the Agricultural Eates Act, 1896 ; — To the Union Assessment Committees and the Assessment Committees in the Metropolis ; — To the Overseers of the Poor of every Parish in England ; — And to all others whom it may concern. WHEEEAS by the Agricultural Eates Act, 1896 (herein- after called "the Act"), it is enacted that during the con- tinuance of the Act the occupiers of agricultural land in England shall be liable in the case of every rate to which the Act applies to pay one-half only of the rate in the pound payable in respect of buildings and other hereditaments ; and provision is made for the annual payment of such a sum to the Local Taxation Account, and for the half-yearly payment out of that account of such amounts to Spending Authorities as may be certified in manner herein-after recited ; And whereas by Sections 4, 6, and 9 of the Act it is enacted that— "4. — (1.) The Local Government Board shall, as soon as " may be after the passing of this Act, certify the amount — " (a) of the annual grant to be paid to the Local Taxation " Account ; and "(b) of the share of such grant to be paid annually to " each spending authority, Agricultural Bates Order, 1896. t63 "under this Act, and for that purpose shall determine in the "prescribed manner the amount which for the purposes of this " Act is to be taken as having been raised during the last y< sar "before the passing of this Act by any rate to which this Ad " applies for the expenditure of each spending authority. "6. — (1.) For the purposes of this Act returns shall be " made to the Local Government Board in accordance with " the prescribed regulations — " (a) by every spending authority in relation to the sums " actually received by them or their predecessors " during the year next before the passing of this " Act from any rate to which this Act applies ; and " (b) by every Assessment Committee or council whose duty " it is to revise or make a valuation list, basis, " standard or other valuation for any parish, in " relation to the gross estimated rental and rateable " value of that parish, and the proportion thereof " which represents agricultural land ; and " (c) by any such authority, committee, or council in " relation to any other prescribed information. " (2.) For the purpose of the returns, statements showing " the gross estimated rental and rateable value of the agri- " cultural land in a parish, and, in the case of any heredita- " ment separately valued which consists in part of agricultural " land and in part of buildings or other hereditaments, of " each such part, shall be made by the overseers of every "parish, and corrected by the Assessment Committee, and " sent to the surveyor of taxes, and be subject to objection " or appeal by the said surveyor and overseers before the " Assessment Committee, and the Justices in Special Sessions, " and the Court of Quarter Sessions, and subject to the rigW " of any aggrieved ratepayer to be heard upon the said " appeal, in such form, within such times, and generally in " such manner, and subject to such provisions, as may be " prescribed. These provisions shall conform as nearly as 464 Agricultural Rates Order, 1896. " circumstances will permit to the existing statutory law " respecting valuation lists, as regards notices, rights to " inspect and take extracts, the hearing of objections, and " otherwise. " (3.) The Local Grovernment Board may by order make " regulations for the purpose of this section, and also " generally for carrying into effect this Act, and those " regulations shall be laid before both Houses of Parliament, " and if neither House of Parliament within ten days passes " a resolution adverse to the said order, they shall be binding " in law until varied in the same manner, shall have effect as " if they were enacted in this Act, and shall amongst other " matters provide — " (a) for fixing, with the concurrence of the Treasury, for " the purpose of the division in the statements of " agricultural land from buildings or other heredita- " ments, the minimum gross estimated rental and " rateable value of the buildings or other here- " ditaments ; " (b) for giving effect to a notice of objection or appeal by " the surveyor of taxes unless it is proved that such " notice is unfair or incorrect ; " (c) for the temporary adoption by the county council or " any other council, of the division in the return " between the total rateable value of agricultural " land and that of buildings and other heredita- " ments ; " (d) for the alteration of the valuation list in accordance " with the statements as finally settled and sending " copies of the returns to spending authorities and " for applying and adapting any statutory form or " procedure respecting the valuation list or poor- " rate ; and " (e) for adapting this Act to cases where there is no " valuation list, or where a sum is raised by rate " from an area not a parish. Agricultural Rates Order, 1896. 465 " (4.) The regulations may also provide fines for the "breach thereof not exceeding forty shillings, or in case of " any continuing offence not exceeding forty shillings a day " during the continuance of the offence, and any such fine " may be recovered as a crown debt or to an amount not " exceeding one hundred pounds before a Court of Summary " Jurisdiction." " 9. — In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires, — * * * * * " The expression ' prescribed ' means prescribed by order " of the Local Grovernment Board." And whereas the Treasury have concurred in these Regula- tions so far as is required by Section 6 (3) (a) of the Act : NOW THEREFORE, in pursuance of the powers given to Us by the Act, and by any other Statutes in that behalf, We, the Local Grovernment Board, Do by this Our Order make and prescribe the following Regulations for the purposes of the Act ; Definitions. Article I. — In these Regulations, unless the context other- wise requires, — The expression " rate " means a rate the proceeds of which are applicable to public local purposes, and which is leviable on the basis of an assessment in respect of the yearly value of property, and which is not a rate — (a) which the occupier of agricultural land is liable, as compared with the occupier of buildings or other hereditaments, to be assessed to or to pay in the proportion of one-half or less than one-half, or (h) which is assessed under any commission of sewers or in respect of any drainage, wall, embankment, or other work for the benefit of the land ; 30 466 Agricultural Bates Order, 1896. and includes any sum which, though obtained in the first instance by a precept, certificate, or other instrument requiring payment from some Authority or officer, is or can he ultimately raised out of a rate as before defined. The expression " rateable value " in the case of the County Rate, or any other rate levied according to any annual value not being rateable value as stated in the Valuation List, means that annual value. The expression " Valuation List " means a Valuation List under the Union Assessment Committee Acts, 1862 and 18(54 or, in the Metropolis, under the Valuation (Metro- polis) Act, 1869. The expression " Spending Authority " means any of the following Local Authorities in England existing at the passing of the Act, that is to say, County Councils, Councils of County Boroughs, Councils of Boroughs and other Urban Districts and of Rural Districts, Boards of Guardians, the Receiver for the Metropolitan Police Dis- trict, School Boards, Highway Boards, and Surveyors of Highways. The expression " expenditure of the Authority " means the expenditure of the Authority exclusive of payments to other Spending Authorities under Precepts or Orders ; except that in the case of a contributory School Board it includes the payments made to the School-owning School Board. The expression " agricultural land " means any land used as arable, meadow, or pasture ground only, cottage gardens exceeding one quarter of an acre, market gardens, nursery grounds, orchards, or allotments, but does not include land occupied together with a house as a park, gardens other than as aforesaid, pleasure-grounds, or any land kept or preserved mainly or exclusively for purposes of sport or recreation, or land used as a racecourse. The expression " cottage " means a house occupied as a dwelling by a person of the labouring classes. Agricultural Rates Order, 1896. 467 The expression " last financial year " moans the year ending on the Thirty-first day of March, One thousand eight hundred and ninety-six, or, if the Spending Authority do not make up their accounts to that day, then the year ending on the nearest day thereto to which they make up their accounts ; except that in the case of a School Board it means the year ending on the Twenty-fifth day of March, One thousand eight hundred and ninety-six, whether the accounts are made up yearly or half-yearly ; and that in any other case in which the accounts of a Spending Authority are not made up to a day in March or April, it shall mean such day as the Board may determine. The expression " Overseers " includes any persons or Body performing the duties of Overseers so far as regards the Assessment of Rates for the Relief of the Poor. The expression " Assessment Committee " means the Union Assessment Committee, or any Committee making a Valua- tion List. The expression " County Council " includes any Joint Com- mittee appointed under Section 33 (2) of the Local Govern- ment Act, 1888 ; except that such a Joint Committee shall not be a Spending Authority for the purpose of these Regulations. The expression " the Siuweyor of Taxes " includes any person authorised by him in writing to act on his behalf. The expression "the Board" means the Local Government Board. Returns to be made by Spending Authoriti>s. Article II. — Each Spending Authority shall, in pursuance of Section 6 of the Act, cause returns to be made to the Board, and for this purpose shall cause such of the forms contained in the Schedules A. to I. inclusive hereto as apply to the Authority to be filled up with a correct statement of the particulars relat- ing to the several matters therein mentioned, and to be signed by the Clerk, or, in the case of a return made by a Surveyor of Highways, by the Surveyor. 30 a 468 Agricultural Rates Order, 1896. Each return shall be sent to the Board on or before the First day of September, One thousand eight hundred and ninety-six. Provided that Appendix A. in the Parliamentary Return as to the Accounts of the Metropolitan Police, 1895-6 (Parlia- mentary Paper, 16-3, Session 1896), shall he deemed to be the Return made by the Receiver for the Metropolitan Police District under this Article. Any further information which the Board may from time to time require for the purposes of the Act in regard to sums received by any Spending Authority or their predecessors during or before or after the last financial year, or as to any alteration in the area of the County or other District of the Authority since the commencement of the last financial year, or in regard to any other matter, shall be furnished by the Authority within the time fixed in that behalf by the Board. In what manner the Amount which is to be taken Jor the purposes oj the Act as the Anion id raised during the last Financial Year for the Expenditure of the Authority by any Rate to which the Act applies is to be determined. Article III. — The amount which shall be taken for the purposes of the Act as the amount raised during the last financial year for the expenditure of each Spending Authority by any rate to which the Act applies shall be such sum as the Board shall determine after considering the returns made to them by the Spending Authority, and making such corrections therein as may appear to them to be required on examination of the same or by reason of any further information obtained by the Board from any Spending Authority or otherwise : Provided that in determining the amount to be taken as aforesaid for the purposes of the Act the amount included in precepts made payable during the last financial year, or, in the case of a rate collected by the Authority, the amount collected during the year shall be taken as the amount raised during the Agricultural Rates Order, 1896. 169 year; but the Board shall take into consideration any sum raised during the last financial year by the predecessors of a Spending' Authority constituted after the commencement of that year, and may take into consideration any alteration" in the area of the County or other District of the Spending Authority since the commencement of the last financial year, and any special circumstances affecting the amount raised by the Spending Authority or their predecessors during the year. Statements to be made by Overseers. Article IV.— 1. The Overseers of every Parish shall as soon as practicable make, and shall, on or before the Seventh day of September, One thousand eight hundred and ninety-six, send to the Assessment Committee and to the Surveyor of Taxes in whose district the Parish is comprised, statements as follows : — («.) If there is no agricultural land in the Parish, the Over- seers shall make and send a statement to that effect. {/>.) If there is any agricultural land in the Parish, the Over- seers shall make and send a statement showing as regards each hereditament separately valued in the Valuation List in force on the Twentieth day of July, One thousand eight hundred and ninety-six, and con- sisting wholly or in part of agricultural land, the particulars stated in the said Valuation List with regard thereto, and also showing, with regard to every separately valued hereditament which is partly agricultural land and partly buildings or other here- ditaments not being agricultural land, the gross estimated rental and rateable value of the agricultural land and the gross estimated rental and rateable value of the buildings and other hereditaments not being- agricultural land. 2. Where any right of sporting is severed from the occupa- tion of the land and is not let, and the Assessment Committee 470 Agricultural Raffs Order, 1896. have certified the amount by which the rateable value of the land is increased by reason of its being estimated as if the right of sporting were not so severed, such amount (according to the Certificate of the Assessment Committee) shall be included in the rateable value of the buildings and other hereditaments. 3. Subject to what is herein-after provided in this Article and in Article Y. as to the value of the buildings and other hereditaments, the separate values of agricultural land, and of buildings or other hereditaments, shall be ascertained by divid- ing the value stated in the Valuation List in force on the Twentieth clay of July, One thousand eight hundred and ninety-six, between the agricultural land and the buildings or other hereditaments assessed therewith, according to the best estimate the Overseers can make ; the gross estimated rental of the buildings and other hereditaments, when the buildings are used only for the cultivation of the land, being calculated not on structural cost, but on the rent at which they would be expected to let from year to year, if they could only be so used ; provided that neither the gross estimated rental nor the rateable value of the whole hereditament shall be altered by the separate valuation of the parts thereof. 4. The statement shall also show (1) the total rateable value of the Parish according to the said Valuation List ; (2) the total rateable value of the agricultural land in the Parish ; (3) the total rateable value of the buildings and other heredita- ments in the Parish, not being agricultural land. The rateable values so shown in the statement shall not include the annual value, according to the estimate on which any contribution in aid of rates is paid, of the hereditaments within the Parish in the occupation of the Crown, but the total annual value of such property shall be separately stated. 5. Each statement shall be in the Form appropriate thereto shown in Schedule K. or Schedule L. hereto, shall contain a correct statement of all the particulars specified therein, and shall be signed by the Overseers or the majority of them. Agricultural Bates Order, L896. 171 As to the Minimum Value of th<> Buildings and other Hereditaments where a separately valued Hereditament has to be divided under the Regulations. Article V. — 1. Where in the Valuation List in force on the Twentieth day of July, One thousand eight hundred and ninety-six, agricultural land is valued separately from the building's or other hereditaments, the gross estimated rental and rateable value of such buildings or other hereditaments shall, for the purpose of the statements under the Act, be those stated in the Valuation List. 2. Where in the Valuation list in force on the Twentieth day of July, One thousand eight hundred and ninety-six, any hereditament separately valued consists in part of agricultural land and in part of buildings whether with or without other hereditaments, the hereditament shall be divided so that the agricultural land alone shall be entered in the Valuation List as one hereditament, and the buildings and other hereditaments as another separate hereditament, so that the value of the agri- cultural land shall be divided from the value of the buildings and other hereditaments. 3. Upon such division the minimum rateable value of the buildings and other hereditaments shall, subject to the proviso hereinafter contained, be as follows : — (a.) If they include a house, then, the minimum rateable value shall be one-eighth of the rateable value of the undivided hereditament as previously stated in the Valuation List : (b.) If the said buildings or other hereditaments do not include a house, then the minimum rateable value shall be five per cent, of the rateable value of the undivided hereditament, as previously stated in the Valuation List : (c.) Provided that — (i.) if in any special case it appears to the Overseers or Assessment Committee that by reason of the 472 Agricultural Rate* Order, 1896. character or condition of the house or buildings or other excej)tional circumstances, the minimum rateable value fixed by the above Regulations is higher than the rateable value would be if ascer- tained in the ordinary way, they may, subject to the consent of the Surveyor of Taxes, fix a rateable value below the minimum fixed by the above Regulations, and the rateable value so fixed shall be substituted for the minimum rateable value fixed by the above Regulations ; (ii.) if the said minimum rateable value of the house, buildings, and other hereditaments would otherwise be less than three pounds, it shall, notwithstanding any such consent of the Surveyor of Taxes, be three pounds ; (iii.) if the house is assessed to the inhabited house duty, and the said minimum rateable value for the house, buildings, and other hereditaments together would otherwise be less than the annual value of the house as so assessed, it shall, notwithstanding any consent of the Surveyor of Taxes, be the annual value of the house, as so assessed. 4. Upon the division mentioned in Clause 2 of this Article the minimum gross estimated rental of the buildings and other hereditaments shall be the minimum rateable value thereof, with the addition of a sum equal to that which would have been deducted from the gross estimated rental to find the said rateable value, according to the character of the hereditaments and the practice of the Assessment Committee. 5. The gross estimated rental of the buildings and other hereditaments and that of the agricultural land shall not when added together exceed the gross estimated rental of the undivided hereditament. 6. Notice in the Form shown in Schedule M. hereto shall be given to the Surveyor of Taxes by the Overseers or the Agricultural Rates Order, L896. t73 Assessment Committee of all cases in which the rateable value is fixed by them, subject to his consent, below the minimum fixed by these Regulations ; and such notice shall be sen! to the Surveyor of Taxes at the same time as the statemenl mentioned in Article IV. or the notice mentioned in Article VII. 2, as the case may be. Proceedings of Assessment Committee in case Overseers fail to make Statement Article VI. — If the Overseers fail to send on or before the Seventh day of September, One thousand eight hundred and ninety-six, to the Assessment Committee a statement that there is no agricultural land in the Parish, or a statement such as is required in Article IV. 1 (b.), the Committee, unless the Board otherwise direct, shall, without any consent of the Guardians of the Poor Law Union, forthwith appoint some person to make and sign such statement within such time as may be fixed by the Committee, not exceeding seven days from the date of his appointment, and the person so appointed shall, when he shall have made such Statement, forthwith send a copy thereof and of the Notice, if any, required by Article V. 6. to the Overseers and to the Surveyor of Taxes ; and the state- ment so made and signed shall be dealt with under these Regulations as if it had been made by the Overseers: Provided that — 1. The making of the said statement shall not relieve the Overseers from any liability they may have incurred in consequence of their default. 2. Every Assessment Committee shall, on the Tenth day of September, One thousand eight hundred and ninety- six, inform the Board whether they have received the statements in respect of all the Parishes in the Union, and, if not, in respect of what Parishes statements have not been received, and what measures have been taken by them in those cases. 474 Agricultural Bates Order, 1896. Correction of the Overseers Statements by the Assessment Committee. Article VII. — 1. As soon as practicable alter the receipt by the Assessment Committee of the statement made by the Overseers under Article IV., the Committee shall take the statement into consideration and ascertain, so far as possible, the correctness of the several particulars therein, and where the statement appears to them to be incorrect or defective, or inconsistent with Article IV. 3. or Article V., shall amend it. For this purpose the Committee shall exclude from the agri- cultural land any hereditament which the Overseers have inserted in the statement as such, but which appears to them not to be agricultural land as defined in the Act, and shall insert in the statement as agricultural land any hereditament which, in their opinion, the Overseers have wrongly omitted ; and may alter the respective values, as shown in the statement, of the agricultural land and of the buildings or other heredita- ments in any separately valued hereditament comprising both agricultural land and buildings or other hereditaments ; but the Committee shall not alter the total value, as shown in the Valuation List, of any such separately valued hereditament, or contravene the provisions of Article IV. 3, or Article V. The Committee shall ascertain the correctness of the totals of the value of the agricultural land and of the buildings and other hereditaments in the Parish, altering the same, if necessary, according to the corrections made by them in the particulars of the statement, or as may be reenvired by reason of any omission or error. 