for making an award. In Moule v. Stawell, reported at the end of Davis v. Vass (a), where the award upon the face of it stated that the arbitrator had enlarged the time so as to cover the award, the Court refused an attachment. [Mellor J. In that case there was no more evidence than the statement on the award.] Those cases were recognised in Wohlenberg v. Lageman (b). [They referred to 2 Arch. Pr. by Chitty, 11th ed., p. 1631, and Russell Arbitration, pp. 595-6, 3rd ed.] COCKBURN C. J. This rule must be discharged. According to the existing practice an affidavit by the attesting witness, where there is one, to an award, that enlargements of the time for making the award were made when they purport to have been made, is not necessary. Therefore we could not expect that a party who applies to make an order of reference a rule of Court should obtain an affidavit that the enlargements of the time were duly made. Whether it is expedient that no affidavit should be required, either of the attesting witness where there is one, or if not of the arbitrator, in addition to the faith which we give to an arbitrator that he has done right, is a matter which we may reserve for future consideration. I think it would be more satisfactory that there should be an affidavit by the arbitrator, because it would be conclusive except under special circumstances, and would prevent such a question as this being raised. We must, however, deal with the case before us on the existing practice, and must give credit to the statement of the arbitrator endorsed on the award that it was made within the enlarged time. But when we come to the question whether the rule should be discharged with costs, it is not unfair (a) 15 East 97.99. (b) 6 Taunt. 251. 253. 1865. ROBERTS V. EVANS. 1865. ROBERTS V. EVANS. to consider the position in which the party moving for it was placed. He applied to the arbitrator to make an affidavit verifying the time of enlargement in order to enable him to move to set aside the award; and the conduct of the arbitrator in refusing was justly and reasonably calculated to engender a suspicion, if not a belief, that he was actuated by the consideration that he could not make it with truth: that being so the rule will be discharged, but not with costs. CROMPTON J. The practice in two if not in all the Courts is to receive such an affidavit as this for the purpose of making an order of reference with the enlargements endorsed thereon a rule of Court; and it is not desirable to overturn that practice. If an action were brought on the award, and the question arose at Nisi prius, the date of the enlargement would be sufficiently proved by the endorsement of it on the order of reference, according to the general rule that primâ facie the date when an instrument, whether mercantile or otherwise, purports to have been made is the true date. But I agree with the Lord Chief Justice that the rule should be discharged without costs. BLACKBURN J. The present practice has existed for ten or twelve years, and is not inconsistent with law, nor has it been attended with inconvenience. It is sufficient to say that we ought not to upset it without a rule of Court. I agree that this rule should be discharged, but not with costs. MELLOR J. Concurred. Rule discharged, without costs. 1865. WERE, appellant, Clerk of the Peace of DEVON, Wednesday, respondent. January 18th. County rate. Police rate. 15 & 16 Vict. c. 81. s. 51. Borough. The borough, parish, and liberty of Bradninch is part of the Duchy of Cornwall, and within the county of Devon. It is an antient borough coextensive with the parish, and has from time to time received charters of privileges; charters have also been granted to the Earls and Dukes Exclusive juof Cornwall. An inquisition, temp. Edw. 1., headed " Borough of risdiction. Braneys," stated that the manor of Braneys had a gallows, a pillory, Presumption &c., estreats of writs and pleas of withernam, &c. A charter of of lost James I., reciting that the borough had divers liberties and customs charter. and immunities by prescription, incorporated the borough and granted to the mayor and recorder for the time being to be justices to keep the peace in the borough, and to have "full power and authority to inquire concerning whatsoever trespasses, misprisions and other minor offences, defaults and articles, done, moved or committed within the borough and parish which ought or might be inquired into before the keepers and justices of the peace in any county &c.," so that they should not "in any manner proceed to the determination of any treason, murder or felony, or of any other matter touching the loss of life or limb." It also granted to the mayor and burgesses the same and similar Courts of record, customs, liberties, privileges, franchises, &c., and jurisdictions which they had theretofore holden, used or enjoyed, or ought to have holden, used and enjoyed. Until 1858 no county rate had ever been