2. The Committee shall complete the examination and cor- rection of the statement on or before the Twenty-eighth day of September, One thousand eight hundred and ninety-six, and shall on or before the Third day of October, One thousand eight hundred and ninety-six. cause notice of any correction made by them to be given to the Surveyor of Taxes and to the Overseers in the Form shown in Schedule N. hereto. Agricultural Rates Order, 1K96. l?-~> Objections by the Surveyor of Taxes and hy the Overseers. Article VIII. — 1. The Surveyor of Taxes shall within fourteen days of the receipt by him of the notice of any corrections of the Overseers' statement by the Assessment Committee or within fourteen days after the Third .day of October, One thousand eight hundred and ninety-six, if he has then received no notice of any such corrections, give to the Committee notice of his objections to the statement or to any correction thereof on the ground (a) that any separately valued hereditament has been wrongly entered as agricultural land, or (b) that the value of such buildings and other hereditaments not being agricultural land as art' included in a separately valued hereditament comprising also agricultural land has hern under-estimated, and in the latter case shall state the gross estimated rental and rateable value of the buildings and other hereditaments not being agricultural land which, in his opinion, should be inserted in the statement. The Surveyor shall at the same time give notice of such objections to the Overseers. The Surveyor of Taxes shall within the time within which he is required to give notice of his objections, if any, to the statement or any correction thereof, state in what cases he consents and in what cases he refuses his consent to the valuation of any buildings and other hereditaments being fixed at less than the minimum rateable value. Such statement shall be made in manner shown on the Form in Schedule M. hereto, a copy of which with such statement thereon shall be forthwith sent by him to the Overseers and to the Assessment Committee. 2. The Overseers shall within seven days after the receipt by them of notice of any correction made in the statement by the Assessment Committee, or of any objection made by the Surveyor of Taxes, give notice to the Committee and to the Surveyor if they intend to object to the same. 3. The Assessment Committee shall fix a day, not later than the Fourth day of November, One thousand eight hundred and ninety-six, for considering the objections of which the Surveyor 476 Agricultural Rates Order, 1896. of Taxes and the Overseers have given notice, and shall give them not less than four days' notice of the day so fixed. At their meeting on that day, or at some adjournment thereof, not later than the Eleventh day of November, One thousand eight hundred and ninety-six, they shall hear the Surveyor of Taxes and the Overseers if he or they desire to be heard, and decide whether the statement shall stand, or whether and in what way the same shall be altered, provided that any alteration required by an objection of the Surveyor of Taxes shall be made by the Committee unless it is proved to the satisfaction of the Com- mittee to be unfair or incorrect. 4. In any case where the Surveyor of Taxes has refused his consent to the rateable value of any buildings or other heredita- ments not being agricultural land being fixed at less than the minimum, the Assessment Committee shall correct the statement by entering therein the rateable value of the hereditament at an amount not less than the minimum. 5. The statement as settled by the Committee shall be forthwith approved under the hands of three members of the Committee present at the meeting at which the same is approved, and shall be forthwith delivered to the Overseers and by them deposited in such manner, and such notice shall be given of the deposit, and there shall be the like right of inspecting and demanding and taking copies of or extracts from such statement, as in the case of a Valuation List under Section 17 of the Union Assessment Committee Act, 1862 ; and at the expiration of seven days from the deposit of the state- ment the same shall be returned by the Overseers to the Clerk to the Committee. 6. For the purposes of the examination and correction of the Overseers' statements and the hearing and deciding objections by the Surveyor of Taxes and the Overseers under these Regulations, the Assessment Committee shall have the like powers of calling for the production of any public or parochial rates and assessments, or for extracts thereof, and of requiring the attendance of persons having the custody of such Agricultural Rates Order, 1896. 177 rates and assessments, or the collection thereof, as they have under the Union Assessment Committee Ads, L862 to 1880, for the purpose of correcting the Valuation Lists and hearing and deciding on the objections thereto, and generally, so far as may be necessary for the purposes of the Act, may proceed under these Regulations as if the statements made by the Overseers were Valuation Lists made by them, and the provisions of the Union Assessment Committee Acts, 1862 to L880, shall, except so far as these Regulations shall otherwise provide, apply, with the necessary modifications, as nearly as circumstances will permit. Provided that where notice of any objection has not been duly given, the Committee may proceed to hear and decide the objection, if the Surveyor of Taxes or Overseers, as the case may be, to whom notice should have been given, consent to the same being so heard and decided. Appeals to Special and Quarter Sessions against Decisions of the Assessment Committee. Article IX. — 1. The Siuweyor of Taxes or the Overseers, if dissatisfied with the decision of the Assessment Committee on any objection, may appeal to the Special Sessions held for the purposes of the Act as herein-after provided, written notice of such appeal being given not later than the Twentieth day of November, One thousand eight hundred and ninety-six, by the Surveyor of Taxes or the Overseers, whichever of them shall be the Appellant, to the other of them and to the Assessment Committee and to the occupier of the hereditaments to which the appeal relates ; and such occupier shall be entitled to appear and be heard on the appeal. The Justices in each Petty Sessional Division shall, on or before the Sixteenth day of November, One thousand eight hundred and ninety-six, appoint a day for the holding of a Special Sessions for the hearing of such appeals ; such day to be not earlier than the Second day of December, One thousand eight hundred and ninety-six, and not later than the Ninth day of December, One thousand eighl hundred and ninety-six. 478 Agricultural Rates Order, 1896. 2. The Special Sessions shall hear and decide the appeal as if the same were an appeal against a rate under Section 6 of the Parochial Assessments Act, 1830, and shall have the like powers for this purpose (including the power of awarding costs) as if the same were an appeal under that Section, and the decision of the Special Sessions shall be binding and conclusive unless the Surveyor of Taxes or the Overseers appeal against the same to the next practicable Court of Quarter Sessions : Provided that it shall be sufficient if notice of the appeal to such Court be given by the Surveyor, or the Overseers, whichever of them may be the Appellant, to the other of them and to the Assessment Committee and to the occupier ten clear days before the day appointed for the said Court of Quarter Sessions ; and the occupier shall have a right to appear and be heard on the appeal. 3. The Surveyor of Taxes or the Overseers, if dissatisfied with the decision of the Assessment Committee on any objection, may, instead of appealing to Special Sessions, appeal to the next practicable Court of Quarter Sessions, and such appeal shall be made, and the Court of Quarter Sessions shall hear and decide the appeal in manner provided with respect to appeals by the Summary Jurisdiction Act, 1879, as if the Assessment Committee were a Court of Summary Jurisdiction, and shall have the like powers for this purpose (including the power of awarding costs) as if the appeal were under that Act. Written notice of any such appeal shall be sent not later than the Twentieth day of November, One thousand eight hundred and ninety-six, by the Surveyor or the Overseers, whichever of them shall be the Appellant, to the other of them and to the Assessment Committee and to the occupier of the hereditaments to which the appeal relates ; and the occupier shall have the right to appear and be heard on the appeal. 4. In any notice of appeal to Special or Quarter Sessions by the Surveyor of Taxes, he shall state the gross estimated rental and rateable value of the buildings and other hereditaments not being agricultural land, which, in his opinion, should be inserted in the statement ; and the Court before whom the Agricultural Rates Order, 1896. 479 appeal shall be heard shall give effect to the notice unless it is proved to the satisfaction of the Court to be unfair or incorrect. 5. Neither the Assessment Committee in deciding- on any objection, nor Special or Quarter Sessions on any appeal under these Regulations, shall alter the total gross estimated rental, or rateable value of any separately valued hereditament, as shown in the Valuation List, or the total rateable value of the Parish, or contravene the pro visions of Article IV. 3, or Article V. 6. The Court of Special Sessions or Quarter Sessions who shall decide any appeal under these Regulations shall direct what alteration, if any, shall be made in the statement, so far as relates to the subject of appeal, and the Committee shall alter the statement accordingly. Returns to be made by the Assessment Committee to the Local Government Board. Article X. — 1. The Assessment Committee shall, on or before the Thirteenth day of November, One thousand eight hundred and ninety-six, inform the Board whether the state- ments relating to the several Parishes in the Union have been approved by them ; and shall, on or before the Twenty-fourth day of November, One thousand eight hundred and ninety-six, make and send to the Board a return in accordance witli the statements approved by them. 2. The return shall be made in the Form in Schedule 0. hereto, shall contain a correct statement of all the particulars specified therein, and shall be signed by three members of the Assessment Committee and by the Clerk. 3. The Assessment Committee shall on the Twenty-sixth day of January, One thousand eight hundred and ninety-seven, send to the Board a return stating the gross estimated rental and rateable value of the agricultural land, and of the buildings and other hereditaments not being agricultural land, in each Parish according to the statements as altered in accordance with 480 Agricultural Rates Order, 1896. the appeals, if any, to Special or Quarter Sessions decided up to that date, and as to the appeals still pending. 4. If any appeals are so pending, the Assessment Committee shall, as soon as practicable after all such appeals have been decided or withdrawn, send a corrected return to the Board showing the effect, if any, of the same on the value of the agricultural land, and of the buildings and other hereditaments not being agricultural land, in the Parish ; or, if no alteration has been made in the value as stated in the last return, shall inform the Board accordingly. 5. Any return required by paragraphs 3 or 4 to be sent to the Board shall he in the Forms in Schedule P. or Schedule Q. hereto (as the case may require), and shall contain a correct statement of all the particulars specified therein, and shall be signed by three members of the Assessment Committee and by the Clerk. 6. At the same times when the Assessment Committee make the returns or send the information mentioned in paragraphs 3 and 4 to the Board, copies thereof, or of so much thereof as relates to the County or Borough, shall be sent by the Com- mittee to the County Council, and to the Council of any Borough wholly or partly comprised in the Poor Law Union. Copies of so much of any return made under paragraph 3 as relates to Parishes comprised in the Metropolitan Police District shall also be sent by the Assessment Committee to the Receiver for the Metropolitan Police District. Statements and Returns to be made by Overseers where there is no Valuation List for a Parish. Article XL — Where there is no Valuation List for a Parish the Overseers shall make a statement as required by Article IV., and shall on or before the Seventh day of Sep- tember, One thousand eight hundred and ninety-six, send a copy thereof, together with such a notice as is mentioned in Agricultural Rates Order, 1896. 481 Article V. 6, if such a notice is required, to the Surveyor of Taxes, who shall, on or before the Seventeenth day of October, One thousand eight hundred and ninety-six, send to them notice of any objections to the statement, and also inform them in what cases, if any, he gives his consent under Article V. •'! [(■.) (i.) The Overseers shall fix a day, not later than the Fourth day of November, One thousand eight hundred and ninety-six, for considering the objections of the Surveyor of Taxes, and shall give him not less than seven days' notice thereof. At their meeting on that day or on some adjourn- ment thereof, not later than the Eleventh day of November, One thousand eight hundred and ninety-six, they shall, after hearing the Surveyor of Taxes, if he desires to be heard, decide whether the statement as made by them shall stand, or whether and in what way the same shall be altered ; provided that any alteration required by an objection of the Surveyor of Taxes shall be made by the Overseers unless it is proved to their satis- faction to be unfair or incorrect. The statement as settled by the Overseers shall be signed by them or a majority of them. The provisions of Articles IV , V., and VIII. shall, with the substitution of the last poor rate made before the passing of the Act for the Valuation List, and with such other modifications as may be required, apply to the statements to be made under this Article, and to the objections of the Surveyor of Taxes thereto, and the Surveyor of Taxes shall have the like power of appeal to Special or Quarter Sessions against any decision of the Overseers as he would have under Article IX. against a decision of the Assessment Committee, and Article IX. shall apply to such appeals, and to the Special and Quarter Sessions to be held for the hearing thereof, and the statement shall be altered by the Overseers in accordance with the decisions on appeal. The Eeturns required by Article X. to be made by the Assessment Committee shall, in cases coming under tins Axtiole, be made with the necessary modifications, and copies thereoi shall be sent by the Overseers, as if they were an Assessment Committee. 31 482 Agricultural Rates Order, 1896. - Return to be made by any Council or Body, not being an Assessment Committee, whose duly it is to revise or make, for the purpose of any Rate to ivhich the Act applies, a Basis, Standard, or other Vcduaiion. Article XII. — 1. Whether the basis, standard, or valuation made, for the purpose of any rate to which the Act applies, by any Council or Body, not being the Eeceiver for the Metro- politan Police District or an Assessment Committee or Overseers, contains particulars of separately valued hereditaments, or contains only the total value of each Parish, the Council or Body shall make a return showing (1) the total net annual value of the hereditaments in each Parish according to the basis, standard, or valuation in force at the passing of the Act, and (2) the total net annual values of the agricultural land and of the buildings and other hereditaments not being agricultural land, in each Parish, divided according to the proportion in which the total rateable value of the Parish is divided in the return made by the Assessment Committee as required in Article X. 3, the form of which is shown in Schedule P. hereto, or by Overseers as required by Article XL The return shall be made in the Form Xo. 1 in the Schedule P., or in the Form in the Schedule 8. hereto, as the case may require, and shall be signed by the Clerk to the County Council, or, in the case of a Council or Body other than a County Council, by the Mayor or Chairman, or two members, and by the Clerk ; and shall be sent to the Board on or before the Tenth day of February, One thousand eight hundred and ninety-seven. Copies of the returns, so far as they relate to Parishes within the Metropolitan Police District, shall at the same time be sent to the Eeceiver for the Metropolitan Police District. 2. Every County Council shall also make n return showing the net annual value of each area into which the County is divided for special County purposes, and the net annual value of each such area divided between agricultural land, and build- ings and other hereditaments not being agricultural land, in the proportion in which the total rateable value of the Parish or Agricultural Bates Order, 1896. 483 Parishes in the area is so divided according to the return made by the Assessment Committee as required in Article X. 3, the form of which is shown in Schedule P. hereto, or by the Over- seers as required by Article XL The return shall be made in the form shown in Form No. 2. in Schedule R. hereto, and shall contain the information specified therein, and shall be signed by the Clerk to the County Council, and shall be sent to the Board on or before the Tenth day of February, One thousand eight hundred and ninety-seven. 3. Where there is no Valuation List for a Parish the heredit- aments included in the Statement settled as provided in Article XL shall, in the next rate made after the Thirty-first day of March, One thousand eight hundred and ninety-seven, be assessed by the Overseers as agricultural land, or as buildings and other hereditaments not being agricultural land, according as they shall be so entered, and at the several values specified, in the Statement settled by the Overseers subject to any alterations made thereon on appeal before the making of the rate. Return to be made as to Highway Areas, or Hereditaments exempt from Highway Bate. Article XIII.— 1. (a) Every Surveyor of Highways or Board for the repair of the Highways of a Parish, if the High- way Parish is not co-extensive with a Poor Law Parish, or if any hereditaments therein rateable to the Poor Pate are exempl from the payment of Highway Rates, and (/>) every District Council levying a Highway Rate on any area not co-extensive with one or more Poor Law Parishes, or a rate wholly <>t' partly for Highway purposes from the payment whereof, or of so much thereof as is for Highway purposes, certain hereditaments rateable to the Poor Rate are exempt, shall mnke and send to the Board a return in the Form shown in Schedule T. hereto, correctly stating the several particulars therein specified. 2. The return shall be signed by the Surveyor of Highways, or, in the case of a Board for the repair of the Highways of a 31a 484 Agricultural Rates Order, 1896. Parish, by two members of the Board, or, in the case of a District Council, by the Clerk ; and shall be sent to the Board on or before the First day of December, One thousand eight hundred and ninety-six. Return as to other Areas not co-extensive with Poor Law Parishes. Article XIV.— Every Spending Authority levying any rate to which the Act applies, other than a Highway Bate, on an area not co-extensive with one or more Poor Law Parishes, shall make and send to the Board a return in the form shown in Schedule V. hereto, and correctly stating the several particu- lars specified in the said form. The return shall be signed by the Clerk of the Spending Authority, and shall be sent to the Board on or before the First day of December, One thousand eight hundred and ninety-six. As to the Alteration of the Valuation List in accordance with the Statements, and as to application of the Statement to the first Rate made by Overseers where there is no Valuation List. Article XV. — 1. The Assessment Committee shall make out a list with respect to all the hereditaments included in the Statement made to them by the Overseers as corrected and altered by the Committee (including any additions thereto made by the Committee of hereditaments omitted by the Overseers), and as altered in accordance with any decision on appeals then decided. The said list shall be in the form shown in Schedule W. hereto, and shall contain in the column headed " Rateable Value of Agricultural Land" the rateable values as well of the separately rated hereditaments consisting wholly of agricultural land as of the agricultural land which in the Valuation List is assessed together with buildings or other hereditaments, and shall contain, in the column headed " Rateable Value of Build- ings and other Hereditaments not being Agricultural Land," the rateable value of any buildings or other hereditaments which in the Valuation List are assessed together with agricul- Agricultural Rates Order, 1896. 185 tural land. In such oases the agricultural land and th* buildings and other hereditaments shall be shown on separate lines, as in the exemplification given in Schedule X. The list made as aforesaid shall, on or before the First day of March, One thousand eight hundred and ninety-seven, be approved by the Assessment Committee in manner provided by Section 20 of the Union Assessment Committee Act, 1862, and shall, from and after the Thirty-first day of March, One thousand eight hundred and ninety-seven, be deemed to be a Supplemental Valuation List and shall be substituted for so much of the Valuation List as relates to the same hereditaments ; provided that for the purpose of estimating the contributions of the several Parishes to the common fund of a Union, or any other contributions to be raised after the said day according 1 1 1 the assessable value of the Parishes, the same shall be deemed to be in force from and after the approval of such list. 2. A copy of the said Supplemental Valuation List, duly signed and countersigned, shall be delivered to the Overseers in accordance with Section 30 of the Poor Law Amendment Act, 1868, and shall be preserved by the Overseers and dealt with by them as required by the Union Assessment Committee Acts. An to adapting the Statutory Form of the Valuation List and of the Poor Hate. Article XVI. — -In every Parish in which there is any agricultural land as defined by the Act, any new or Supplemental Valuation List made after the Thirty-first day of March, One thousand eight hundred and ninety-seven, shall be made out in the Form shown in Schedule W. hereto, instead of being made in the Form shown in the Schedule to the Union Assessment Committee Act, 1862, and every rate made after thai date which is now required to be made in the Form shown in the Schedule to the Parochial Assessments Act, 1836, shall in every such Parish be made in the Form shown in Schedule Y. hereto. 486 Agricultural Mates Order, 1896. As to the temporary adoption by the County Council or other Council of the division of the Rateable Value of Agricultural Land and that of Buildings and other Hereditaments Article XVII. — 1. County Councils and other Councils whose duty it is to make, for the purposes of any rate to which the Act applies, a basis or standard or valuation which will not contain particulars of separately rated hereditaments, but only the total rateable value of each Parish, shall cause a basis or standard or valuation to be prepared in the Form set out in Schedule Z. hereto, showing (1) the total rateable value of each Parish in the County or other area to which the basis or standard or valuation applies according to the basis, standard, or valuation then in force, (2) the total rateable value of the Parish (according to such basis, standard, or valuation) divided if the Parish contains any agricultural land between (a) agri- cultural land, and (b) buildings and other hereditaments not being agricultural land, according to the proportion in which the total rateable value of the Parish is so divided in the return made by the Assessment Committee as required in Article X. 3, the Form of which is shown in Schedule P. hereto, or by Overseers as required by Article XL, and (3) the assessable value of each Parish, that is to say, one-half the rateable value of the agricultural land in the Parish, if the Parish contains any agricultural land, added to the rateable value of the buildings and other hereditaments not being agricultural land, in the Parish. 2. Such basis, standard, or valuation shall on or before the Tenth day of February, One thousand eight hundred and ninety-seven, be approved by the Council, or by some Com- mittee authorised by the Council to approve the same ; and, notwithstanding anything contained in the County Eates Act, 1852, or in any other Act, from and after the Thirty-first day of March, One thousand eight hundred and ninety-seven, the values of the several Parishes as shown in the column of such basis, standard, or valuation headed " Assessable Value of the " Parish, being one-half the amount in Column 3 added to the Agricultural Rates Order, 1896. 487 "amount in Column 4 " shall during the continuance of the Act be the basis, standard, or valuation for the levying- of County Rate or any other rate leviable by the Council according to the assessable value of the several Parishes on which the same is levied, unless or until the Council shall make a new basis, standard, or valuation in manner provided by law. o. Copies of the basis, standard, or valuation approved as required by paragraph 2 shall, on or before the Twentieth day of February, One thousand eight hundred and ninety-seven, be sent, in the case of the County Rate basis, to all the Boards of Guardians of all Poor Law Unions wholly or partly included in the County, and to all other persons to whom precepts for County contributions are directed, and as regards so much of any such basis as relates to Parishes comprised in the Metro- politan Police District, to the Receiver for the Metropolitan Police District, and, in the case of standards or valuations for Borough or other rates, to the Overseers or other persons to whom precepts for such rates are issued. 4. Provided that if after the Tenth day of February, One thousand eight hundred and ninety-seven, the rateable value of the agricultural land in any Parish included in such basis, standard, or valuation shall be altered on any appeal under these Regulations decided after that date, the Council may, if they think fit, notwithstanding anything contained in the County Rates Act, 1852, or in any other Act, alter the basis, standard, or valuation accordingly ; and shall in such case send notice of the alteration to the several Boards of Guardians and other persons to whom copies of the basis, standard, or valuation were sent as herein-before directed. Application of Regulations to Metropolis. Article XVIIL— These Regulations and the forms in the Schedule thereto, in their application to parishes within the Metropolis as defined by the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869, 488 Agricultural Rates Order, 1896. (herein-after in this Article called " the said Act,") shall have the following and any other necessary modifications : — (1) " Gross value " shall be substituted for " gross estimated rental." (2) It shall not be necessary for the Overseers of any parish in which there is no agricultural land to send to the Assessment Committee a statement to that effect as required by Article IV. L (a). (3) The Forms shown in Schedules G 2, L2, N2, W 2, and Y 2 shall be substituted for those shown in Schedules G., L., N., W., and Y., respectively, and in the Forms shown in Schedules R. and Z. " rateable value " shall be substituted for " net annual value." (4) Section 21 of the said Act, and Section 39 of the said Act, so far as it relates to costs of appeals to Special Sessions, shall apply to Special Sessions held for the purposes of these Regulations. (5) Appeals, under Article IX. 2 from Special Sessions, or under Article IX. 3 from decisions of Assessment Committees, shall be heard and decided by Quarter Sessions, under the said Act, as amended by the Local Government Act, 1888, as if they were appeals under the said Act against a Valuation List, and for the purpose of hearing and deciding such appeals Quarter Sessions shall have the like powers (including the power of awarding costs) as they have for the purpose of the appeals under the said Act ; provided that no person shall be entitled to appeal to such Sessions or appear or be heard on any appeal except the persons entitled under these Regulations to appeal or to appear and be heard on any appeal to Quarter Sessions. (6) The following Sections of the said Act, that is to say, Section 50 as to expenses, Section 60 as to Parishes where the Vestry or the Board of Guardians perform Agricultural Rates Order, 1896. 48!) the duties of Overseers, Section 65 as to the service of notices, and Section 67 as to inspection of documents deposited, shall apply as if the statement and returns to be made under these Eegulations were Valuation Lists under the said Act. As to the reasonable expenses of making the Statements and Returns required by these Regulations Article XIX. — The reasonable expenses of County Councils and other Local Authorities, and of Overseers, and Assessment Committees, in making the statements and returns required by these Eegulations, or otherwise in performing the duties imposed on them by these Regulations, and the reasonable remuneration, whether by gratuity or otherwise, of any officers or other persons employed by them in this behalf, shall, and, as regards the Assessment Committee, notwithstanding anything contained in the Union Assessment Committee Acts, 1862 to 1880, be paid out of the funds or rates out of which their expenses are ordinarily payable. Provided that any expenses incurred by an Assessment Committee by reason of the default of any Overseer shall be charged by the Guardians as expenses incurred on behalf of the Parish in respect of which the default occurred. Fines for failure to comply with <>/-/ £3, 660 Carriages and Wagons „ 3*941 1,293 Traffic Expenses „ 11-451 3,757 General Charges „ 1-367 448 Law and Parliamentary ,, 0-252 83 Compensation ,, 0-285 ... ... 94 Government Duty „ 0-710 233 Miscellaneous Expenses „ 0-904 297 r 9,865 Net Receipts £17,850 Allow Stations, 5 percent, of Gross Receipts (£27.715)... 1,386 Net Annual Value £16,464 Allow Tenant's Profit, 17^ per cent, of Gross Receipts ... 4,850 £11,614 Allow Landlord's Deductions for Maintenance and Renewals. 6d. per Train Mile 1 - %s Rateable Value of Line + Rates Deduct Rates at 6s. in £1— as 26s. : 6s. :: £9,646 to... Net Rateable Value of Line Net Rateable Value of Line £7,420 ,-- „ „ Station X (as per Schedule A) 11,493 „ Station Y (as per Schedule B) .295 £19,208 494 Valuation of a Railway. Rateable Value of Line and Stations Add for Speculation, 5 per cent. Rateable Value Add for gross 1-10* 11 - (a) Gross Value £19,208 9d0 £20,168 2,016 £22,184 SCHEDULE A. Valuation of Station X (Terminus) and of Laud, Sidings, 8fc. Land — 176,938 feet superficial, Forecourt and Site of Station, at 6d. Land occupied by Railway Sidings, &c, 3^ acres at £4,000 an acre=£ 14.000 at 4 per cent Buildings and Appurtenances— Levelling, Paving, and Draining 224,496 c. feet Offices and Buildings, at 6d. Verandah, Iron, and Glass ... 2,100 squares superficial Framed Roof over Station Columns and Girders to Station Iron Water Tanks Urinals and W.C.'s, and fitting up Electric Lighting and fittings Stand Pipes for Engine Feeding Weighing Machines ... Timber framed Buildings and Offices Sidings, Points, &c. ... ... Bridge and Carriage Slope Station and various Signal Boxes ... Gas, Lamps and Fittings Brickwork to Station, &c Stonework to Station, &c. ... Woodwork to Station. &c Estimated Structural Value ... 5 per cent, thereon Structural Value. £8,520 5,612 1,146 32,592 10,930 2,000 800 2,000 250 150 1,178 5,570 2,000 2,760 1,227 9,265 1,932 3,250 £91,182 £4,424 560 £4,984 4,559 Carried forward £9,543 (a) Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1809, Schedule 3, p. 434. Valuation of a Railway. 495 Brought forward ... £9,543 Add for Estimated Annual Letting of — Bookstalls £20(1 Refreshment Bars 400 Advertising Spans ... ... ... ... 1000 Hairdresser's Saloon ... ... 100 Lavatory and Cloak Kooms 2f>0 1,950 Total Estimated Rateable Value of X Station ... £11,493 SCHEDULE B. Valuation of Station Y (not a Terminus). Land — 19,400 feet superficial, being Site of Booking Offices, Subways, Platforms, &c, at 2d £162 Buildings and Appurtenances — Booking Offices, Stairs, Subways, &c Sheds on Platforms, wood-framed and glazed roofs over part of Platforms 8,050 feet (cubic) Timber in Planked Platforms and Framed Bearers, at 3s. ... Allow for Gas, Lamps, and Services A. Id the Station Signal Box, containing 15 Levers £2,658 at 5 per cent. ... Estimated Rateable Value of Station Structural Value. £200 1.000 1,208 100 150 £2,658 133 E295 496 II. VALUATION OF PORTION OF THE METROPOLITAN DISTRICT RAILWAY. [Made for a Metropolitan Parish at the 1895 Quin- quennial Assessment.] Length of Line in Parish 58^ Chains. Estimated Passenger Train Miles run in the Parish during the year ending December 31, 1894=133,400. Estimated Gross PvF.ceipts — 133,400 Passenger Train Miles at 88-77d. ... Add Parcels. Goods, and Minerals, at VllQd. .. Miscellaneous Receipts, at 2 m 92d. Total Gross Receipts ... Working Expenses — Locomotive Power Carriages and Wagons Traffic Expenses General Charges Law and Parliamentary Compensation, &c. (Government Duty Joint Lines and Stations, Expenses of (per mile). 1 0-872 3-587 11-702 4-566 0-216 0-020 (1-7 11 1 1-708 . £49.341 620 1.623 £6,043 1,994 6,504 2.538 120 11 400 950 Net Receipts ... Allow Stations. 5 per cent, of (Gross Receipts (£51,584) ... Allow Tenant's Profit, 17i per cent, of (Gross Receipts ... Allow Landlord's Deductions for Repairs and Renewals of Way and Works at 6d. per mile Rateable Value of Line -\- Rates Deduct Rates at 6s. in £1— as 26s Net Rateable Value :: £18,084 to £51,584 18,560 £33,024 2,579 £30,445 9,026 £21,419 3,335 £18,084 4,174 £13,910 Valuation of Portion of the Metropolitan District Railway. 497 SUMMARY. Station X — Land, Estimated Annual Value £710 Buildings, Structural Value, £15,943 ; 5 per cent. thereon 800 Add Annual Value of Bookstall 100 ,, „ ,, Refreshment Bar ... 200 ,, ,, ,, Advertising Space ... 200 „ „ ,, Part of Subway 50 £2,060 Station Y — Land, Estimated Annual Value £309 Buildings, Structural Value, £5,094 ; 5 per cent. thereon 255 Add Annual Value of Bookstall 75 ,, „ ,, Advertising Space ... 100 740 say £2,800 Add Rateable Value of Line ... ... 13,910 Rateable Value of Line and Stations 16,710 Add for Speculation 5 per cent. 885 Rateable Value ... £17,795 Add for gross 1-10*. (b) 1,779 Gross Value £19,574 (b) Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869, Schedule 3, p. 434. 32 498 III. SPECIMEN VALUATION OF A DOCK COMPANY. (&) The Gross Receipts for the year, and exclusive of the rent of the premises rateable separately ... ... ... ... £20, GOO Disbursements during- the same year, including Expenses of a Steam-tug, Direction, Insurance, Local Rates, etc. ... 10,300 Net Receipts £10,300 Further Deductions, claimed and allowed, were Capital necessary for carrying on the Com- pany's business — that is to say, Moveable Plant " £6,900 Coals in Store, Materials, and Cash Balance ... 8,100 Total Amount of Capital £15,000 On which last amount the Court allowed, under the special circumstances of the case, £5 per cent, interest and £20 per cent, for tenants' and trade profits ... ... ... ... 3,750 Estimated Annual Expense of Repair and Renova- tion of Moveable Plant 845 Estimated Annual Expense of Repair and Renova- tion of Fixtures or Fixed Plant, described hereafter 390 Annual Repair and Maintenance of the Freehold Premises occupied by the Company, exclu- sive of the above fixtures ... ... ... 1,565 Total Deductions 6,550 Net Rateable Value in the hands of a Tenant ... £3,750 (b) Reg. v Southampton Doelc Co., 14 Q.B. 587 ; 20 L.J.M.C. 155 ; 15 Jur. 268. 499 IV. SPECIMEN VALUATION (in outline) OF THE ASSESSMENT OF A DOCK COMPANY. Receipts in Dock — Import Rates ... Export Rates ... Tonnage Dues and Rent on Ships Discharge and Extra Rates on Ships ... Total Gross Receipts Tenant's Working Expenses — Wages ... Salaries ... General Stores ... Gas and Electric Light Water Coals and Coke Repairs of Tenant's Plant Dredging Lighterage of Goods ... Carriage of Goods Incidental Charges Telegraph and Telephone Communica- tion Removal of Ships Superannuation Allowances ... Directors' Salaries Auditors Management and Office Expenses Law and Parliamentary Charges Warrant Stamps Rates at in £ on Rateable Value... TotalTenant's Working Expenses Net Receipts of Undertaking ... Tenant's Share — Tenant's Working Capital Estimated Value of Tenant's Plant (Schedule A) Deduct from Full Cost for Present Value per cent. Depreciation Present Value ... 500 Specimen Valuation {in outline) of a Dock Company. Tenant's Share— (continued). £ Allow three months' Tenant's Ex- penses (including Rates) Banker's Balance Tenant's Capital Tenant's Share— per cent thereon Gross Value Landlord's Statutable Deductions— Maintenance and Repair of Works and Landlord's Plant, etc. Renewal Fund ... Fire Insurance ... Rateable Value — £ SCHEDULE A. Estimate of Tenant's Plant — Fire-engines, Hose, and Fittings Tu g* ^ Trucks, Scales, and Gear Tarpaulins Furniture, Fittings, etc. Ropes, Chains, Tackle, etc. Stores, Books, etc. Barges and Boats Dummies (Hyd. Capstans) ... Dredging Plant Booms ... Office Boxes, Gatekeepers, etc. Locomotives Carriages Wagons ... Tugs and Ferry Boats Floating Crane ... Total Estimated Value 501 VALUATION OF A GAS COMPANY. [Made for a Metropolitan Parish at the Quinquennial Assessment, 1890.] Receipts — Gas Rental and Gas Meter and Stove Rental Residual Products Miscellaneous ... Total Gross Receipts ... Expenditure — Manufacturing Charge*. Coals £1,255,316 Salaries 20,068 Wages 331,568 Purification (33.419 Repairs 276.762 £2,347,862 841.754 8,961 £3,198,577 Distribution Charges. Wages ... 47,906 Repairs ... 52,185 Meter Repairs ... 30,107 Stove Fixing and Repairs 12.500 Public Lamps ... 31,399 Rents 6,823 Rates and Taxes (adjusted subsequently) 82,917 Management Charges. Director's Allowances ... 5,500 Company's Auditors 400 Salaries (Secretary, Accountant, and Clerks) 15,250 Collector's Commission 28,940 Stationery and Printing 7,880 General Charges 3,123 Parliamentary and Law Charges ."-. Superannuation 13,425 Bad Debts 12,891 Public Officers ... 4,517 Depreciation nil 2,305,896 £892,681 Normal Receipts for Account Year ... 502 Valuation of a Gas Company. Expenditure — (continued). Brought forward ... £892,681 Add Extra Receipts for increased price in Gas sold by Meter 210,200 Deduct for necessary corrections — Wear and Tear ... ... ... ... £4,200 Increase in Wages 17,170 £1,102,881 21,370 1,081,511 Deduct Extra Net Cost of Coal 56,856 Total Annual Value divisible between Landlord and Tenant £1,024,654 Tenant's Share 226,450 £798,204 Landlord's Deductions — Sinking Fund for Renewals on Works ... £42,240 Insurance of Works 14,090 56.330 • Total Rateable Value £741,874 Deduct Estimated Rateable Value of Indirectly Productive Portion, viz. : — Works and Stations £248,600 Chemical Works 17,108 Mains 21,705 Houses, etc. ... ... ... ... ... 4,965 282,378 Add Rates at 5s. 2d. in £1 72,947 355,325 Rateable Value of Directly Productive Mains, etc.... £386,550 503 VI. VALUATION OF AN ELECTRIC LIGHT COMPANY. {Made for a Metropolitan Parish at the 1890 Quin quennial Assessment.] Gross Receipts — By Sale of Current by Meter £18,131 5 „ „ Under Contracts 981 1 1 8 £19,112 16 8 „ Rental of Meters on Consumer's Premises 288 18 H „ Transfer Fees ... ... 53 12 »i £111.455 — Add for probable increase in Receipts during the next two or three years, say 50 per cent. ... ... 'J, 727 — Estimated total Gross Receipts ... ... £29.182 Working Expenditure — Generation and Distribution Expenses. (1) To Coals, Carriage and Unloading £3,582 (2) „ Oil, Waste, Water, and Engine Room Stores 985 (3) ,, Proportion of Salaries of Engineers and Otficers ... 1.03G (4) ,, Wages and Gratuities at Generating Stations ... 2.763 (5) ,, Repairs and Maintenance of Buildings and Plant ... 348 Management Expenses. (6) To Directors' Remuneration ... £800 (7) „ Salaries of Manager, Chief Engineer, Secretary. Clerks, etc ... ... ... ... 1,963 (8) „ Stationery and Printing ... 250 (9) „ General Establishment Charges 164 (10) „ Auditors of Company and Accountants' Charges ... 69 3,246 Law Expenses £ charged, say ... ... 150 Carried forward ... £12.110 £8,714 504 Valuation of an Electric Light Company. Working Expenditure — {continued). Brought forward Add for probable increase in Working Expenditure dining the next two or three years, say 50 per cent, of Itemsl,2,5,8, 9 ... £3,582^ 985 250 164 £12,110 2,665 Total Estimated Working Expenditure Net Receipts divisible between Landlord and Tenant plus Rates Tenant's Allowances. Capital Required, say £15,000 (as per Schedule Allow Interest thereon 5 per cent £750 „ Trade Profit 10 per cent 1,500 ., Risks and Casualties 1\ per cent. ... 375 Landlo rd' s A 11 o tea nces. Sinking Fund on Buildings and Leases ... £400 Depreciation on Plant and Machinery 1,000 Insurance ... ... ... ••• ••• " Rateable Value of Entire Undertaking (plus rates) . . . Deduct for Works and Stations £6,332 And Rates thereon at 5s. in £1 1,578 £14,775 £14.407 — A). Deduct Rates at 5s. in £1 Rateable Value of Distributing Mains and Wires, etc.... = 6 - 5 per cent, of Gross Receipts. 2,625 — £11,782 1,492 — £10.290 — 7,900 £2,390 478 £1,912 SCHEDULE A. Estimated Tenant's Capital. Total Working Expenditure .£14,775 Allow 3-8ths. thereof Allow Cash Balance at Bank, say ,, Cash for Rates and Taxes „ Value of Stores on Hand „ Meters £7,650 Instruments 387 £5,540 1,000 250 100 Say £15,000. £8,037 say 8,000 — £14,890 — 505 VII. VALUATION OF AN ELECTRIC LIGHT COMPANY Recently made for a Metropolitan Parish. Receipts- Sale of Current ., under Contract Rental of Meters ... Transfer Fees Discounts on Purchases Sale of Old Materials Sundry P"ees Expenditure — Coals and Fuel Oil Waste and Engine Stores Salaries, Engineers and Officers Wages at Stations ... Repair and Maintenance of Works ., ,, Mains Renewals, Engines and Mains Miscellaneous Expenses ... Directors Salaries, General Management, Clerks Stationery ... General Establishment Charges Auditors Law... ... ... Insurance ... Fees, Testing Meters Board of Trade Audit Depreciation, Buildings ... Plant and Machiner Secret 7 iry and Valuation- Receipts Expenditure Tenants' Share Rates at 4s. 6d. in £ Rateable Value £29,389 377 699 41 71 14 2 £30,593 £4,380 701 990 2,954 1,072 886 1,291 64 1,172 2,001 213 231 79 300 157 2 39 300 1,292 £18,124 £30,593 18,124 £12,469 2,240 £10,229 1,879 £8,350 33 506 VIII. VALUATION OF A WATER COMPANY. [Made for a Metropolitan Parish at the 1895 Quin- quennial Assessment.] Gross Receipts for the year as stated by the Company Gross Expenditure for the same period as shewn by their published Accounts From which deduct for future re-adjustment : — Rates and Taxes £19,605 Rents of Houses and Lands ... ... 670 Maintenance and Repair of Impound- ing and Service Reservoirs, Filtering Beds, Works and Pipes for obtaining and storing of Water ... ... 617 Maintenance, Repair and Renewals of Mains, Pipes, Fittings, Meters and Works connected with the Distribu- tion of Water 7,499 And a further deduction in respect of the supervision and management of the Landlord's Interest in the Hereditament ... ... ... 947 £187,591 £77,808 29,338 Amount of Tenants' Expenditure minus Rates and Taxes Do. to be divided between Landlord and Tenant ... Allow Tenants' Share (as per Schedule B) ... Do. Landlord's Statutable deductions (Schedule C) ^.s per Company £46 : 697 Rateable Value of Whole Undertaking, plus Rates Deduct Rateable Value of Indirectly Productive Works plus Rates at 5s. in £1 (as per margin) 159,209 Rateable Value of Directly Productive Works, Pipes and Mains, plus Rates kiltl Houses, etc Rates at 5s 47,367 „ 11,842 48,470 139,121 8,750 130,371 12,683 117,688 59,209 £58.479 Memorandum— £58,479 is 3M7 per cent, of Gross Receipts. Valuation of a Water Company, 507 SCHEDULE B— TENANTS' CAPITAL. Allow Cash required for Tenants' Working- Expenses, say 3-8 th s. (equal to 44 months), of the Financial Year's Expendi- ture (^48,470) 418,177 Do. Cash required for Estimated Rates and Taxes (same period) ..