levied in Bradninch, but rates in the nature of county rates were made by order of the borough justices in Sessions; and the borough justices had always held their Quarter Sessions and tried felonies and misdemeanors to the same extent as the county justices, who did not interfere in any manner or for any purpose within the borough. By stat. 15 & 16 Vict. c. 81. s. 51., relating to the assessment of county rates, the word "county" shall, in the construction of that Act, mean and include any liberty, franchise, or other place in which rates in the nature of county rates may be levied, having a separate commission of the peace, and not subject to the jurisdiction of the county at large in which such liberty, &c. may lie, nor contributing to the county rates made for such county at large; and the words "county rate" shall mean and include every rate or tax assessed in any county for all or any of the purposes to which county rate or stock is liable. Held, that the charter of James I. did not give the justices of the borough exclusive jurisdiction, that the existence of a lost charter with a non intromittant clause could not be presumed, and therefore the borough was liable to be assessed to the rate for the county at large, and to the police rate. NOTICE of appeal having been given to the Quarter Sessions for the county of Devon against the basis or standard for a county rate made by the justices in Quarter Sessions on the 16th October, 1860, whereby the borough, parish and liberty of Bradninch was assessed to the county rate for general purposes in the 1865. WERE Clerk of the sum of 197. 4s. 6d., and for the police purposes in the sum of 281. 16s. 3d., the following special case was stated for the opinion of the Court. The borough, parish and liberty of Bradninch, in the county of Devon, is part of the possessions of the Duchy of Cornwall. It is within and entirely surrounded by the county of Devon, and is not detached from that county by being bounded wholly or in part by any other county. It is a very ancient borough, and is coextensive with the parish, and has from time to time received charters of privileges. Charters have also from time to time been granted to the Earls and Dukes of Cornwall. In the 10th John, A.D. 1208, a charter was granted by the Crown to Henry, the son of Earl Reynold, to have and hold a fair every year at Bradnesse, to continue four days, to wit, three days before the day of St. Dionysius and on the day itself, and to have there and hold a market in every year weekly on Saturday, with all liberties and free customs which the city of Exeter had. Amongst the records of the late treasury of the Exchequer in the public record office in the custody of the Master of the Rolls, pursuant to stat. 1 & 2 Vict. c. 94., to wit, in the Roll indorsed "Extracts of Inquisitions made by the command of our Lord the King, in the counties of Oxford, Berks, Buckingham, Bedford, Cambridge, Huntingdon, Devon, Cornwall, concerning the rights and liberties of our Lord the King, substracted, and the excesses of sheriffs, coroners, escheators, and all other bailiffs whatsoever of our Lord the King, in any manner touching our Lord the King, in the 4th year of the reign of King Edward, son of King Henry," is contained an inquisition, of which the following is a translation: "Borough of Braneys. "The jurors of the said borough say that the manor of Braneys was an escheat of our Lord King Henry, father of our Lord the King that now is, by the death of William de la Londe, because he died without heir, and the same Lord the King gave the said manor to Richard" Earl of Cornwall, "his brother, with his wife" Lady"Lench in free marriage, and to the heirs of the body of the said" Lady "Lench, and they say that Edmund, Earl of Cornwall, now holds the said manor, but by how many fees and by what services they know not, and that it is worth yearly 307., and has a gallows, a pillory and tumbrell, assize of bread and ale, estreats of writs and pleas of withernam, a warren, and other royal liberties." The case then set out another inquisition to the like effect from the bundle of inquisitions temp. Edward I., indorsed "Inquisitiones Com. Devon," also among the records in the public Record Office: that inquisition was headed, "Verdict concerning the manor of Bradneys," and indorsed "Borough of Braneys." The following is a translation of parts of a charter granted by James I., in the second year of his reign, and which is dated the 13th November in that year. The whole of the charter was copied in the appendix and was to be taken as part of the case. "The King, To all to whom &c., greeting. Whereas our borough of Bradneys, otherwise called Bradninch, in our county of Devon, is an ancient borough, and the mayor and burgesses of the same borough of Bradneis, otherwise called Bradninch, from time whereof the memory of man is not to the contrary, had used and 1865. WERE V. Clerk of the Peace of |