<<.,•_>.-, Do. Standing Balance at Bank ... ... ... ... ... 6 000 Do. Purchase of Meters (412,645) less 25 per cent, deprecia- tion 'J. 485 Do. General Stores, Tools, Implements and Furniture, say ... 6,000 Total 449,587 Say .£50,000 at 17£ per cent. ... £8,750. Carried to Valuation, £8,750. SCHEDULE C— LANDLORDS' STATUTABLE DEDUCTIONS. Allow (a) Maintenance and Repairs of Impounding and Service Reservoirs, Filtering Beds, Works, Mains and Pipes for obtaining and storing Water as estimated on the average of six consecutive years' expenditure up to and including the Account Year, 1894 ... ... ... £877 Do. (b) Maintenance, Repairs and Renewals of Mains, Pipes, Fittings, Meters, and Works connected with the Distribution of Water, as per Company's Statement ... 7,499 Add Sinking Fund for Renewal and Insurance of the perishable part of Works, Reservoirs, &c, included in item (a) ... 3,360 Allow for Expenses due to the Supervision and General Manage- ment of the Landlords' Interest in the Company's Undertaking, estimated at 2 per cent, commission on £46, 697, Annual Value of the Company's Stations and Works ; and £670, Annual Value of Houses ami Lands owned bv the Company, together amounting to £47,367 * ™ Total £™M Carried to Valuation, £12,683. INDEX. A ACREAGE PRINCIPLE, application to the rating of clocks, 175-176. ADJOURNMENT, power of Justices at Special Sessions in Metropolis as to, 266. Quarter Sessions in Metropolis as to, 277. ADVERTISING STATION, rateable, 3, 222, 448. person rateable for, 222, 448. land occupied for other purposes and used temporarily for, 222. gross and rateable value of hereditament used for, 449. AGENT, of objector may appear before Assessment Committee. 236, 261, 362, 401. AGGRIEVED, person, may appeal, 246, 297. may object to Valuation List, 232, 259. 360. may demand new valuation, 365. AGRICULTURAL LAND. defined, 3, 4, 460, 461, 466. separate Valuation Lists for, 4, 456, 457. partial exemption of, from rates, 3, 87, SH, 453. payment out of local taxation account in respect ,,\' deficiency arising from exemption on, 454, 155. contributions raised according to assessable value of parish con- taining, 455. assessable value of, 455. appeal against Valuation List of, 457, 458. rating of, as distinct from buildings, 456, 457, 458, 459, 486. Local Government Board to certify deficiency arising from exemption on, 455, 456. Local Government Board may give provision;:! certificate for payments out of annual grant for, 456. statement by overseers with respect to. 4.">7. Ui*. 169. 470. AGRICULTURAL RATES ACT, 3, 4, 453-461. Orders under, 458, 459, 462-490. definitions in, 460, 461. pavment out of local taxation account in respect of deficiency, lot. 455. contributions to be raised accordine; to assessable value of parish, I Local Government Board to certify annual sums payable in respecl oi deficiency, 455. separate Valuation Lists for agricultural land. 456, 4.;7. 34 510 INDEX. AGRICULTURAL RATES ACT— {continued). rental of buildings under, 457. returns to Local Government Board by spending authorities and Assessment Committees under, 457, 467. appeal against Valuation List under, 457, 458. fines for breach of Local Government Board regulations, 459. AGRICULTURAL RATES ORDER, definitions, in, 465-407. returns to be made by spending authorities, 467. amount raised by spending authority during last financial year to be determined by the Local Government Board. 468. statement made by overseer under, 457, 458, 469. minimum value of buildings and hereditaments separately valued under, 471-473. proceedings of Assessment Committee if overseers fail to make state- ment, 473. correction of overseers" statement by Assessment Committee, 474. objections by surveyor of taxes and overseers under, 475, 477. appeal to Special and Quarter Sessions under, 477-479. returns to be made by Assessment Committee to Local Government Board under, 479,480. statement and returns to be made by overseers under, where there is no Valuation List for parish, 480. 481. return to lie made by any council or body, not being an Assessment Committee, 4X2, 483. ' return to be made as to Highway areas or hereditaments exempt from Highway rate. 483, 484. return as to areas not co-extensive with poor law parishes. 484. alteration of Valuation List in accordance with statements as altered on appeal, 484, 485. supplemental Valuation Lists under, 485, form of Valuation List and rate under, 485. adoption by county councils, etc., of division of rateable value of agri- cultural land and buildings, 486, 487. application to Metropolis of regulations under, 487, 489. reasonable expenses of statements and returns under, 489. fines for failure to comply with regulations under, 489. extension of time in particular cases under, 490. provision for further returns under. 490. ALLOTMENTS, agricultural land. 3, 460, 461. partial exemption of, from rates, 87, 88, 452, 454. AMBASSADOR, exempt from rating, 87. servant of, not exempt if he does not reside in house of. 87. AMENDMENT, of notice of appeal by Quarter Sessions, 343, 347. of Valuation List by Assessment Committee. 375, 376. ANCHORAGE, tolls rateable, 169. ANNUAL VALUE. Vide also Rateable Value. defined, 33, 315. in communions annis, 44-47. rent hypothetical tenant will pay basis of, 48. takings of a business not to be taken into account in estimating. 49-51. increased by non-parochial earnings, 52, 53. of stations, 129, INDEX. -]] APPEAL, where exemption claimed by literary, art, or scientific society, 85. 328, proof of receipts by railway company on, l: 31. notice, of objection to Assessment Committee musi contain all grounds of appeal. 233, 238, 375, 376. must be to next practicable Sessions, 239, 246, 298. where appellant cannot, to next Quarter Sessions, 233. notice of objection to Assessment Committee a condition precedenl to 234, 238. fresh notice of objection unnecessary after rate made, 234. where Valuation List is amended fresh notice of objection unnecessary 234. to Special Sessions by ratepayer who has failed to obtain relief from Assessment Committee, 238-241, 320. amount recoverable pending, against rate, 239, 240, 264, 304, 305. where rate reduced on, 240. application to refund after rate reduced on. 240. parish officers not bound to support, 240. notice of, to Special Sessions, 241-244. to whom given, 241, 243, 307, 308, 375. form of, 242. how served, 242. respite of, where no notice given to person objected to, 242, 243. notice of, must be reasonable, 243, 248. fresh notice of, unnecessary after respite, 306. hearing of, where no notice given, 243, 306, 307. joint notice of, 243, 248, 297, 308. notice of, to all inhabitants not necessary, 243, 308. must state all grounds of, 244, 24i», 306, 375, 376. abandonment of grounds of, 244. 24'.), 308. onus of proof where rateable property has been omitted, 244. onus of proof where appellant alleges he has no rateable property, 244. Assessment Committee as respondents to, 244, 245. by Assessment Committee from decision of Special Sessions, 245, .">77. to Quarter Sessions, 246, 297, 342, 367, 368. notice of. to Quarter Sessions, to whom given, 247, 249, 342. form of, 247, 342. how served, 248, 306. must state all grounds of appeal, 249, 306, 342. recognizance in case of, to Quarter Sessions, 246, 321. case stated for opinion of High Court after notice of, to Quarter Sessions, 249, 250, 348. case stated for opinion of High Court must finally dispose of, 348. from Queen's Bench, 250, 349. arbitration after notice of, to Quarter Sessions, 25(1, 349. where reference abortive Quarter Sessions may hear. 351. power of Quarter Sessions to amend defect in notice of, 25.'!, 251. 343, 347. power of Quarter Sessions to amend or quash rate, 254-256, 303, 304. dismissed on ground of jurisdiction — costs of, 255, 344. genera] powers of Quarter Sessions as to costs of, 344. not entered or prosecuted, costs of, 256, 346. costs of vexatious or frivolous, 343. respite of, unnecessary, when case stated by Quarter Sessions for opinion of High Court, 257. no, without leave from High Court on case state,! by Quarter Sessions. 257. against accounts of overseer, 297, 298. relief given by justices on, against rate. 299, 300. 34a 512 INDEX. APPEAL— (continued). by person aggrieved by distress, 300. persons rated as owners may, 313. order of justices at Special Sessions of no force pending, to Quarter Sessions, 322. power of Quarter Sessions on, to amend mistake or omission in judg- ment or order of justices, 346. power of Quarter Sessions on, to order survey or valuation, 3(39. appellant need not seek relief of Assessment Committee on, in case of statutory exemption, 377. provision as to costs of Assessment Committee on, 378. against poor-rate by owner, 391, 438. Valuation List of agricultural land, 457, 458. decision of Assessment Committee under Agricultural Rates Order, 477-479. [AGAINST RATES IN METROPOLIS.'] in respect of supplemental list, 262, 417, 418. does not lie in respect of provisional list, 263, 422. power of justices at Special Sessions, 264, 267. 404, 410. who may, to Special Sessions, 264, 403. time for, to Special Sessions, 414. poor-rate payable pending, 264, 269, 415. to Special Sessions, form of notice of, 265. to whom notice must be given, 265, 266, 409. failure to give notice of, to Special Sessions, 266. notice of, must contain all grounds of, 26(5. joint notice of, 266, 272. abandonment of some of the grounds of, 2(56. Sessions cannot quash rate on ground not set out in notice of, 26(5. appellant must enter into recognizance after notice of, 2(56. 267, 272, 279. Assessment Committee may appear as respondents on, 2(57, 377. to Special Sessions, costs of, 267, 268, 411. wdio may, to Quarter Sessions from Assessment Committee and Special Sessions, 26S, 2(59, 408. to Quarter Sessions by Assessment Committee, 268, 269. grounds of, to Quarter Sessions, 268, 269, 408. amount of rate recoverable pending, to Quarter Sessions, 269. to Quarter Sessions, notice of, 270, 409, 414. on whom served, 270, 409. in case of supplemental list, form of notice, 270, 271. service of notice of, 271. notice of intention to appear must be given by respondents, 272. to Quarter Sessions must be entered by petition, 273, 280. time for lodging petition, 273. form of petition, 273. 274. to Quarter Sessions, case to be stated by appellant and respondent on, 274, 280. places for hearing, to Quarter Sesssions, 407. case stated for opinion of High Court after notice of, to Quarter Sessions, 275, 412. effect of Judicature Act, 1894, upon case stated, 275. to Quarter Sessions, who have right of audience, 275, 276. power of justices to summon witnesses, etc., 276, 407. power of justices at Sessions as to adjournment and decision, 277, 410. from Quarter Sessions by special case, 277, 278, 412. no, from decision of High Court without leave, 278. costs of, to Special or Quarter Sessions, 267, 277, 281, 411. relating to property in City of London, in separate list, 282. fees on, 406. XNDEX. 513 APPEAL— (continued). costs of, incurred by Assessment Committee or overseers, -122. use of public room for, 427. when owner or lessee may, 438. APPELLANT, must enter into recognizances, 246, 266, 272. 273, 271. 279, 320. and respondent to Quarter Sessions in Metropolis musl state then 274, 280. APPORTIONMENT, of rateable value, parochial principle, 149-156, 191, L92. ARBITRATION, after notice of appeal to Quarter Sessions, 250-252, 349. arbitrator may state a case, 251, 350. where reference is silent as to costs, 251, 345, 350. members of Assessment Committee not personally liable for cost6 of 251. costs in discretion of arbitrator, 252, 351. by order of Quarter Sessions, 252, 349, 350. where reference abortive High Court may order Sessions to hear appeal. 351. ARREARS, of poor-rate, succeeding overseers may levy, to reimburse former, .'I'M. ART, society, exempt from rating, 81-85, 325-329. ASSESSABLE VALUE, of agricultural land, 455. ASSESSMENT, in Metropolis, quinquennial, 257, 417. ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE, cannot compel production of evidence, 131. notice of objection to, 232, 233, 234, 360, 361, 363, 375. fresh notice of objection unnecessary after rate made, 233. power of, to amend Valuation List, 375, 37(5. where Valuation List amended by, fresh notice unnecessary, 234, 235. notice of objection, how served on, 236, 372. who may appear before, 236. cannot compel objector to produce evidence, 236, 237. objection to alteration by, 237, 238. 362, 363. appeal to Special Sessions from, 238-241. notice of appeal must be given to, 241, 375. may appear as respondents with consent of Guardians, 244. 377. no costs where Assessment Committee appeal without consent ol Guardians, 244, 245, 377. not liable for costs if they do not appear, 244, 267. may appeal from decision of Special Sessions 24.5, 377. members of, not personally liable for costs, 251. appointment of, by Board of Guardians, 354. where Union has same bounds as borough town council to appoinl additional members of, 355. provision where Guardians fail to appoint, 355. as to vacancies on, 355, 35(5. extent of authority of, 356. tirst meeting of, when to be held. ?>U^. quorum of. what constitutes. 356. may employ clerk, 356. minutes of meetings of, to be entered in book, open to inspection, 356, 357. 514 INDEX. ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE— {continued). proceedings of, to be reported to Local Government Board, 357. may require returns from overseers and producti n of books, 357, 358. examine persons attending before them, 358. enlarge time for making Valuation List, 359. appoint persons to make Valuation List, 359. direct revision of Valuation List, 359, 365. valuation directed by, to be made in writing, 378. Valuation List to be transmitted to, by overseers, 359, 360. to hold meetings to hear objections, 361. may direct further Valuation List to be made, 362. valuation ordered by, to lie in writing, 378. must alter Valuation List, where rate amended on appeal, 363. notice of alteration of Valuation List (Metropolis) to be sent to over- seers by. 412. may allow compensation for returns or copies of valuation, etc., 371. remuneration of clerk of, 371. penalty for non-attendance upon order of, 371, 372. appellant need not seek relief of, in case of statutory exemption, 377. provision as to costs of, on appeals, 378. to give notice of valuations to companies, 37S. clerks of, to furnish clerks of peace with totals of Valuation Lists. 380. power of, to order map or plan to be made, 380. to make returns to Local Government Board under Agricultural Kates Act, 457, 479. definition of, in Agricultural bates Order, 467. proceedings of, where overseers fail to make statement under Agri- cultural Rates Order, 473. correction of statement of overseers by, under Agricultural bates Order, 474. hearing of objections of surveyor of taxes and overseers under Agri- cultural Kates Order by. 475-477. appeal against decision of, under Agricultural Kates Order, 477-479. [IN METROPOLIS.] election of, 398. may require particulars of rent, etc., of hereditaments in the Metropolis, 258. to make Valuation List in default of overseers, 402. to certify Valuation List, 402. alteration in gross or rateable value of property in Metropolis by, — notice to occupier, 258, 400, 401. objection to Valuation List before, 259, 413. grounds of objection before, 401. who may appear before, 261. must give notice of time for hearing objections, 413. cannot compel objector to produce evidence. 261. objection to alteration in Valuation List by, 262. bound to make out provisional list in default of overseers, 263, 419. who may appeal from, to Special Sessions, 264. notice to, of appeal tu Special Sessions, 265. Assessment Committee as respondents to appeal, 267. appeal to Quarter Sessions from, 26H, 269. by, 268, 269. notice of appeal to Quarter Sessions must be given to clerk to, 270, 409. appeal to Quarter Sessions from, by petition, 273. justices at Quarter Sessions may compel clerk to, to produce evidence, 276, 277, 407. clerk to, cannot appear to consent at Quarter Sessions, 276, 427. notice of decision of High Court must be given to clerk to, 275. INDEX. 5 1 5 ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE— {continued). time for transmission of Valuation List by overseers to, U3, II I. before which Valuation List must be revised by, ILL re-deposit of Valuation List by, 414. costs of appeal incurred by, 422. may require returns from owner and occupier, 125. not liable for costs if tbey do not appear. 267. Guardians may appoint valuer to assist, 42ti. security for costs of valuation by, 427. ASSESSMENT SESSIONS. Vide Quarteb Sessions (Metropolis). members of, 405. quorum and powers of, 406. expenses of, allowed by Local Government Board, 422. ASSIZE COURT, exempt from rating, 78. ATTACHE, exempt from rating, 87. B BARRACKS, exempt from rating, 73. excess of accommodation rateable, 73. BARRISTER, certificate of , in cases of exemption of literary and scientific societies, 81, 325-329. may appear for objector before Assessment Committee, 236, 261. at Special Sessions, 245. exclusive audience at Quarter Sessions, 253, 275, 276. only one heard at Quarter Sessions in Metropolis, 27(5, 281. consents at County of London Quarter Sessions must be signified by a, 281. BEACONAGE, tolls rateable, 169. BENEFICIAL OCCUPATION, defined, 10-13, 15. of Crown property, 78, 79. of premises used in connection with docks, 177, 178. BOOK, to be kept for entry of poor-rate, 301, 302. penalty for injuring rate, 372. Valuation List part of rate, 429. BOOKSTALL, at railway station, when rateable, 30. BOROUGH RATE, deficiency in, where land taken under Lands Clauses Act, 61. BRANCH LINE. as feeder to main line, 52, 53. rent of, how assessed, 53. rateable value of, cannot be separated from main line, 105, LUb. guarantee to, by railway company, 108, 109. conflict of decisions, as to assessing, 113. no deduction for loss on, 122. BREWERY, with tied houses, rating of, 50-52. 516 INDEX. BRICKFIELD. existing value of, 32, 33. royalty taken into account for rateable value of, 46, 201-204. BRIDGE, royal, exempt from rating, 76, 77. rating of, 189-191. where tolls absorbed by working expenses of, 191. apportionment of rateable value of. among parishes, 191, 192. open free, not rateable, 191. BUILDINGS, rateable, 3. occupied by School Board, 9. rateable where occupation beneficial, 10. of value, 13. according to existing value, ; J >2-3.">. advantages to be taken into account in estimating rateable value of, 35. with machinery, how rated, 36-42. used as a lace manufactory, 42. rateable according to rent hypothetical tenant would pay. 48. where owner is occupier of, 53-58. owner not rateable for, where land only occupied, 55. deduction for repairs and renewal of. 61-65, 147. exempt from rating. 72-89. occupied by County Council when rateable, 79. volunteer corps foe service id' corps exempt from poor- rate. 86. 87. appurtenant to railway, deduction for, 91, 127-12'. used in connection with canal, how rateable, 135-140. docks, rating of, l"i 7, 178. mine, rateable, 194, 195. occupied by Postmaster-General for Electric Telegraph, 384. rating of , in connection with agricultural land. 456-459, 469, 470, 471, 485. rateable value in case of yearly tenancy. 61, 62. lease, 63. 64. weekly tenancy, 64, 65. c CANAL COMPANY, exempt from rating by local Act, 88. allowance for tenant's profit, 117. enhanced value of wharves, etc., used in connection with, 127-129. proof of receipts by, on appeal, 131. rated as occupiers of land, 134, 135. rateable at value of adjacent land, 135-140. conflict of decisions, 136-140. enhanced rateable value of, 137-139. where land outside parishes enumerated in act of incorporation is acquired by, 139, 14'). rateable on parochial principle, 140-142. compensation for tolls payable by, 141, 142. profits of a lock rateable in parish in which lock is situate, 142, 143. repairs to banks of canal, 143. in assessing, no deduction is allowed for compensation payable under act of incorporation, 143, 144. exempt from poor-rate when rates exempt, 144. under local Act. 144. land on which goods are landed from canal exempt from rating where no dues are paid, 144. Assessment Committee to give notice of valuation to, 378. INDEX. r,\7 CARETAKER, when rateable, 30, 31. CASE, stated for opinion of High Court, after notice of appeal to Quarter Sessions, 241), 2 ,(), 272, 348, 412. appeal from decision of High Court on, 260. Quarter Sessions may state, 256, 277, 412. High Court may remit, to Sessions, 256. ■ effect of Judicature Act, 1894, oh, 256, 278, 349. to be stated by appellant and respondent on appeal to. Quarter Sessions m Metropolis, 274, 280. CEMETERY, rating of, 209-211. assessed upon profits, 209, 210. rated according to receipts in preceding year, 211. expenses of management, deduction for, 211. CHAMBERS, when rateable, 29. CHAPEL, exempt from rates, 81, 314. CHURCH, exempt from poor-rate, 81, 314. publication of poor-rate in, 292, 293. where no. 293, 395. CHURCHWARDEN, not overseer in rural parish, 24H, 289. distress against, for non-payment of rate, 291. rate must be signed by, 316, 322. declaration by, with respect to poor-rate, 323, 374. CITY OF LONDON, separate list for appeals relating to property in, 282. CLERICAL ERROR, person aggrieved by, in rate in Metropolis, 259, 430. CLERK, to Assessment Committee, remuneration of, 371. to Assessment Committee to furnish clerk of peace with totals of Valuation List, 380. to Assessment Sessions in Metropolis, 405. COAL MINE, rateable, 193, 194. even if no profit made, 194. flooded, how rated, 1 ( J4. no deduction for repairs and renewals of, 194. deduction for repair, etc., of plant of, 194. land and buildings in connection with, rateable, 194, 195. is property " other than land," 195, 196. rateable at improved value, 19i», 200. royalty to be taken into account in assessing, 201-204. nryalty payable "in kind" rateable, 204-2(17. situate in more than one parish, 207, 208. COLLECTION, rate for, not included in terminal, 95, 96. cost of where rent paid weekly, 64. tithe rent-char.ge, 227, 228. 518 INDEX. COMMISSION, to owner who agrees to pay poor-rate, 56, 57, 387, 388. is ordered by vestry to pay poor-rate. 56, 57, 388, 389. COMMITMENT, warrants for, in default of distress, to whom directed, 332. in default of distress, form of warrant for, 339-441. COMMON LANDS, when rateable, 11—13. COMPANY, liquidator of, when liable for poor-rate. 6, 7. notice of valuations to be given to, 378. COMPENSATION. for tolls payable by canal company, 141, 142. payable under act of incorporation of canal company, no deduction allowed for, 143. 144. mill owners not rateable for tolls received as, for loss of water. 189. COMPETITIVE VALUE. 114. COMPLAINT, of overseer against ratepayer, 334, 335. form of summons upon, of overseer against ratepayer, 334, 335. CONSENT. motions at County of London Quarter Sessions must be signified by counsel, 280. appeals heard by, where no notice given, 243. 306, 307. CONTRIBUTION, id' parish to Union, how calculated, 366, 367. CONTPJBUTIVE VALUE, in respect of railways, 108-114. COPPER MINE, how rateable, 196, 197, 442-444. deduction of one-half of rate by tenant, 196, 197. COPEOLITES, land used for digging for, rateable, 208, 209. CORPORATION, liable for deficiency of poor-rate on land taken by, under the Lands Clauses Act, 59-61. property of, not exempt from poor-rate, 89. notice of appeal against a rate to, seized in fee of lands omitted from poor-rate, 308. COSTS, replevin for goods taken under warrant of distress for, 236, 291. no, where Assessment Committee appear as respondents without consent of Guardians, 244, 245, 377. provision as to, where Assessment Committee respondents on appeal. 378. power of justices as to, at Special Sessions, 245, 321. where case stated for High Court, 250, 256, 257, 349. members of Assessment Committee not personally liable for, 251. order of reference silent as to, 251, 344, 350. subsequent Court of Quarter Sessions cannot award, 251, 255, 344. in discretion of arbitrator, 252, 351. Quarter Sessions may award, 254, 344. taxation of, after Sessions by consent, 255, 344-346. INDEX. 519 COSTS-^-(co?itinued). cannot be given against Crown officer, 255, 344. where appeal dismissed on ground of jurisdiction, 255. Sessions may order, to be paid to clerk of the peace, 255, 344. Sessions may order, to be paid to successful party, 255, •">! I. taxed between hearing and adjourned hearing, 25 '>. 345. taxed at adjourned Sessions, 256, 345. of vexatious or frivolous appeals, .'it.'i. of appeal not entered or prosecuted, 256, .°>1<'>. default in payment of, 256, 346. of warrant of distress for poor-rate, 330. one warrant of distress, for rate and, 332. High Court may enforce orders of Quarter Sessions Eor, 352. in respect of several summonses where one would have sufficed, 353. of new survey or valuation ordered by Quarter Sessions. 369, 370, 371. of map or plan ordered by Assessment Committee, 380. of levying rate, when owner liable for, 391. [IN METROPOLIS.] no, where Assessment Committee appear as respondents withoul consent of Guardians, 267. of appeal to Special Sessions, 267, 2tiX, 411, 422. Quarter Sessions. 277, 281, 411, 422. High Court by special ease, 278. of Valuation List ordered by Quarter Sessions, 411. of appeal incurred by Assessment Committee or overseers, 122. of valuation, 427. COTTAGE, definition of, in Agricultural Hates Act, 461, 466. COTTON MILL, how rated when not worked, 33. COUNSEL. Vide Barrister. COUNTRY HOUSE, how rated, 35. COUNTY COUNCIL. premises occupied by, for administrative purposes not exempt Iron, rating, 79. return to be made to, under Agricultural Hates Order, 482, 183. adoption by, of division of rateable value of agricultural land and buildings, 486, 487. COUNTY COURT, exempt from rating, 78. COUNTY OF LONDON QUARTER SESSIONS, orders regulating proceedings on appeal to, 279-281. notices of motion to, must be served two clear days before meeting 280. consent motions may be made at any time at, n. 231. from gross value to obtain rateable value in Metropolis, 123, lot. of rate by tenant of wood or plantation, 441. DEFAULT, in payment of costs, 256, 346. DEFICIENCY, of poor-rate on land taken under Lands Clauses Act to lie made up by promoters, 58-61. under Agricultural Rates Act to be certified bv Local Governmenl Board, 455. DELIVERY, rate for collection and, not included in terminal. 95, 96. DEPOSIT, of Valuation List, 237, 258, 262, 359, 362, 363, 367,402, 403, 412, II I. in lieu of recognizance on appeal to Special Sessions in Metropolis, 266, 267, 280.' in lieu of recognizance on appeal to Quarter Sessions in .Metropolis. 272, 273, 280. notice of , of Valuation List to state mode of objecting in Metropolis, 101. DEPRECIATION, deduction for, 90, 93, 121, 122. DIRECTLY PRODUCTIVE, property rateable divisible into indirectly and, 14 n -15tJ. DIRECTORS, deduction for salaries of, 93, 211. DISTILLERY, machinery in, how far rateable. 40. 41. DISTRESS, replevin in case of goods unlawfully taken under a. 235. where appeal disallowed, 235. replevin in case of, for costs, 236, 291. overseers may levy, for rates, 290. may be levied on churchwarden or overseer for non-paymenl ol rate, 291. appeal against, 3U0. notice of appeal not to prevent, 304. _ justices must issue warrant of, if rate good on face ol it, 304. costs of warrant of, for poor-rate, 330. imprisonment in default of, 331, 332. one warrant of, for rate and costs, 382. warrant of, to whom directed, 332. against ratepayer, form of, 336-339. commitment in default of, form of, 339-341. 522 INDEX. DOCK COMPANY, statutory restriction against earnings of, 19, 42-44. rateable in parish where docks are situate, 47, 1 72-171). where expenses of maintaining docks exceed receipts, 129. rent payable for, by tenant from year to year, 162, 163. enhanced value of land occupied by, 163-168. how rated, 164, 165. rateable in respect of dues received, 165-168. statutory prohibition against earnings, 171, 172. acreage principle only applied ex necessitate, 175-17G. steam-tug used by, deduction for, 176, 177. deduction for floating capital, 176, 177. rating of, where docks produce no profit, 177, 178. machinery attached to, 178. where exclusive possession of property has been parted with by, 178, 170. specimen valuation of, 498-500. DOCKS, trustees of, not exempt from rating, 163, 164. rateable value of, which communicate with each other, 174. acreage principle only to he applied ex necessitate to rating of, 175-176. where no profit produced by, 177, 178. premises used in connection with, but rateable apart from, 177, 178. rateable value of premises enhanced by proximity to, 178. DUES, dock company rateable in respect of, 165-168. harbour rateable for, 168-171. payable "in kind" rateable, 204-207. mining, include royalty or toll, 414. EARNINGS, where restricted by statute, 42-44, 159, 171, 172. not material in assessing rateable value of, 49-52. non -parochial, rateable value increased by, 52-53, 108, 157, 158. EASEMENT, not rateable, 21, 27-29, 87, 181, 188, 189. ELECTRIC LIGHT COMPANY, rateable to poor-rate, 145-147. rateable value of, 146, 147. apportionment of rateable value of, among parishes, 149-156. specimen valuation of, 503-505. ENHANCED VALUE, 20, 39, 99-102, 127-129, 1:^7-139, 163-168, 177, 178, 186, 187, 215, 216, 449. EVIDENCE, Assessment Committee cannot compel production of, 131, 236, 237, 261. that pier between high and low water-mark lies within parish must be given by parish seeking to enforce rate, 186. Justices at Quarter Sessions in Metropolis may compel production of evidence 276, 277, 407. minutes of Assessment Committee to be, 356, 357. of making and publication of poor-rate, 393. when Valuation List in force in Metropolis conclusive, of gross and rateable value, 416, 417. Valuation List, how proved in, 427. INDEX. EXCESS OF ACCOMMODATION, rateable in certain cases of exemption, 73-75. EXCHANGE TOLL, 99. EXCLUSIVE OCCUPATION, 20-32. of road by tramway, 21. intention of parties to l>e considered, 22. 23. question of fact, 23, 24. by telephone company, 24. by telegraph company, 24, 25. lodger has no, 29. refreshment-contractor has no, 30. where railway company lets part of its premises, 124. of part of station, 126. of part of property of dock company, 178. EXEMPTIONS FROM RATING, 72-89. Crown property, 72-79. royal palaces, 73. harracks, 73. prisons, 74, 75. premises rented by Postmaster-General, how far exempt, 75, 7»). Royal Academy, 7(1. museum, 76. Royal bridge, 76, 77. Police Courts and stations, 77, 78. County Court, 77, 78. Assize Court, 77, 78. Sessions Court, 78, 79. judges' lodgings, 78, 79. personal property, 80, 324. turnpike tolls, 80, 81. churches and chapels, 81, 314. Literary, Scientific, and Art Societies, 81-85, 325-329. lighthouses, to what extent, 85, 86. volunteer storehouses, 86, 87. Sunday and Ragged Schools, 87, 385. ambassadors and attaches. 87. easements, 87. unoccupied property, 87. partial, of allotments, orchards, agricultural laud, 87, 88, 451, 152, 153. unoccupied property, 87. by local Act of Parliament, 88, 144. canal company, when exempt, 144. when unnecessary to seek relief from Assessment Committee prior t" appeal in case of statutory, 377. EXISTING VALUE, of brick-held, 32, 33. 201-204. poor-rate assessed on, 32-35, 130, 131, 156, 157, 201-204. F "FAILURE TO OBTAIN RELIEF," 234, 238, 375, 376. FARES, . . .. to be taken into account in estimating the rateable value ol railway. 94, 95. FEE, . ., payable by scientific or literary society claiming exemption, ■>->■ on appeal in Metropolis, 406. 524 INDEX. FERRY, rateable, 186-188. mileage principle not applicable to rating of, 186. rateable value of, enhanced by tolls received, 186. FIXE, on breach of Local Government Board's regulations under Agricultural Rates Act, 459, 489. FISHERY, deduction allowed from gross value for rate levied under local Act, 220, 221. FISHING, RIGHT OF. Vide Sporting Rights. FLOATING BARGE, occupier of, when rateable. 183. FLOATING CAPITAL, deduction for, 116, 176. 177. FLOATING DOCK, occupier of, when rateable, 182-184. FLOATING PIER, occupier of, when rateable to poor-rate, 182. FLOATING PONTOON, when rateable, question of fact, 184. FLOODED .MINK. how rated, 34, 194. FORM, of notice of objection, outside the Metropolis, 232. in the Metropolis, 260. of notice of appeal, outside the Metropolis, 247. ■ in the Metropolis, 265. of petition of appeal to Quarter Sessions in Metropolis, 273, 274. in which poor-rate is to be made. 316, 322. 372. 374. 431. 435. of poor-rate in local Act of Parliament must be followed, 323. of complaint by overseer against ratepayer, 334, 335, 336. of summons upon complaint of overseer against ratepayer, 336. 337. of warrant of distress against ratepayer, 336-339. of Valuation List. 374. 423. 433, 485. FORTIFICATIONS. land used for, how far rateable, 76. FOWLING, RIGHT OF. Vide Sporting Rights. FREEHOLD, no deduction allowed for things attached to, 36, 37. 117. 118. 159-161, 178. FURNISHED HOUSE, owner rateable for, 58. G GAME, RIGHT OF KILLING, Etc. Vide Sporting Rights. GAS COMPANY, reservoirs, pipes, mains, etc., rateable. 145-147. rateable value of, 147, 148. apportionment of rateable value of, among parishes, 149-156. INDEX. GAS COMPANY— (continued). works in excess of actual requirement, 156, 157. statutory restriction against earnings, 42-44, 159. no deduction allowed for articles attached to freehold or essential to works, 159-161. deduction for meters, 160. Assessment Committee to give notice of valuation to, .'57s. specimen valuation of, 501, 502. GENERAL CHARGES, of a railway, what included in. 93. GENERAL RATE, deduction for, 228. GOODWILL, no deduction for, 123. GOVERNMENT, school rateable, 76. GROSS ESTIMATED RENTAL, defined, 4, 359. GROSS RECEIPTS, of railway, basis of rate, 90. what included in, 94-96, 102. . collection and delivery rates not included in, 95, 96. receipts from trade upon another company's line not included in, 98, 99. deductions from, to obtain rateable value of gas, electric light, or water company, 147. apportionment of rateable value according to, 149-156. GROSS VALUE defined, 5, 398. of tin, lead, and copper mine, 196, 442-444. alteration of, notice to occupier, in Metropolis, 258, 400, 401. notice of appeal affecting, must be served on surveyor of taxes in Metropolis, 281. totals of, to be sent to every Assessment Committee in Metropolis, 403. when Valuation List in Metropolis conclusive evidence of, 416. 417. deduction from, to obtain rateable value in Metropolis. 42.'5, 439. in Metropolis to be inserted in Valuation List, 423. of land used for wood or plantation. 441. of land, etc., used for advertising station, '449. GUARDIANS, Assessment Committee require consent of. to appear as respondents to an appeal, 244, 245, 267, 377. order made by Board of, must be under seal, 318, 319. election of Assessment Committee by Board of, 354, 355, 398. power of, to borrow money for valuation expenses. 379, 380. provision in Metropolis for parish without Board of, 42."), 126. may appoint valuer to assist Assessment Committee in Metropolis. 126. H HARBOUR, iflQ rateable for dues received in respect of occupation of land. 168-J 11. company not rateable for tramways connecting harbour with railway, if tramways maintained exclusively by railway company. 179. 35 526 INDEX. HEREDITAMENT, rateable, 3. enhanced in value by machinery, etc., 20, 36-42, 449. profits of trade not rateable as an, 51. one notice of objection may include one or more, in Metropolis, 21*10. 439. definition of, in Valuation (Metropolis) Act. 1869. used for advertising station, 449. HIGH COURT, case stated for opinion of. after notice of appeal to Quarter Sessions. 249, 250, 275, 348. decision of, entered as judgment of Sessions. 250. appeal from decision of Queen's Bench, 250, 349. Quarter Sessions may state case for opinion of, 250, 277. may remit case to Quarter Sessions, 256, 257, 277. 278. may draw inference of fact, 256, 257, 278. has full power over costs, 250. 257, 27K. no appeal without leave from, on case stated by Quarter Sessions, 257, 278, 349. notice of decision of, must be given to clerk to Assessment Committee. 275. may enforce orders of Quarter Sessions, 352. HOSPITAL, rateable, 16. HOUSE. Vide Buildings. HYPOTHETICAL TENANT, defined, 8. rent payable by, 8, 9. rent payable by, where statutory restriction against earnings, 19. property rateable according to rent payable by, 4, 46, 47, 48. evidence of takings of business inadmissible to ascertain rent payable by. 49. where owner is occupier, 53, 54. rent payable by, where tenancy weekly, 65. <>f railway, where no direct rateable profits, 114. must be assumed where no tenant pussiNc 156. of tithe rent-charge. 227, 228. I IMPRISONMENT, in default of payment of costs of appeal, 256, 346. in default of distress, 331, 332, 389. IMPROVED VALUE, land rateable at, 34. coal mine and quarries rateable at. 199, 200. INCLOSURE ACT, tithe exempted from rate by, 226. INCOME-TAX. deduction for tenant's, 71, 124. no deductions for landlord's. 71. 124. IN COMMUNIBUS ANNIS, property rateable according to its value, 44-47. 67. INDEX INCORRECTNESS, objection to Valuation List on ground of, 232, 259, 360, 361. appeal to Quarter Sessions in Metropolis on ground of, 270. INDIRECTLY PRODUCTIVE, property rateable divisible into directly and, 149—156. INDUSTRIAL SCHOOL, rateable, 77. INHABITANT, means person permanently resident in parish, 280. rates and rate-book may be inspected by, 293, 296, 319, 320 128 129 430. INHABITED HOUSE, separate assessment for, in Metropolis, 431. INLAND REVENUE, allowances by, in connection with rating in Metropolis, 422. INSPECTION, of rates and rate-books, 293, 294, 296, 319. 320, 428, 429. 430. INSTALMENT, overseers may make rate payable by, 391, 392. INSURANCE, to ascertain net annual value deduct cost of, 4, 61-65, 92, 227, 315. INTEREST ON CAPITAL, deduction for, 90, 115-117, 147, 496, 504. Sessions proper judges of amount, 93. INTEREST ON DEBT, no deduction allowed for, 163. J JUDGES' LODGINGS, at assize, exempt from rates, 78, 79. JUDICATURE ACT, 1894, effect of, on case stated for opinion of High Court. 250, 256. 257, 275, 277, 278, 349. JURISDICTION, appeal dismissed for want of, 255. of Special Sessions in Metropolis, 267. 268, 404. outside Metropolis, 245. 320, 321. JUSTICES, interested, 240, 241, 249, 269, 378, 379. may hear appeals by consent where no notice given, 243. jurisdiction of, at Special Sessions, 245, 267, 268, 320, 321, 322, W4, 410. at Quarter Sessions in Metropolis can compel production oJ evidence, 276, 407. power of, at Quarter Sessions in Metropolis. 277, 410, 411. 1 outside Metropolis, 254, 299, to appoint overseer, 296. relief given by, 299, 300. must issue warrant of distress if rate good on face oi it. .-504. not liable as trespassers for acts done to levy rate subsequently quashed, 305. 528 INDEX. JUSTICES— (continued). mandamus to, to allow rate, 317. power of, to order imprisonment in default of distress, 331, 332. may order costs to be paid to clerk of peace or to successful party. ' 255. 344. power of, at Quarter Sessions on appeal to amend mistake or omission in order of, 34(5. overseers must produce Valuation List before, 363, 364. to o-ive notice of time and place of holding Special Sessions in Metropolis. 404. appointment id', for General Assessment Sessions. 405. K KIND, rent payable in, 48, 99. royalties or dues payable in, rateable. 204-207, 446. L LAND, rateable, 3. agricultural, defined, 3. 460. agricultural, reduction in rates on, 3. used for plantation or wood, 3, 212, 213, 440, 441. used for growth of saleable underwood. 3, 212-214, 440, 441. sporting rights when severed from occupation of. 3. 217, 218, 442. rate to be made on net annual value of, 4. where occupier of. cannot legally become tenant. 8. rateable where occupation beneficial, 10. rateable where occupation of value, 13. used for sewage farm, 17. purchased for sewers, 17, 18. rated according to its existing value, 32-35. rated in its improved state. 34. with machinery attached, 36-42. with statutory prohibition against earnings, 42-44. rateable according to value in communibus annis, 44-47, 67. rateable in parish where situate, 47, 190. rateable according to rent hypothetical tenant would pay. 4H. rent of, percentage of purchase price. 54. where owner rateable instead of occupier, 53-58. taken under Lands ( ilauses Act, deficiency of poor-rate on, 58-61. where owner has agreed to pay rates instead of occupier, 61. rateable value in ease of yearly tenancy, 61, t>2. lease, 63, 64. weekly tenancy, 64, 65. outside prison and worked by convicts not exempt from rating, 75. occupied by post office, how far exempt from rating, 75, 76. used for fortifications, how rated, 70. what included, in assessing railway station, 130. canal company rated as occupier of, 134, 135. canal company rateable according to value of adjacent, 135-140. conflict of decisions on canal rating, 136-140. on which goods landed from canal, exempt from rating where no dues paid, 144. directly and indirectly productive of rateable value. 149-156. INDEX. LAND— (continued). occupied by duck company, enhanced value of, 163 dock company rateable in respecl <>l' dues connected with occ ition ol 165-168. occupied by ferry, enhanced in value by lulls. 1st. occupied to render river navigable, when rateable, 188. occupied in connection with mine rateable, 194, 195. exclusively occupied for digging for coprolites, 208, 209. enhanced in value 1 » v sporting rights, 215-217, 220. used for advertising station rateable, 222. 448, I 19. no deduction from rateable value for corn-renl payable to vicar 226 227. ' power of surveyor to enter upon, for survey, 319. acquired by Postmaster-General for telegraph purposes, rateable value of, 384. LANDING-PLACE, of ferry rateable, 186-188. LANDLORD, where tenant makes bargain with, to do repairs, 62. property tax, no deduction for, 71, 124, 230. LANDS CLAUSES ACT, land taken under, how rated, 58-61. LAND TAX, no deduction allowed for, 71, 230. LEAD MINE, rateable value of, 196, 1«.»7. 442-444. deduction by tenant of one-half rate on, 196, 197. LEASE, rateable value of property held under, 63, 64. with premium, (>3. LESSEE, objection by, to Valuation List in Metropolis, 259, 138. appeal by, to Special Sessions in Metropolis, 265, 438. of mine, deduction of rate by, 444, 445. LIBRARY, when exempt from poor-rate, 82, 83. LIGHTHOUSE, when exempt from rating, 85, 86. LIGHTING RATE, deduction for, 228. LIQUIDATOR, as occupier, when rateable, 6, 7. LITERARY SOCIETY. exempt from rating, 81-85, 325-329. subscription must be voluntary, 81. three copies of rules to be submitted to barrister, 327. provision where barrister refuses certificate of exemption, 328. expenses, how rateable value of railway isaffected by, 105, L06, 1 11. 112 profits of lock are. 142, 143. expenses of maintaining lock are not, 143. 530 INDEX. LOCAL ACT, exemptions from poor-rate under, 88. canal company exempt from rating under, 144. form of rate in, must be followed. 323, 366, 370. unions under, included in Union Assessment Act, 1862, 373. LOCAL BOARD, not exempt from rating, 79, 80. LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD, expenses of clerk of Assessment Sessions allowed by, 422. proceedings of Assessment Committee to be reported to, 357. to certify annual sums payable under Agricultural Rates Act. 455. returns by spending authorities and Assessment Committee under Agricultural Rates Act, 457, 479, 480. power of, to make orders under Agricultural Rates Act, 458, 459. fines for breach of regulations by, under Agricultural Rates Act, 459. LOCAL RATES, property rateable under Rating Act, 1874, liable for, 445. LOCAL TAXATION ACCOUNT, payment out of, in respect of deficiency arising from exemption of agricultural land, 454, 455. LOCK, profits of, rateable in parish in which lock is situate, 142, 143. expenses of maintaining, not local, 143. LOCOMOTIVE EXPENSES, what included in, 92. LODGER, not rateable, 29. LUNATIC ASYLUM, how rated, 29. M MACHINERY, buildings with, how rated, 36-42. attached to freehold, 36, 37, 117, 118, 159-161. used in distillery, how far rateable, 40, 41. essential to ship-building. 41. in lace manufactory, 42. used in connection with railway, 117, 118. canal, enhanced value, 127-129. gas company, 159-161. dock Gompany, 178. mine, 194, 195, 199. MAINS. of gas or water company rateable. 145-147. deduction for renewal of, 147. MANDAMUS, to Assessment Committee who have failed to make out provisional list, 263. inspection of rate may be enforced by, 293. to overseers to make rate. 315. to justices to allow rate, 317. INDEX. 581 MANUFACTORY, how rated when not working, 33. how rated in case of strike, 33. machinery on, how rated, 36-42. machinery used at Lace, 42. MAP, power of Assessment Committee to order. 380. MARKET, stallage rateable, 25-27. tolls not rateable, 25-27. tods arising out of use of soil rateable, 26. pens, when rateable, 26. MARRIED WOMAN, imprisonment of, in default of distress, 332, 389. METER, deduction for gas, 160. METROPOLIS, "gross value" of property in, defined, 5, 398. deductions to ascertain rateable value of property in, 62. property not rated by mistake in, 88. quinquennial assessment in, 257, 41 1. making of Valuation List in. 400. deposit of Valuation List in, 258, 413, 414. election of Assessment Committee in, 398. overseers must transmit Valuation List to Assessment Committee, 258. notice to. occupier of alteration in gross or rateable value of heredita- ment in, 258, 400, 401. Assessment Committee may require particulars from owner or occupie of rent of hereditament in, 258, 425. person aggrieved by clerical error in rate in. 259, 430. omission of name of person liable to lie rated m. 259, 431. grounds of objection to Valuation List in, 259, tOl. Assessment Committee must give notice of time tor hearing objeel - 413. who may object to Valuation List in, 259, 260, 401. one notice of objection may include one or more hereditaments in, _••■ 439 to whom notice of objection 0. Valuation Lis. mus1 be given notice Of objection to Valuation List in, how served. 261 *28 objector not bound to produce evidence before Assessment Uoiuro in, 261. T . . -.,, . .,,.., ..... objection to alterations in Valuation List in, 262 362, 363. objection and appeal in respect of Supplemental List, J.-. "■ • objections to Provisional List, 263, 419, 4JL no appeal from decision of Assessment * ommittee in respeel visional List, 263. i i ; , •v,", i-'-' overseers not bound to insert property in ^'T " ' I ^ V dcl'ml. of Assessment Committee bound to make out Provisional List overseers, 263. ,,,,.„. Committee 264, who may appealto Special Sessions from Assessment Oom time for holding Special Sessions, 264 403 404 414. poor-rate recoverable pending appeal, 264, ->>• • -".'• appeal must be to next practicable Sessions, M. notice of appeal to Special Sessions. 26o, 2bb, 109, HI. 532 INDEX. METROPOLIS— {continued). appellant must enter into recognizance on appeal to Special Sessions, 266, 267, 279. Assessment Committee as respondents to appeal, 267. who may appear at Special Sessions, 267. extent of jurisdiction of Special Sessions, 267, 268, 404. appeal to Quarter Sessions, who may, 268, 269, 408. grounds of appeal to Quarter Sessions. 268, 269, 408. time for holding Quarter Sessions in, 268, 269, 407, 414, 415. "persons aggrieved" not entitled to obtain alteration of total of gross or rateable value, 269, 408. where justices are interested, 269. notice of appeal to Quarter Sessions in, 270. 271. 409, 414. on whom it must be served, 270, 409. mode of service of notice of appeal, 271, 428. respondents must give notice of their intention to appear, 272, 280. notice of appeal must contain all grounds of appeal, 272. appellant to Quarter Sessions to enter into recognizances, 272, 273, 279. appeals to Quarter Sessions to be entered by petition, 273, 274, 280. form of petition, 273, 274. time for lodging petition, 273. on appeal to Quarter Sessions appellant and respondent must each state his case, 274, 280. case stated by consent for opinion of High Court after notice of appeal to Quarter Sessions, 275, 412. effect of Judicature Act 1894 upon case stated. 275. power of justices at Quarter Sessions to summon witnesses, 276. 277, 407. jurisdiction of Quarter Sessions in, 277, 410. appeal from justices at Quarter Sessions by special case. 277. 27H, 412. no order made on appeal affecting gross value of property in, unless notice of appeal lias been served on surveyor of taxes, 281. costs of appeal in. 281, 411. solicitor must attend to settle order of Quarter Sessions in, 281. scheme for regulating the holding of Courts of Quarter Sessions in, 282, 283. definition of, in Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869, 397. duplicate of Valuation List to be sent to surveyor of taxes, 400. notice of deposit of Valuation List to state mode of objection, 401. surveyor of taxes may inspect, copy, or object to Valuation List, 401, 402. Assessment Committee to appoint person to make Valuation List in default of overseers, 402. Valuation List to be certified by Assessment Committee, 402. totals of gross and rateable values to be sent to every Assessment Com- mittee in, 403. quorum of Quarter Sessions in, 406. fees on appeal in, 406, 407. places for hearing appeals to Quarter Sessions in, 407. alteration of Valuation List by Quarter Sessions, 410. when Quarter Sessions may appoint person to make valuation or Valua- tion List, 410, 411. transmission of Valuation List by overseers to Assessment Committee, 413, 414. time before which Assessment Committee must revise Valuation List, 413. duration of Valuation List in, 415. INDEX. METROPOLIS— (continued). when Valuation List in force conclusive evidence of gross and rateable value in, 41 li. 417. overseers to prepare Supplemental List in, 117- U9. provisions as to Provisional List in, 419-422. costs of appeal incurred by Assessment Committee or overseers, 122. allowances by Inland Revenue in connection with rating in, 122. expenses allowed to Assessment Sessions by Local Government Board, 422. contents of Valuation List in, 423. form of Valuation List, 423, 4.'>.">. percentage of deduction from gross value to obtain rateable value, 423. gross value as specified by surveyor of taxes to be inserted in Valuation List, 423. occupier to make returns, 424. provision for parishes where no guardians, or overseers, 425, 42<',. where vestry are overseers, 426. guardians may appoint valuer to assist Assessment Committee, 426, 427. Assessment Committee and overseer may give security lor costs oi valuation, 427. use of public room for appeals in, 427. service of notices in, 428. publication of notices by overseers in, 4i's. inspection of rate books*, etc., by ratepayer. 42S. 429. Valuation List part of rate books in. 429. separate assessment of houses in, 431. deductions from gross value to obtain rateable value. 42!}, 434. form of rate in, 435. when owner or lessee may appeal against a rate in. 438. application of regulations under Agricultural Rates Order to. 187, 189. MILEAGE PRINCIPLE, railway company not rateable on, 102-PlK. ferry not rateable on, 18ii. MINE, rateable, 3, 193, 440, 441 . flooded, how rated, 34. rateable value of coal, 194, 196-199. land and buildings in connection with, rateable, P.M. L95. tin, lead, and copper, how rateable. 196-199, 442-444. 44... meaning of, in Rating Act 1874, 197, 444. deduction of one-half of rate by tenant of. 197-199. royalties or dues payable " in kind" rateable, 204-207, 44t>. situate in more than one parish, 207, 208. works of, in different union from mine. 208, 444. MISTAKE, property not rated by, 88. _ ., . in order of justices, power of Quarter Sessions to amend, d4b. amendment of, in rate in Metropolis, 259, 430. power of guardians to borrow, for valuation expenses, 61\f, iW- MOORINGS, rateable when occupier is in occupation of soil, 180. not rateable when occupier has only licence, 181. 534 INDEX. N NAVIGABLE RIVER, when rateable, 188, 189. NET ANNUAL VALUE, defined, 4, 315, 316. rate to be on, 4, 315. NON-ATTENDANCE, penalty for, upon order of Assessment Committee, 371, 372. NON-PAROCHIAL EARNINGS, rateable value increased by, 52, 53. rateable value of railway increased by, 108-114. rateable value of water company increased by, 157, 158. NOTICE, to occupier of alteration in gross or rateable value of property in Metropolis, 258, 400, 401. of motion to Quarter Sessions for county of London must be a two days', 280. how served on Assessment Committee, 372. of valuations to be given to companies, 378. to occupier of rate in arrear, where owner has become liable for poor- rate, 390. by justices of time and place of holding Special Sessions in Metropolis, 404. of time for holding Quarter Sessions in Metropolis, 4(>7. of time for hearing objections to Valuation List (Metropolis), 413. service of, in Metropolis. 428. NOTICE OF APPEAL. Vide Appeal. NOTICE OF OBJECTION. Vide Objection. OBJECTION. Assessment Committee to hold meetings to hear, 361. to Valuation List, notice of, 232, 361, 363, 375. who may give notice of objection, 232, 360. grounds of, 232. notice of, must contain all grounds of appeal, 233. time for giving notice of, 233. fresh notice of, unnecessary, after rate made, 233, 376. where Valuation List amended by Assessment Committee, fresh notice of. unnecessary. 234. 235. notice of, how served and upon whom. 236. 375. to alterations made by Assessment Committee, 237, 238, 362. 363. by overseers and surveyor of taxes under Agricultural Rates Order, 475-477. [IN THE METROPOLIS.] to Valuation List, grounds of. 259. 401 . who may object, 259, 26(1, 414. one notice of, may include hereditaments separately assessed in Metropolis. 260, 439. to whom notice of, must be given. 260, 261. form of notice of, 260. INDEX. OBJECTION— (continued). service of notice of, 261, 413. to alterations in Valuation List, 262, 414. to Supplemental List, 262, 418. to Provisional List, 263, 420. notice of deposit of Valuation List to statu time and mode of, I'M. Assessment Committee to give notice of time for hearing, U3. OBJECTOR, counsel, solicitor, or agenl of, may appear before Assessment Com- mittee, 236, 261, 401. cannot be compelled to produce evidence, 236, 261. OCCUPATION, defined, 5. not divisible, 6. must be beneficial, 10-13, 15. property rateable, when occupation of value. 13-20. of public park, 20. must be exclusive, 20-32, 124. exclusive, of road by tramway, 21. of docks and sheds by steamship company not exclusive. 22. by telephone company exclusive, 24. by telegraph company exclusive, 24, 25. by refreshment contractor not exclusive, 30. by caretaker, 30, 31. by servant, 31, 32. rateable according to existing value, 32-35. by owner, 53-58. yearly tenancy, 61, 62. by railway company rateable irrespective of benefit derived from ii. 102, 103. of wharves, 102/103, 171. exclusive, of part of station. 126. of railway, prospective value of, 131), 131. of road by tramway company, rateable, 131-133. of soil of river, etc", rateable, 180-184. OCCUPIER, to be rated, 3, 287. of agricultural land, 3, 453. defined, 5. cannot divide up his occupation, 6. structural separation unnecessary between occupiers. 6. liquidator as. 6, 7. where, cannot legally become tenant. 8. occupation of, must be beneficial, 10-13. must be exclusive. 20, 21. if mere licensee not rateable, 27, 181. of bookstall at railway station not rateable, 30. rated according to existing value of property 32-3o. how rated where there is a statutory prohibition agamsl earninj 42-44. where owner is, 53-58, 65, 311, 312. deduction of rate from rent by. M. .".12. 313. for short term may deduct poor-rate from rent. 56, bb, Mi amount of poor-rate payable by. for short term. 387. yearly tenancy. 61, 62. _ liability of incoming, for poor-rate, 72, Mb. liability of outgoing, for poor-rate, 72, .>.>... canal company as. of land. 134. 135. 536 INDEX. OCCUPIER— (continued). of waterworks, public authority as, 146, 147. where trustee, not exempt from rating, 163, 164. of moorings rateable where in occupation of soil, 180. of floating pier, barge, or dock, when rateable. 182-184. notice to, of alteration of gross or rateable value of property in Metropolis, 258, 400, 401. objection by, in respect of Provisional List in Metropolis, 263, 420. may pay rates where owner who has undertaken fails to pay, 390. owner who has agreed to pay poor-rate must give overseers list of, 390. notice to, of rates in arrear, where owner has become liable for poor- rate, 39U. provision for successive, 192. overseers to insert names of every, in rate. 393. to make returns in Metropolis, 424. Assessment Committee may require returns from owner and, in Metro- polis, 425. of mine, deduction of rates by, 444-445. OMISSION. objection to Valuation List on ground of, 232, 360. of person liable to be rated, in Metropolis, 259, 430. ORCHARD. agricultural land, 3, 460, 461. partial exemption from poor-rate of, 87, 88, 451, 454. ORDERS, of County of London Quarter Sessions, 279-281. affecting gross value of property in Metropolis cannot be made unless notice of appeal served on surveyor of taxes. 281. under Agricultural Rates Act, 462-490. ORDINARY YEARS, property to be rated as it exists in. 44-47. 67. OVERSEER. to rate railway on prospective value, 130, 131. objection to Valuation List by. 232, 360, 414. service of notice of objection to Valuation List on, 236, 260, 261, 321, 361, 376. need not obtain consent of Vestry to proceed with appeal, 244. not bound to insert property in Provisional List in Metropolis, 263, 419. Assessment Committee in Metropolis bound to make out Provisional List in default of, 263, 419. appeal by, to Special Sessions in Metropolis, 264, 403. Quarter Sessions, 268, 269, 367, 368, 408. duty of, under statute of Elizabeth, 287, 288. churchwarden not, in rural parish, 289. nomination of, by parish council, in rural parish, 289. may levy rates by distress, 290, 331. must allow inhabitant to inspect rate, 293, 296. penalty for not permitting an inhabitant to iuspect poor-rate, 294. times when accounts must be made up by, 295, 296. must supply copies of poor-rate to inhabitants, 296, 301, 302. penalty for not accounting, 296, 302. death of, appointment of successor, 296. appeal against accounts of, 297, 298. provision to prevent vexatious action against, for distress levied, 300. succeeding, to levy arrears to re-imburse former, 301. not estopped from recovering rate by reason of mistake of predecessor, 301. INDEX. OVERSEER— (continued). power of, where no churchwarden, 302. action against, to recover excess of poor-rate, 305. mandamus to, to make rate, 315. must Bign rate, 316, 317, 358, 374. declaration by, with respect to poor-rate, .'»2:j. 374, 380, 131. penalty on, for not making declaration, 380. form of complaint of, against ratepayer, 334, 335, 336. Order of Quarter Sessions enforced against succeeding, Assessment Committee may require returns from, .'l.">7 . to prepare Valuation List, 358. to sign Valuation List, 359. to deposit Valuation List with parish hooks. 359, 413. to transmit Valuation List to Assessment Committee, 359, 360. must produce Valuation List before justices, 363, 364. to prepare Supplemental List, 364, 417. 419. expenses of, charged on rates, 379. to state period for which rate is made, 391, 392. may make poor-rate payable by instalments. 392. to insert names of all occupiers in rate. 393. definition of, 394, 397. in Metropolis Assessment Committee to prepare Valuation l.i-t iii default of, 402. notice of alteration of Valuation List (Metropolis) to be given to, by Assessment Committee, 412. transmission of Valuation List (Metropolis) to Assessment Committee by, 413. may make out Provisional List in Metropolis, 419. costs of appeal incurred by, in Metropolis, 422. provision in Metropolis for parishes when- no, 425, 426. where vestry is, in Metropolis, 426. may give security for costs of valuation in Metropolis, 427. publication of notices by, in Metropolis. 428. statement of estimated rental and rateable value by, under Agricultural hates Act, 457, 458, 469. definition of, in Agricultural Hates Order. 467. proceedings by Assessment Committee where no statemenl made by, under Agricultural Hates Order, 473. correction of statement of, by Assessment Committee, under Agricul- tural Rates Order, 474. objection by overseers under A gricultural Rates Order, 475-4< <. appeal by, to Special and Quarter Sessions under Agricultural Kates Order, 477-479. statement and returns to he made by, under Agricultural Kates Order where there is no Valuation List for a parish, I*"'. OWNER, when occupier, 53-58. 65, 387-394. may agree to pay poor-rate, 56, 317. 370, 387. failure by, to pay poor-rate after agreement to pay. 390. vestry may compel, to pay poor-rate, 56, 57, 311, 312, d8», &> ■ deductions where owner pays. 57, 388, 389. omitting to pay rates forfeits commission, 389. rateable for furnished house, 58. pays tithe rent-charge under Tithe Act, 1891, 62 221. objection by, to Valuation List in Metropolis. 259, W8. appeal by. to Special Sessions, in Metropolis, 265, 138. where receiver of rent rated as, 31u. person rated as. may appeal, 313. who is not occupier' not to be rated where right id voting for mem of Parliament depends on rating, 313. 538 INDEX. OWNEK— (continued). who agrees to pay rate must give list of occupiers to overseers. 390. when lialile for costs and charges of levying rate. 391. recovery of rates unpaid by. 391. appeal against Valuation Listand rate by. 391, 438. definition of, 394. Assessment Committee may require returns from, in .Metropolis. 425. of advertising station, when, rateable. 448. PALACE. royal, how far rateable, 73. PARISH, property rateable in, where situate, 47. railway rateable on "parochial principle," 102-1(18. wln-re no direct rateable profits of, 114. deduction for renewals in, 121. tramway company extending to more than one parish, 133. profits of a lock rateable in, where lock situate. 142. 143. property directly and indirectly productive of rateable value in, 149-156, 191, 192. docks rateable in, where situate, 172-176. evidence that pier between high and low water-mark lies within parish seeking to enforce rate must be given by, 186. bridge situate in more than one, 191, 192. mine situate in more than one. 207, 208. churchwardens not overseers in rural, 248, 289. contribution by, to Union, how calculated, 366. appeal by overseer on behalf of, 367-369. application of Union Assessment Act, 1862, to single, 382. definition of, 394, 397. appeal against total of gross or rateable value in, in Metropolis. 408. without board of guardians or overseer, provision for, 425, 42i">. assessable value of agricultural land in, 455. returns to be made by overseers under Agricultural Piates Order where there is no Valuation List for, 480. PARISH COUNCIL, notice of objection to clerk of, 233. notice of appeal to clerk of, 242, 247, 249. duties of overseers with respect to objections and appeals transferred to, 289. PARISH OFFICERS. Vide Overseer. PAROCHIAL ASSESSMENT ACT, rule laid down in, 4, 44, 45, 315. PAROCHIAL PRINCIPLE, defined, 47. property rateable according to, 47, 172-176. railway company rated on, 103-108. tramway company assessed on, 133. canal company assessed on, 140-142. apportionment of rateable value on, 149-156. docks rateable on, 172-176. mine situate in more than one parish, 207, 208. INDEX. 539 PENALTY, for not permitting inhabitant to inspect rate, 294, 320. for not keeping book for poor-rate, 302. for non-attendance upon order of Assessment Committee, 371, 372. for injuring rate book, 372. on overseers for not making declaration, 380. on owner who fails to give overseers list of occupiers, 390. for omitting name of any occupier from rate, 393. for not making returns in Metropolis, 425. PENS, in market, rateable, 26. PERMANENCE, necessary element to occupation, 5. PERSONAL PROPERTY, exempt from rating, 80, 289, 324. PERSONAL SERVICES, of incumbent, no deduction allowed for, from gross income of tithe rent-charge, 230, 231. PETITION, appeals to Quarter Sessions in Metropolis must be entered by, 273, 280. form of, 273, 274. PIERS, occupier of floating, rateable when there is a permanent occupation of the soil, 182. landing, when rateable, 182. extending into sea below low water-mark, 185, 18G. between high and low water-mark, 186. PIT, rateable value of, 193-196. PIPES, of gas or water company rateable, 145-147. directly and indirectly productive of rateable value, 149-156. PLAN, Assessment Committee may order, 380. PLANTATION, land used for, rateable, 3, 212, 213, 440, 441. deduction from rent where rateable value increased by Rating Act 1874, 213, 441. rated at enhanced value where there is right of sporting, 215-217. POLICE, courts and stations exempt from rating, 77, 78. residence of, how far exempt, 77, 78. PONTOON, floating, rateable, 184, 185. POOR-RATE. Vide also Assessment Committee, Appeal, Special Sessions, Quarter Sessions, Metropolis. on agricultural land, 3, 453. made on net annual value of hereditament, 4, 315. when liquidator of a company liable for, 6, 7. only valid where occupation beneficial, 10-13. tramway company rateable to, 21, 131. easement not rateable to, 27-29, 87. 540 INDEX. POOB,-RATE-r(continued). market tolls, when rateable to, 25-27. assessed on property in its existing value, 32-35, 202. assessed on enhanced value of land or buildings, 20, 36-42, 99-102, 127-129, 168, 177, 186, 215. where there is a statutory prohibition against earnings, 42-44. where no profit made, 45, 46. assessed on property in parish where situate, 47, 102-108, 149-156. assessed on rent hypothetical tenant would pay, 48. Assessment and Collection Act, 55-58, 387-394. owner may agree to pay, 56, 57, 387. vestry may order owner to pay, 57, 388, 389. *un paid, recovery of, by owner, 391. deficiency of, on land taken under Lands Clauses Act, 58-61. deduction of, from rent by occupier for short term, 66, 387. amount of, payable by occupier for short term, 387. liability of incoming occupier for, 72, 395. liability of outgoing occupier for. 72, 395. exemptions from, 72-89. buildings used by County Council, how far exempt from, 79. local boards not exempt from, 79, 80. profits of trade exempt from, 80. churches and chapels exempt from, 81. literary, scientific, and art societies exempt from. 81-85. lighthouses, how far exempt from. 85, 86. volunteer storehouses exempt from, 86, ST. Sunday and Ragged Schools exempt from. 87, 385. ambassadors and attaches exempt from. 87. un iccupied property exempt from, 87. corporation property not exempt from, 89. railway company rated to, on parochial principle, 102-108. payable by railway company, enhanced by non-parochial earnings. 108-114. competitive value. 114. interest on capital, deduction for, 93, 115-117. tenant's profits, deduction for. 93. 115-117. no deduction for things attached to freehold or permanently connected with railway. 117. 118. rails and sleepers not exempt from. 119. deduction for renewal, 67, 119-122, 493 507. no deduction for loss on branch line. 122. no deduction allowed for goodwill, parliamentary expenses, or land- lord's income-tax. 123. 124. deduction for tenant's income-tax, 71, 124. railway station, how assessed to, 130. of railway assessed upon prospective value. 130. 131. tramway company rateable to, 131-133. payable by canal company, 134. 135. canal company, how assessed to, 135-140. canal company, when exempt from, 144. gas, electric light, and water companies rateable, 145-147. gas, electric light, and water companies rateable on parochial principle, 149-156.' payable by water company enhanced by non-parochial earnings, 157, 158. ' payable by dock company, 164-168. payable by harbour commissioners. 168-171. docks assessed to, on parochial principle, 172-176. occupier of moorings rateable to. when in occupation of lied of river. ISO. INDEX. 541 POOR-RATE— (continued). occupier of moorings not rateable when licensee, 181. occupier of floating piers, etc., when rateable to, question of fact, 180-185. piers which extend into sea below low water-mark not rateable to, 185, 186. landing-place of ferry rateable to, 186-188. navigable rivers, when occupier of, rateable to, 188, 189. dam in river not rateable to, 189. bridges rateable to, I'M). 191, 192. mines, quarries, pits, rateable to, 193-196, 201-204. royalties or dues payable "in kind " rateable to, 204-207. cemetery rateable to, 209. land used for plantation, wood, or growth of saleable underwood rateable to, 212-217, 440-442. sporting rights rateable to, 217-220, 440-442. procedure for recovery of, in Tithe Act, 1891, 225. amount recoverable pending appeal, outside Metropolis, 239, 240, 304. to be paid pending appeal in Metropolis, 415. where rate appealed against is reduced, 240, 309. application to refund, after reduction on appeal, 240, 310. action to recover back, erroneously made, 240. action to recover back excess paid, 305. amendment on appeal of, improperly described in rate book, 245. powers of Quarter Sessions as to amendment or quashing of, 254-256, 303, 304, 305, 306. omission from, of person liable to be rated in Metropolis, 259, 430. overseers and churchwardens may levy, by distress, 290, 291, 300. how published, 292, 293, 395. inspection of, by ratepayer, 293, 294, 296, 319, 320, 428, 429. penalty for not permitting an inhabitant to inspect, 294, 320. demand to inspect, must be made at reasonable time and place, 294. copies of, to be supplied to inhabitants, 296, 319. relief given by justices on appeal against, 299, 300. arrears of, may be levied by succeeding overseers to re-imburse former, 301. overseer not estopped from recovering, by reason of mistake of pre- decessor, 301. copies of, to be entered in book, 301-302. justices must levy warrant of distress if rate good on its face, 304. repayment of, to persons struck out from, 309, 310. when goods of occupier may be distrained for rates payable by owner, 312. mandamus to overseers to make, 315. to be made in form given in Parochial Assessment Act, 316, 317, 372, 374. must be signed by overseer, etc., 316. mandamus to justices to allow, 317. not duly allowed, a nullity, 317. must shew on face purpose for which it is made, 317. new survey and valuation for purposes of, 317, 318. form of, 322, 323, 372, 374, 431, 435, 485. declaration by overseers and churchwardens as to, 323, 374, 431. warrant of distress for costs of, 330. one warrant of distress for, and costs, 332. summons for non-payment of, how served, etc.. 332, 333.. on payment or tender of, and costs, all proceedings to cease, 333. 36 542 INDEX. POOR-RATE— (continued). consolidation of proceedings for the recovery of different rates against same person, 353. Assessment Committee must alter Valuation List where rate is amended on appeal, 363. to be made in accordance with approved Valuation List, 365, 366. made under local Act of Parliament, 366. expenses of overseers charged on, 379. appeal against, by owner, 391, 438. overseers to state period for which, is made, 391, 392. when deemed to be made, 393. evidence of making and publication of, 393. overseers to insert name of all occupiers in, 393. definition of, 394. deduction of, by tenant of wood or plantation. 441. advertising stations rateable to, 222, 44^. POST OFFICE, exempt from rating, 75. PREMIUM, with lease, effect on rateable value, 63. PRISON, how far exempt from rating, 74, 75. PRIVATE BOX, at theatre, when rateable, 29. PROCEDURE, for recovery of rate in Tithe Act 1891, 225. on objection and appeal against rates outside Metropolis, 232-257. in the Metropolis, 257-283. PROFIT, where restricted by statute, 42-44. where none made, 45, 46, 177, 178. of trade not rateable, 49, 50, 51, 52, 80, 324. where no direct rateable profits, 114. proof on appeal by railway or canal company. 131. of lock rateable in parish in which lock is situate 142, 143. where none made by water commissioners. 146. where docks produce no, 177, 178. coal mine rateable where none made, 194. of cemetery company rateable, 209. 210. PROOF, of receipts by railway or canal company on appeal, 131. onus of, on appeal, where rateable property omitted, 244. onus of, where appellant alleges he has no rateable property, 244. PROPERTY, rateable, 3. where occupation beneficial, 10. where occupation of value, 13. rated according to existing value, 32-35, 130, 131. rated in its improved condition, 33. used for public purposes, how rated, 34, 35. occupation of, must be exclusive, 20-32. rateable according to its value in communibus annis, 44-47, 67. where no profit made, how rated, 45, 46. rent basis of annual value of, 4, 46, 47, 315. INDEX. 543 PROPERTY— {continued). rated in parish where situate, 47. rateable according to rent hypothetical tenant would pay, 48, 315. rateable value of, increased by non-parochial earnings, 52, 53. where owner is occupier, 53, 58. unoccupied, 54, 55, 87. poor-rate on, during construction, 58. under Lands Clauses Act, 58-61. under Lands Clauses Act where owner has agreed to pay rates instead of occupier, 61. rateable value in case of yearly tenancy, 61, 62. lease,' 63, 04, 68, 69. weekly tenancy, 64, 65. deduction for renewal, when of perishable nature, 67-70. where tenant does repairs, 70. exempt from rating, 72-89. Crown, exempt, 72-79. Crown rateable where there is beneficial occupation. 78, IS). personal, exempt, 80. exempt from poor-rate by local Act, 88. exempted by mistake, 88. of corporation, not exempt from poor-rate, 89. directly and indirectly productive of rateable value, 149-156. where dock company parts with exclusive occupation of part of, 178. appeals relating to, in City of London, in separate list, 282. taken by Postmaster-General for Electric Telegraph, 384. made rateable by Rating Act, 1874, liable for local rates, 445. PROPERTY TAX, no deduction allowed for landlord's, 71, 124. PROVISIONAL CERTIFICATES, under Agricultural Rates Act, 456. PROVISIONAL LIST, objections to, 263, 420. no appeal from decision of Assessment Committee in respect of, 263, 422. overseers not bound to insert property in, 263, 419. Assessment Committee bound to make out, in default of overseers, 263, 419. provisions as to, in Metropolis, 419-422. PUBLICATION, of poor-rate, 292, 293, 393. where no church, 395. of notices by overseers in Metropolis, 428. PUBLIC HOUSE, rating of brewery with tied, 50, 51. rating of, 51, 52. actual profits of, not material, 51. evidence not admissible to prove takings of a tenant of, 52. licence will increase rateable value of, 51. PUBLIC PARK, rateability of, 20. PUBLIC PURPOSES, property used for, how rated, 34, 35. 36 a 544 INDEX. Q QUARRY, rateable, 193. improved value of, 199, 200. royalty to be taken into account in assessing - , 201-204. situate in more than one parish. 207. 208. QUARTEK SESSIONS, appeal to, 246, 297, 320, 321, 342, 3(37, 368, 477-479. Assessment Committee may appeal to, 377. next practicable Sessions. 246, 298, 377. notice of appeal to. 247, 248. when held, 248. notice must state all grounds of appeal. 249. 342. cannot quash rate for defect not pointed out in notice of appeal, 249. 308. recognizance necessary on appeal to. 246. case may be stated for Queen's Bench after notice of appeal to, 249, 250, 348. arbitration after notice of appeal to, 250, 349. subsequent Court cannot allow eosts of appeal, 251, 255, 344. arbitration by order of, 252, 349. where reference to arbitration abortive, appeal may be heard by. 351. who have right of audience at, 253. power of. to amend defect in notice of appeal. 253, 254. 343, 347. powers of, to amend or quash rate. 254-256, 303, 304, 305, 344. order of, quashing rate, need not order overseers to make new rate. 254. not bound to give reasons for quashing rate. 254, 347. general power of, as to costs, 344. must determine amount of costs, 254, 255, 344, 345. costs of vexatious or frivolous appeals to, 343. unsuccessful party may agree to taxation out of, 255. can award no costs against officer of ( Irown, 255. 344. eosts may be taxed at adjourned, 256. can state case for opinion id' High Court, 256. case remitted to, by High Court, 25(5, 257. powers given to High Court by Judicature Act, 1894, on case stated by, 256, 257, 349. costs in High Court, 256, 257, 349. order of justices at Special Sessions not in force pending appeal to, 322. power of, on appeal to amend mistake or omission in order or judgment. 346. to order substitution of new for defective recognizance, 346. High Court may enforce orders of, 352. power of, to order survey or valuation. 369. appeal to, against decision of Assessment Committee under Agricultural bates Order, 477-479. [IN THE METROPOLIS.'] who may appeal to, from Assessment Committee and Special Sessions, 268, 404, 408. grounds of appeal to, 268, 408. may hear cases remaining after March 31. if they have no1 been deter- mined through pressure of business, 269. time for holding, 268, 269, 407, 414, 415. amount recoverable pending appeal to, 269, 415. INDEX. 54* QUARTER SESSIONS— {continued). notice of appeal to, 270, 271, 409, 414. on whom notice of appeal must be served, 270, 400. mode of service of notice of appeal to, 271, 428. respondents must give notice of intention to appear, 272, 280. notice of appeal must contain all grounds of appeal, 272, 343. appellant to, to enter into recognizances, 272, 273, 279. cannot quash rate on ground not set out in notice of appeal, 272. appeal to, must be entered by petition, 273, 280. time for lodging petition, 273. form of petition, 273, 274. case to be stated by appellant and respondent on appeal to, 274, 280. stated for opinion of High Court after notice of appeal to, 275, 412. eifect of Judicature Act 18!>4 upon case stated, 275. who have right of audience, 275, 276, 281. power of justices to summon witnesses, 276, 407. jurisdiction of justices at, 277, 410. costs of appeal' to. 277, 281, 411. appeal from, by special case, 277, 278, 412. notice of motion to, must be served two clear days before meeting of, 280. consent motions may be made at any time, 280. consents must he signified by counsel, 281. orders affecting gross value not made unless notice of appeal has been served on surveyor of taxes, 281. solicitors to attend on settling order of Court of. 281. srheme for regulating the holding of Courts of, 282, 283. may order valuation or Valuation List to be made, 410, 411. QUEEN'S BENCH. Vide High Court. QUINQUENNIAL ASSESSMENT, in Metropolis. 257, 415, 417. QUOL'UM. of Assessment Committee, 356. of Assessment Sessions in Metropolis, 406. R RABBITS, right to kill. Vide Sporting Rights, 217-220, 440-442. RAGGED SCHOOL. exemption of, from rates, 87, 385. RAILS, rateable, 119. RAILWAY COMPANY, not to be assessed by value of adjoining land. 33. machinery attached to freehold of, how rated. 36-42, 117, 118. statutory restriction against earnings of, 42-44. branch line as feeder to main line, 52, 53. of, how assessed, 53. stations of, how rated, 54, 91, 130. rent payable by tenant from year to year of, 90, 91. gross receipts basis of rate, 90, 91, 94. deductions from gross receipts, to obtain rateable value, 90. •>46 IXDEX. RAILWAY COMPANY— (continued). - iuetion f ■ i -92 127-12 buildings appurtenant to, deduction for. 91. deduction for renewals. 91, 119—121. dirr - - - . J 3 .15-117. 115-117. rrciation. . - 121. taxes _ - ipts of. ioclud - - do not include collection and delivery rates toll paid to another company not to be taken into account in assessing rateable vale 2 - receipts from trade upon another company's lines. 98, 99. ir-- - -::.:.::-_ : "v. -. t . ange toL'. rent in kind. 3sess enefit derived from occupation of lat. poor-rate payable by. parochial principle, 10; .~:>le value of. how affected by local exp . Ill, 112. rateable value of. enhanced by non-parochial can _ -114. guarantee to branch line. conflict of de>. - -nt of branch lines. 113. competitive vatue. 114. bo^- fits .14. no deduction for things essential ti> railway. 117. - ssonbi j, 122 goodwill. : . parliamentary expe:.- 12 124. landlord's income-tax. I _ deduction for tenant's income-tax. 124. where part or ipation. 1_- rent paid by one company to anott. - station, 124-12 r-rate upon pr< - due, 130, 131. proof or inv to produce evidence, 131. tramway company rateable like. '. - company rateable for tramway maintain?-! exclusively by them. I notice of valuations to be given to. by Assess 378. imen valuation of. - 197 KATE. F v Kate. r.oition of, in Agricultural Kates Order. 4 RATEABLE HEREDITAMEi - i. 31! RATEABLE VALUE. - ofbufldin. I 11 471. of country-h of buildings with machinery. 36— - of brew of public-hou»- increased by non-parochial eamin _ _ ' 108-114,157,158. of unoccupied property. ' - in case of yearly tenancy. 61 _ "lease." 63. 64. " weekly tenane , IXDEX. RATEABLE VALUE— (continued). of railway, how calculated. 9<», 91. of railwav. toll paid to another company not to be taken into account. of railway, receipts fr-jni trade upon another company's Hi. act of free ninhine powers on. 99-1 . rent in kind of railway ssess f benefit derived from occupation land", l. 177. _ of premi- - - in connection with docks, 1 of ferry, - ofbri - - - -191. apportionment of. of bridges, 191, 1^2. of mines, quarries, pit.-. of tin. copper, and lead mines. 196-199. 442-444. in ass* ssing, £ mines, quarries, etc.. roy i ty I taken inl . _ - of cemetery. 209-211. t sporting rights. 217-220, 442-444. ofadvertis _ si don, 222, 448 alteration of, of property in Metropolis— n b" • - " - 401. . Ar too high a ground of appeal to Quarter Sessions in pons 268, 2 of land acquired by Postmaster-General for electric telegraph. iRH 548 INDEX. RATEABLE VALUE— (continued). ' totals of, to be sent to every Assessment Committee in Metropolis, 403. when Valuation List in force in Metropolis conclusive evidence of, 41(5, 417. in Supplemental List, how ascertained, 419. deduction from gross value to obtain, in Metropolis, 423, 434. of land used for wood or plantation, 212, 441. of hereditaments used for advertising station, 449. of orchards, 451, 454. of allotments, 452, 454. statement of, by overseers, under Agricultural Rates Act. 457, 458, 469, 470. definition of, under Agricultural Hates Order. 46 >. division of, of agricultural land and buildings, 486, 4S7. RATE -BOOK. Vide Book, Ratepayer, Inhabitant. RATEPAYER, appeal to Special Sessions by, 238-241, 264, 268, 320 403. Quarter Sessions by, 246, 268, 269. 297, 320, 408. form of complaint by overseer against, 334, 335, 336. definition of, in Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 397. inspection of rate-book, etc, by, 293, 294, 296, 319, 320, 428, 429. RATES AND TAXES, deduction for, to ascertain net annual value, 4, 61, 62, 315. deduction for, from rateable value, 66, 67. covenant to pay, in lease of mine, effect of. 198, 199. RECEIPTS. Vide also Gross Receipts. where expenses exceed, 129. proof of, on appeal by railway or canal company, 131. RECEIVER, of rent, when rated in place of owner, 313. RECOGNIZANCE, appellant to enter into, 246, 266, 272. 279, 320. waiver of, or deposit in lieu of. 266, 267, 272. 273, 279. power of Quarter Sessions to order substitution of new for defective, 346, 347. recovery of forfeited, 351. RECOVERY, of various rates against same person, consolidation of proceedings, 353. RE-DEPOSIT, of Valuation List. 237. 2(52, 414. REFORMATORY SCHOOL, rateable, 77. REFRESHMENT CONTRACTOR, at railway station, when rateable, 30. RELIEF, failure to obtain, from Assessment Committee, condition precedent to appeal, 234, 238, 375, 376. given by justices on appeal against rate. 2H9, 300. from Assessment Committee unnecessary in case of appeal on ground of statutory exemption, 377. INDEX. 549 RENEWAL, deduction for, to ascertain rateable value, (51-65, 67-70, 92, 119-122, 147, 227. RENT, payable by hypothetical tenant basis of annual value, 4, 46, 47, 48, 148, 315.' paid by occupier not necessarily rent hypothetical tenant would pay, where, cannot be earned on account of statutory prohibition, 10, 42-44. payable " in kind," 48, 99. where more than hypothetical tenant would pay, 49. evidence of takings inadmissible to ascertain rent, 4'.*. of branch line of railway, 53. where owner is occupier, 53-58. of land taken at percentage of purchase-price, 54. of railway stations, 54, 130. of furnished house, 58. deduction of poor-rate from, by occupier for short term, 66, 312, 313, 3^7. of railway, 90, 99. rent paid by railway company for use of station to be taken into account in assessing rateable value, 124-126. traffic receipts basis of rent payable by tramway company, 133. basis of rateable value, 148. payable by tenant of dock company, 162, 163. premises attached to docks, 178. royalty payable by lessee of mine to be taken into account as part of, 201-204. annual, of tithe rent-charge, 227, 228. REPAIRS, deduct cost of, to ascertain annual value, 4, 61-65, 119-122, 147, 227, 315. where tenant pays, 61, 62, 68, 70. of banks of a canal, 143. REPLEVIN, for goods unlawfully taken under distress for rates, 235. even if appeal against poor-rate has been disallowed, 235. of goods taken to enforce payment of costs, 236. RESPITE, of appeal, fresh notice of appeal unnecessary, 306. RESPONDENT, to appeal to Quarter Sessions in Metropolis must give notice of intention to appear, 272, 280. and appellant to Quarter Sessions in Metropolis must state their case, 274, 280. REVISION, of Valuation List in Metropolis every five years, 417. RIVER, persons authorised to make navigable, have only easement, 28, 188, 189. persons who occupy soil of, rateable, 180. navigable, when rateable, 188. dam in, not rateable, 181*. ROLLING-STOCK, deduction for depreciation of, 121, 122. 550 INDEX. ROYAL ACADEMY, exempt from rating, 76. ROYALTY, to be taken into account in assessing rateable value of mine or quarry, 46, 201-204. • part of rent, 204. , payable " in kind " rateable, 204-207. 446. RUNNING POWERS, where railway company has, 99. SALEABLE UNDERWOODS. land used for growth of, 3, 212-217, 440. 441. how rated, 45, 214. defined, 213, 214. deduction of rate by tenant of. 213, 441. SCHOOL, government, rateable, 76. reformatory, rateable, 77. industrial, rateable, 77. Sunday, exempt from rating, 87, 385. ragged, exempt from rating, 87. 385. SCHOOL BOARD, school of, rateable, 9, 16. 44. SCIENTIFIC SOCIETY, exempt from rating. 81-85, 325-329. rules of. to he submitted to barrister, 327. appeal where barrister refuses exemption, 328. SERVANT, when occupation by, rateable, 31, 32. of ambassador, when rateable, 87. SERVICE, of notices on Assessment Committee, 372, 428. SESSIONS. Vide also Special Sessions, Quarter Sessions. court, exempt from rating, 78, 79. are proper judges of amount to be allowed for tenant's profit, interest on capital, depreciation, etc., 93. SEWAGE FARM, rateable, 16. 17. works on, rateable. 19. SEWER KATE, deduction allowed for. 70. SEWERS, under road not rateable, 17. on embankment, rateable value of, 17, 18. SHOOTING, RIGHT OF. Vide Sporting Rights. SHORT TERM, occupier for, may deduct poor-rate from rent, 56, 66, 387. amount of rate payable by occupier for, 387. INDEX. 551 SLEEPERS, rateable, 119. SOCIETY, for promotion of literature, science, and art, exempt from rating. 81-85, 325-329. religious, not exempt from rating, 83, 325. educational, not exempt. 83. 326. . appeal by literary or scientific, where exemption claimed, 85, 328, 62V. SOLICITOR, may appear before Assessment Committee, 236, 261. at Special Sessions, 245, 267. must attend to settle order of Quarter Sessions in Metropolis, 281. SPECIAL SESSIONS, appeal to, from Assessment Committee, 238-241, 477-479. when held, 238, 320,321. failure to obtain relief condition precedent to appeal to, 238, 37o. next practicable Sessions, 233, 239, 377. amount recoverable pending appeal to, 239, 240, 304. notice of* appeal to, 241-244. to whom given, 241, 243, 307, 320, 375. form of, 242. how served, 242, 372. where not given to person objected to, 242, 243. must be reasonable, 243. to all inhabitants unnecessary, 243. must state all grounds of appeal, 244. abandonment of grounds of appeal, 244. Assessment Committee may appeal from decision of, 24o. who have right of audience at, 245. power of justices at, 245, 320, 321. costs of appeal to, 245, 321. appeal to Quarter Sessions from, 246, 320, 321. order of justices at, not in force pending appeal to Quarter Sessions, 322. ' justices at, have no power to state a case, 246. [IN METROPOLIS.] who may appeal to, 264, 403. time for holding, 264. 403. 414. justices at, can only inquire into value of property, 264. amount recoverable pending appeal to, 264. appeal must be to next practicable, 264. time for notice of appeal to, 414. to whom notice of appeal to, must be given, 265, 266, 40J. form of notice of appeal to, 265. _ cannot quash rate on ground not alleged in notice of appeal, 2bb. appellant must enter into recognizance, 266, 279. who may appear at, 267. extent of jurisdiction of, 267, 268, 404, 410. costs of appeal to, 267, 411. appeal to Quarter Sessions from, 268, 269. form of notice of appeal from, to Quarter Sessions, 271. appeal to Quarter Sessions from, by petition, 273. justices to give notice of time and place of holding, 404. appeal to, from Assessment Committee under Agricultural Rates Order, 477-479. 552 INDEX. SPECIMEN VALUATION. of a railway. 493-497. of a dock company, 498-500. of a gas company, 501, 502. of an electric light company. 503-505. of a water company. 506, 507. SPENDING AUTHORITIES, under Agricultural Rates Act, 450. 460. 461. returns to Local Government Board by, under Agricultural Rates Act. 457. 467. definition of, in Agricultural Rates Order. 466. amount raised in the last financial year by, to be determined by Local Government Board under Agricultural Rates Order. 468. SPORTING RIGHTS. rateable, 3, 217-220, 440, 441. 442. wood or plantation enhanced in value by, 215-217. 220. severed from occupation of land. 217. 21K. 220, 442. 469. where owner lets, hut remains in occupation, 21*. 219, 442. STATION. what constitutes railway. 129. how assessed, 90, 91, 130. railway, rent paid by railway company for use of, to he taken into accounl in assessing rateable value. 124-126. railway, deductions for, how calculated, 127-129. what constitutes. 129. of gas, electric light, or water company, deduction for, 147. STATUTORY EXEMPTION, appeal in case of, 377. STATUTORY PROHIBITION, against earnings. 10, 19, 42-44. 159, 171. 172. STEAM ENGINES, attached to freehold, how rated. 36-42. 117. 118. STEAM-TUG, used by dock company, deduction for. 176. 177. STOCK-IN-TRADE, exempt from rating, 324. STRIKE. how manufactory rated in case of, 33. STRUCTURAL SEPARATION, unnecessary between occupiers. 6. STURGES BOURNE'S ACT, 57. 311. SUCCESSIVE OCCUPIERS, provision for, 392. 395. SUMMONS, for non-payment of rates, how served, etc., 332, 333. SUNDAY SCHOOL, exempt from rating, 87, 385. INDEX. 553 SUPPLEMENTAL LIST, objections to, 262, 365, 418. rateable value in, how ascertained, 262, 419, appeal against, 262, 365, 418. form of notice of appeal' in case of, 270, 271. overseers to prepare, 364, 417, 41K, 419. provisions of Union Assessment Act, 1862, apply to. 365. notice of, to be given to companies, 378. under Agricultural Rates Order, 485. SURVEY, new, for purposes of rating, 317, 318. power to surveyor to enter upon land for purposes of, 319. Assessment Committee may employ person to, 362. Quarter Sessions may order, 369, 370. SURVEYOR OF TAXES, duplicate of Valuation List to be sent to, in Metropolis. 400. may object to Valuation List in Metropolis, 260, 401, 402, 414. may appeal to Special Sessions in Metropolis, 264, 403. notice to, of appeal to Special Sessions in Metropolis, 265, 409. may appeal to Quarter Sessions in Metropolis, 270, 281, 408. justices at Quarter Sessions may compel, to produce evidence, 276, -In". when appellant, respondent begins at Quarter Sessions in Metropolis, 276. 281. definition of, in Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 186i>, 397. Agricultural Rates Order, 467. objections by, under Agricultural Rates Order, 475-477. appeal by, to Special and Quarter Sessions under Agricultural Rates Order, 477, 479. T TAXATION, of costs after Sessions by consent, 255, 256, 344-346. TAXES. Vide Rates and Taxes. TELEGRAPH, rateable value of land purchased by Postmaster-General for electric, 384. TELEGRAPH COMPANY, exclusive occupation by wires of, 24, 25. Assessment Committee to give notice of valuation to, 378. TELEPHONE COMPANY, exclusive occupation by wires of, 24. TENANT. Vide also Hypothetical Tenant. where occupier cannot legally become, 8. where tenant yearly, rateable value, 61, 62, 315. bargains with landlord to do repairs, 61, 62, 6S. , n. has lease, 63, 64. weekly, 64, 65. deduction for income-tax payable by, 71, 124, 227, 228. liability of incoming, for poor-rate, 72. outgoing, for poor-rate, 72. from year to year of railway, 90, 91. of mine, deduction of one-half of rate by, 197, 193, 444. 445. of tithe rent-charge, rent payable by, 227, 228. of wood or plantation, deduction of rate by, 441. 554 INDEX TENANT'S PROFIT, deduction for, 90, 115-117, 147, 227, 228. amount a question for Sessions, 91, 93. claim for, disallowed in respect of business carried on by railway company as manufacturers of their own stock, 116. no deduction allowed for, where none can be legally made, 162, 163. deduction for. from gross income of tithe rent-charge, 227. TERMINAL, included in gross receipts of railway company, 94-96. receipts for collection and delivery not included in. 95, 96. TITHE RENT-CHARGE, rateable, 3. 223-227. deduction for, to ascertain rateable value. 61-65, 315. paid by owner under Tithe Act, 1891. 62, 224, 225. procedure for recovery of rate on. in Tithe Art 1891, 225. order as to future rate in Tithe Act 1891, 225. exemption from rates contained in Inclosure Act, 226. annual payment to rector, when rateable, 226. annual rent of, 227. 228. no deduction to be made for allowance to minister of a new district, although a charge upon. 227, 228. minister of new district not rateable for allowance charged upon tithe rent-charge-. 228, 229. no deduction allowed for curate's salary. 229, 230. no deduction allowed for money borrowed from Queen Anne's Bounty. or for services of incumbent. 230. 231. TIME. for appealing against poor-rate, 233, 239, 377. for proceedings against rate in Metropolis, 413-415. extension of. under Agricultural Rates Act. 490. TIN MINE, rateable value of. 196. 197. 442-444. deduction by tenant of, of one-lvdf of rate. 197. 198. TOLL, turnpike, exempt from rating, 80, 81. received by railway company must be included in gross receipts, 94-96. paid by railway company to another company not to be taken into account in assessing rateable value. 97. 98. exchange, 99. compensation for. payable by canal company, 141, 142. not rateable^/- se, 134, 168," 170, 187. anchorage and beaconage, rateable, 169. enhances value of landing-place of ferry, 186. TOTAL, of gross or rateable value of parish in Metropolis, appeal against, 408. TOWING-PATH, navigation company not rateable for. "29. TRADE, profits of, not rateable, 49-52, 80, 324. receipts by railway company for, on line of another company, 98, 99. TRAFFIC CHARGES, what included in, 93. INDEX. 555 TRAMWAY COMPANY, exclusive occupation of road by, 21. rateable, 131-133. rated like railway company, 132. rated on parochial principle, 133. deductions same as in case of railways, 133. not entitled to exemption under s. 211 of Public Health Act, 1875, 132. TURNPIKE TOLLS, exempt from rating - , 80, 81. u UNDERWOODS, land used for growth of saleable, how rated, 3, 45, 440, 441. UNFAIRNESS, objection to Valuation List on ground of, 232, 259, 360, 361. appeal to Quarter Sessions in Metropolis on ground of, 270, 409. UNION, where bounds of, same as of borough town council may appoint additional members of Assessment Committee, 355. contribution by parish to, how calculated, 366, 367. appeal by overseer on behalf of parish of, 367, 368. . under local Acts may come under Union Assessment Act, 1862, 373. definition of, in Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1869, 397. UNIVERSITY, not exempt from rating, 77. UNOCCUPIED PROPERTY, not rateable as a rule, 54, 55, 87. V VACANCY, on Assessment Committee, 355, 356. VALUATION. Vide also Specimen Valuation. new, for purposes of poor-rate, 317, 318. Quarter Sessions may order new, 369, 370, 410, 411. Assessment Committee may allow compensation for returns or copies of, 370. costs of. 369, 370, 371, 427. ordered bj^ Assessment Committee to be made in writing, 378. notice of, to be given to companies, 378. power of Guardians to borrow money for expenses of, 379. VALUATION LIST, objection to, 232, 259, 360, 362, 363, 402, 403, 413. fresh notice to amended, unnecessary, 234, 235. deposit of, 237, 258, 262, 359, 362, 363, 367, 402, 413, 414. amendment of, where overseers have no notice of meeting of Assess- ment Committee, 238, 376. objection to alterations in. 237, 262, 362, 414. overseers to prepare. 358, 359. Assessment Committee may enlarge time for making, 359. appoint persons to make, 359. direct revision of, 359, 365. 556 INDEX. VALUATION LIST— {continued). overseer must transmit, to Assessment Committee, 359. Assessment Committee may direct further, to be made, 362. must be altered by Assessment Committee where rate amended on appeal, 363. custody of, 363, 364. when in force, 364. no rate to be made except in accordance with approved, 365, 366. form of, 374, 423, 435, 485. power of Assessment Committee to amend, 375, 376. clerks of Assessment Committees to furnish clerks of peace with totals of, 380. appeal against, by owner, 391. making of, in Metropolis, 400. duplicate of, to be sent to surveyor of taxes, in Metropolis, 400. deposit of, in Metropolis, to state mode of objection, 401. surveyor of taxes may object to, in Metropolis, 401 402. in Metropolis Assessment Committee to make, in default of overseers, 402. to be certified by Assessment Committee in Metropolis, 402. totals of gross and rateable values of, in Metropolis, to be sent to every Assessment Committee, 403. alteration of, by Quarter Sessions in Metropolis, 410. when Quarter Sessions may appoint person to make, 410, 411. alterations in, to be sent by Assessment Committee to overseers in Metropolis, 412. time for transmission by overseers to Assessment Committee (Metro- polis). 413, 414. time within which Assessment Committee in Metropolis must revise, 413. duration of, in Metropolis, 415. in force in Metropolis, when conclusive evidence of gross and rateable value, 416, 417. revision of, in Metropolis, every five years, 417. contents of, in Metropolis, 423. gross value as certified by surveyor of taxes in Metropolis to be inserted in, 423. how proved in evidence, 427. part of rate books in Metropolis, 429. separate, for agricultural land, 4, 456, 457. of agricultural laud, appeal against, 457, 458. definition of, in Agricultural Kates Order, 466. returns to be made by overseers under Agricultural Kates Order where there is no, 480. alterations of Valuation List in accordance with statements under Agri- cultural Kates Order, 484, 485. VALUE. Vide also Rateable Value. property is rateable where occupation of, 13. enhanced, 20, 39, 99-102, 127-129, 137-139, 163-168, 177-178, 186, 187, 215-217. property must be rated according to existing, 32, 35. annual, defined, 33. contributive, 10S-114. competitive, 114. of rolling-stock, deduction for interest on capital and tenant's profits calculated with respect to, 115-117. deductions made in respect of stations calculated on actual, 127. prospective, of railway, 130. 131. improved, of mint'. 199. 200. INDEX. 557 VALUE — {continued). of wood or plantation enhanced by sporting rights, 215—217. assessable, of agricultural land, 455. minimum, of buildings and hereditaments separately rated under Agri- cultural Rates Order, 471-473. VESTEY, may order owner to pay poor-rate instead of occupier, 56, 57, 388, 389. parish meeting substituted for, in rural parish, 289. defined, in Poor-Rate Assessment and Collection Act, 1869, 394. election of Assessment Committee by, in Metropolis, 398. where, overseers in Metropolis, 426. VOLUNTARY, . meaning of, in connection with subscriptions to literary or scientific societies, 81, 82, 326. VOLUNTEER STOREHOUSE, exempt from rating, 86, 87. w WAIVER, of recognizance on appeal, in Metropolis, 266, 267, 272, 273, 279. WARRANT, of distress, costs of, 330, 331, 332. one for rate and costs, 332. or commitment, to whom directed, 332. against ratepayer, form of, 336-339. of commitment in default of distress, form of, 339-341 . WATER COMPANY, statutory prohibition against earnings of, 42-44, 159. reservoirs, pipes, mains, etc., rateable, 145-147. where no profit made, 146. rateable value of, 147, 148. apportionment of rateable value of, among parishes, 149-156. works in excess of actual requirement, 156, 157. rateable value enhanced by non-parochial earnings, 157, 158. notice of valuations to be given to, by Assessment Committee, 378. specimen valuation of, 506, 507. WATER RATE, deduction for, not allowed, 71. WATER-MARK, piers extending into sea below low, 185, 186. WATERWORKS. where occupier of, a public authority, 146, 147. WEEKLY TENANCY, rateable value, how calculated under, 64, 65. WHARF, occupation of, by railway company, 102, 103. used in connection with canal, enhanced value, 12/-12y. land on which goods are landed from canal not rateable as, where no dues are received, 144. occupation of, rateable, 171. 1 37 558 • INDEX. WITNESS, power of justices at Quarter Sessions to summon certain officials as, 276, 407. WOOD, land used for, rateable, 3, 212-217, 440, 441. deduction from rent where rateable value increased by Hating Act 1874, 213, 214, 441. not to be rated on assumption of alteration in condition, 214, 215. rated at enhanced value where there is a right of sporting, 215-217. WORKHOUSE, rateable, unless exempt by local Act, 87. WORKING EXPENSES, deduction for, from gross receipts, 90, 91, 493-507. what included in, 92, 93. WORKS, in excess of actual requirements rateable, 156, 157. YEARLY TENANCY, rateable value of, 61, 62. YEAR TO YEAR. Vide also Yearly Tenancy. net annual value of hereditaments let from, 4. tenant from, of railway, 90, 91. tenant from, of gas, electric light ; or water company, 147. z ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY, not exempt from poor-rate, 84, 326. TO ARCHITECTS, SURVEYORS, ENGINEERS AND BUILDERS. WATERLOW & SONS LIMITED. MANUFACTURING AND EXPORT STATIONERS, Contractors to Her Majesty's Government for the Home, Colonial and Indian Services. WATERLOW AND SONS LIMITED keep an extensive Stock of WHATMAN'S DRAWING PAPERS, TURKEY MILL DRAWING PAPERS, FINE DRAWING PAPERS, CARTRIDGE PAPERS IN SHEETS OR CONTINUOUS ROLLS, MOUNTED DRAWING PAPERS, TRACING PAPERS AND TRACING LINENS, Carefully selected to meet the requirements of the above Professions. Sample Books will be submitted upon application. RULED SECTIONAL LINES On Drawing or Tracing- Paper, ruled in Brown or Grey. Size in Drawing Taper, Tl\ X 17 ; Tracing Paper, 2'ih X 18 J. PRICES OF RULED SECTIONAL LINES. Scale. lin. -|ths, -|ths, -|ths, •|ths, fths, -ird. ftbs, ith, ith, Ith. jVh. AT PRR QUIRE. Drawing Taper. 1 Tracing Paper. Drawing Paper. Tracing Paper. Drawing Paper. Tracing Paper. 1 Quire 5 , 10 „ .. .. 3/0 2/8 2/6 5/6 5/2 5/0 4/3 3,9 3/3 6/9 6/4 5/9 6/0 5'6 5/0 8/6 80 7/6 Scale. ,',«.. T \th oV h - AT PER QUIBE. ' Drawing Paper. Tracing Paper. Drawing Paper. Tracing Paper. Drawing Paper. Traring Paper. 1 Quire 5 „ 10 „ .. .. 8/0 • 7/6 70 10/0 9/6 9/0 1 9/0 8/6 8/0 11/0 10/6 10/0 i 110 10/6 9/6 IS/0 12 6 12/0 n Mounting on Holland 5d. per square foot, on Union, 4d. 85 & 86, LONDON WALL, E.C. ; 49, PARLIAMENT STREET, WESTMINSTER, S.W. ; and TEMPLE ROW, BIRMINGHAM. Telegraphic Address: WATLBLOWS, LONDON WALL, LONDON. WATERLOW & SONS LIMITED,' 85 & 86, London Wall, London, E.C, WISH TO CALL THE ESPECIAL ATTENTION OF ENGINEERS, ARCHITECTS, SURVEYORS AND OTHERS, T TO THE GREAT FACILITIES THEIR ■ * -;« LITHOGRAPHIC DEPARTMENT - Offers for the rapid and accurate execution of all work required by the Profession, viz. : PLANS, SPECIFICATIONS, BILLS OF QUANTITIES,. SCHEDULES OF PRICES, REPORTS, CONTRACTS AND TENDERS, &c, &c, either lithographed or copied. -1 The long experience of Waterlow & Sons Limited in this class of business, and the large and efficient staff of hands in their employ having a-' knowledge of the technicalities peculiar to this work, enable them to ensure correctness as far as possible, so that proof copies can be dispensed with, thus saving time and trouble. k A set of Bills of Quantities, Specification, &c, of whatever length, can at any time be lithographed in a few hours and the copies sent by return of post. VIEWS, ELEVATIONS AND WORKING DRAWINGS Enlarged or Reduced, Copied, Lithographed or Photo -Lithographed. PLANS AND TRACINGS MOUNTED ON HOLLAND, LINEN OR PAPER. A large stockof TRACING LINENS and PAPERS kept, Pattern Books of which will be sent on application. gCr^^ T OF LAW LIBRARY UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES p WATERLOW cj- SONS LIMITED, LAW PUBLISHERS LIST OF PUBLICATIONS-continued. INDIAN EXCHANGE TABLES, By J. I. Berry. In Cloth, 21s., or with Supplement, 25s. SUPPLEMENT TO DITTO, 5s. SECOND SUPPLEMENT TO DITTO, 5s. INTEREST TABLES at the rate of two and three-quarters percent, per annum on sums varying fro £1 to £10,000 for all periods from 1 to 364 days, and from 1 to 12 months. Compiled by F. Alt.' Barraud, Solicitor. In cloth, 2s. 6d. *. JOINT-STOCK COMPANIES PRACTICAL GUIDE. By Henry Hurp.ell ani Clarendon C Hybe, Bamsters-at-La«\ Invaluable to the Legal Profession anl to Secretaries, Directors, Pr. moters and all other persons engaged in the formation or management of Joint-Stock Companie Fifth Edition. In cloth, 5s. LAW AND PROCEDURE OF SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON SPECIALLY INDORSED WRL' under Order XIV. By C. Cava\ai;h, of the Middle Temple, Barrister-at-Law. In cloth, 5s. net. LAW AND PRACTICE OF REGISTRATION OF DEEDS IN THE COUNTY OF MIDDLESE under the Middlesex Deeds Acts containing the fall texts of the Acts, Rules and Fee Order with Note Instructions, Precedents of Memorials, Ac. By C. Fortescue-Brickdale, of Lincoln's Inn, Barriste at-Law. In cloth, 3s. 6d. LAW OF BUILDING. ENGINEERING. AND SHIP BUILDING CONTRACTS. By Alfrk A. Hudson, of the Inner Temple, Barrister-at-Law. Second Edition. In 2 vols. 50s. LAW OF DIRECTORS AND OFFICERS OF JOINT-STOCK COMPANIES, then Powers, Duti« and Liabilities. By Henry Huhrkll; of the Middle Temple, and Clarendon- G-. Hyde, of tl Middle Temple, Barristers-at-Law. Third Edition. In cloth, 6s. LAW OF MERCANTILE AGENTS; OR. THE FACTORS' ACT, 1889.— By M. Molone Barrister-at-Law. In cloth boards, Post free. Is. 7d. LAW OF MERCHANT SHIPPING AND FREIGHT, with Tables of Cases Fprms. as Complete Index. By J. T. Foard, of the Inner Temple, Barrister-at-Law. Royal 8vo. In hal calf, 2: s. LAW OF RATES AND CHARGES ON RAILWAYS AND CANALS. Synopsis of th." Kailwa and Canal Traffic Act. 1883. By Percy 8th and Tnos. Waghorn, of the Inner Temple, Barristers at-Law. In boards, 2s. In cloth, 3s. LAW RELATING TO BETTING, TIME BARGAINS AND GAMING, including the La relating to Stakeholders, Stewards, the Winners of Races; Stork Exchange Transactions, Lotterie: Gaming Houses, Betting Houses, &c. By GeobgE Herbert Shikield and Henry S. Cautiki Barri-tei-at-Law. Third Edition, revised and enlarged. In boards, 2s. 6d. LAW RELATING TO CORRUPT PRACTICE3 AT PARLIAMENTARY, MUNICIPAL AN; OTHER ELECTIONS AND THE PRACTICE ON ELECTION PETITIONS, with an Appendi of Statutes, Roles and Forma. By Miles Walker Mattinson and Stuart Cunningham MAOtSKii of Gray's Inn, Barristers-at-Law. Third Edition. In cloth, 10s. LEGAL ADVICE to Engineers, Architects, Surveyors, Contractors and Employers, by A. A. Hi; s rt Barrister-at-Law. Post free, Is. 7d. LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT, 1894.— Queen's Printers' Copy, with an exhaustive Index. By Horac E. Miller, LL.B., Barrister-at-Law. Post free, 2s. 3d. MANUAL OF HYDROLOGY. By N. Beardmore, C.E. In cloth 24s. MANUAL OF THEATRICAL LAW, containing instructions for Licensing Theatre., and Mdsie Halls and Chapters on the Law of Contracts between Actors and Managers, &c. Are. By Clarenci Hamlyn, of the Middle Temple, Barrister-at-Law. In Cloth. 5s. MERCAT0R S BUSINESS AND SOCIAL TELEGRAPHIC POCKET CODE.— Compiled by i Practical Telegraphist. In cloth, 5s. net. MERCHANDISE MARKS ACTS, 1887 and 1891, with Commentaries, Decided Cases, and reference to Expert Evidence before Select Committees. By Frank Safford, of the Middle Temple, Barrister at-Law. In cloth, 7s. 6d. ORGANIZATION OF A SOLICITOR'S OFFICE, being a reprint (with revisions) of a Series o Articles contributed to the " Solicitors' Journal," by Edward F. Turner, Solicitor. Third E Iumi, In cloth, 7s. 6d. PARISH AND DISTRICT COUNCILS.— A Treatise on the Local Government Act. 1894: with th< incorporated Provisions of other Acts, and the Orders and Circulars issued by the Local Government Board. By Horace E. Miller, LL.B., Barrister-at-Law. In cloth, 7s. 6d. THE POSITION IN LAW OF WOMEN.— Showing how it differs from that cf Men, and the effect ol the Married Women's Property Act, 1832. By Thomas Barrett-Lennard, of the Middle Temple, Barrister-at-Law. In cloth, 6s. 25, 26 & 27, GREAT WINCHESTER STREET ; 85 & 86, LONDON WALL ; 49. PARLIAMENT STREET; and FINSBURY FACTORIES. UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY SONS LIMITED, OF PUBLICATION ^-continued. tACTXCAL HINTS ON THE PREPARATION AND REGISTRATION of Jont Stock Companies F n is. witfi Precedents, Tables of Fees and Stamp Duties, and an Index. Third Edition. Post fcACTICAL SUGGESTIONS ON THE PREPARATION AND REGISTRATION OF DEEDS, and other documents at tb\ various Public Offices, with Tables of Fees and an Index. Second Edition. Post free, Is. Sd. , tACTICE OF THB LAND REGISTRY UNDER THE TRANSFER OF LAND ACT, 1862, with such portions of the Kules as are now in force, and General Instructions, Notes, Forms, and Precedents. By Chardes Fortescute-Brickdale, B.A., of Lincoln's Inn. Barrister, Assisting' Barrister to the Land Registry. In cloth, 3s. 6d. lACTITIONER'S PROBATE MANUAL.— Containing Instructions as to Proee lure in obtain!* Grants of Probate and Administration, with numerous Precedents of Forms, and full particu'ais asm ■Duties, Fees, etc., with a copious Index. By SamOel Wilkinson, formerly Chief Clerk in the Durham Probate Registry. Fifth Edition. In cloth, 5s. net. LILWAYS IN SCOTLAND, 1845— 1873.— The General Acts for the regulation of Railways in.? ' •Scotland, including the Companies, Lands and Railways Clauses (Scotland) Acts, complete to the c'oa^ of 1873. and a copious Index. A Supplement to the General Railway Acts. 12mo. In cloth (1S73), 3% SLATIONSHIP OF LANDLORD AND TENANT. By Edgar FoA,Barrister-at-Law. Second Edition.' In cloth, 25s. GHTS AND DUTIES OF TRUSTEES IN BANKRUPTCY AND UNDER DEEDS OF ARRANGEMENT, containing information as t5 Appointment and Security. Realizing and Distributing the Property of Estates, Administration of Estates and Rendering of Accounts to the Board of Trade by Trustees under Deeds of Arrangement ; and a Tin.e Tabic shewing the time at which the principal Duties of Trustees are to be performed. By H. F. WuEffORD. In cloth, 3s. 6d. | [ORT AND CONCISE PRECEDENTS OF THE CLAUSES MOST GENERALLY IN USE IN FARMING AGREEMENTS, with complete forms of Agreements, Dissertations and Full Notes, and a Table of Contents. By J. W. Jeudwine, of Lincoln's Inn, Barrister-at-Law. In boards, 2s. LICITORS' DIARY, ALMANAC, LEGAL DIGEST. AND DIRECTORY. -The Edition for; 1§97 is the 53rd year of publication of this important Annual, which is now universally recognized as, the mo,t useful Legal Diary published. Prices 3s. bd.. 5s.. (is., and 8s. (id., according to diary space and binding. LICITORS' POCKET BOOK.— In leather tuck, 2s. 6d. ; Roan Wallet, Is. 6d. ; and Russia Wallet, 7s. 6d. ANDING ORDERS.— The Standing Orders of the Lords and Commons relative to Private Bills, with ' Appendix. Published at the close of each Session. In cloth, 5s. MMARY JURISDICTION ACT, 1884, with Notes. A Supplement to Avers' "Guide to the Law and Practice of Petty Sessions." By Edward T. Ayers, Solicitor. In boards, 2s. MMARY JURISDICTION ACTS ; Tabular View of .the Summary Jurisdiction of Justices as to indictable offences. By E. T. Ayers, Solicitor, Great Yarmouth. Printed on indestructible paper. 2s. net. i OCK EXCHANGE ACCOUNTS with an Appendix of Forms. By Stephen H. M. Killik. In cloth," 3s. 6d. net. JBLE OF CORRUPT AND ILLEGAL PRACTICES WHICH VITIATE THE ELECTION. By M. W. Mattinson and S. C. Macaskie, Barristers-at-Law. On linen-lined card. Prices : 1 copy, 2d: ; 50 copies, 6s. ; 100 copies, 10s. May also be had printed on stout cardboard 11 by 17, suitable for affixing to the walls of Committee Rooms. Price Cd. each. BLE OF FEES, CHARGES AND EXPENSES, AND COURT FEES UNDER THE LAW OF DISTRESS AMENDMENT ACT, 1888. Stamp Duty on Appraisement, Fees Chargeable by High' B-ailirls. Ac. By R. T. Hunter, Chief Clerk, County Court, Stockton-on-Tees. Mounted on linen and folded in cloth case, Is. 6d'. .BLES FOR THE IMMEDIATE CONVERSION OF PRODUCTS INTO INTEREST AT TWENTY- NINE RATES, viz. :— from one to eight per cent, inclusive, fee.,