may adopt the Act. Sect. 12 specifies three classes of such places. Sect. 13 provides how, in each of these classes, meetings to decide as to the adoption of the Act shall be summoned; and,-for the present, passing over sects. 14 and 15,-sect. 16 provides that any place not having a known or defined boundary may petition the Secretary of State to settle its boundary. On the receipt of the petition, he inquires not as to the fitness of the place for adopting the Act, but as to the propriety of the proposed boundaries; and then "any place the boundaries of which have been settled in pursuance of the foregoing provisions shall thenceforth, for the purposes of this Act, be deemed to be a place with a known and defined boundary, and may adopt this Act accordingly," that is, shall be added to the three classes mentioned in sect. 12: it then provides how, in this fourth class of places, a meeting shall be summoned to decide as to the adoption of the Act. Sect. 14, which in proper style of drafting would have been placed after sect. 16, applies to a place including within its limits a less place, which, if it were not so included, would of itself be authorized to adopt the Act. No doubt the District which makes the present application, before it had a defined boundary, was not authorized to adopt the Act; but, after its boundary had been settled, I am unable to perceive why it should not be considered a place with a known and defined boundary for the purpose of sect. 16 as well as other sections. If so, it is brought within sect. 14: and therefore it cannot adopt the Act until the larger place within the limits of which it is included has refused to adopt it. And, if the larger place does adopt the Act, 1862. In re MATLOCK BATH District. 1862. In re MATLOCK ВАТН District. there is one other way of proceeding, according to which the smaller place may be excluded from its operation, viz. by appeal to the Secretary of State, under sect. 17. That section, which empowers the Secretary of State to allow the exclusion, is quite as applicable to the case in which the boundary is ascertained by an order of the Secretary of State, under sect. 16, as where the place has a known and defined boundary within sect. 12. A reasonable scheme of legislation requires that this District should be construed to be within sect. 14. MELLOR J. Sect. 16 of stat. 21 & 22 Vict. c. 98. contains provisions for forming a fresh class of Districts the boundaries of which are to be settled by an order of the Secretary of State. Then, looking at sect. 14, it will appear that while the policy of the Act is to encourage the formation of Districts adopting the Act, it is not its policy to multiply smaller Districts; and I do not see why it should intend to make a difference between Districts to be formed under sect. 16 and those which had been already referred to in sect. 14. Rule refused. 1862. May 7th. THE QUEEN, on the prosecution of the Burial Wednesday, By stat. 15 & 16 Vict. c. 85. ss. 10, 11, extended to the whole of England by stat. 16 & 17 Vict. c. 134., the vestry of any parish, having resolved that a burial ground shall be provided for the parish, shall appoint a Burial Board. By sect. 52 "Parish' shall mean every place having separate overseers of the poor, and separately maintaining its own poor." Mandamus to the overseers of the parish of W., reciting that a Burial Board had been appointed for that parish, commanded them to pay out of the poor rates of the parish the expences incurred by that Board. Return: that, in 1840, before the constitution of the Burial Board for the parish of W., that parish had been, under stat. 58 G. 3. c. 45., divided into three separate parishes for all ecclesiastical purposes; but did not shew that either of the new parishes had appointed a Burial Board under stat. 20 & 21 Vict. c. 81. s. 5. Held no answer. MANDAMUS to the overseers of the poor of the parish of Walcot, in the county of Somerset. The writ recited that in and for the parish of Walcot there was a Burial Board duly and lawfully constituted pursuant to the statutes in that case made and provided, and that the Burial Board had incurred certain expences in carrying the statutes into execution, to wit, the sum of 481. 9s. 8d., which expences, by the statutes, are chargeable upon and to be paid out of the rates for the relief of the poor of such parish; that a certificate, under the hands and seals of certain members of such Board as were authorized to exercise the powers of the Board, of the sum above mentioned was duly served upon the defendants, and that they were thereby then required to pay such sum to the clerk to the Board for and on behalf of the Board; which they had refused to do. The writ then commanded them to pay, or, if necessary, raise by due course of law and pay, the sum of 481. 9s. 8d., purB. & S. VOL. II. 20 15 & 16 Vict. 1862. suant to the certificate of the Board, and to the statutes The QUEEN in such case made and provided. V. Overseers of Return. That the church of the parish of Walcot, before and at the time of the division of the parish into three distinct and separate parishes as thereinafter mentioned, had been and was a rectory; and that, before the constitution of the Burial Board for the parish of Walcot, and before the passing of any resolutions by the vestry of that parish that a burial ground should be provided for it, the parish of Walcot had been and was, by an order in council duly made on the 5th March, a. d. 1840, in pursuance and under the authority of stat. 58 G. 3. c. 45., intituled "An Act for building and promoting the building of additional churches in populous parishes," divided into three distinct and separate parishes,-named respectively the parish of Walcot St. Swithin, the parish of St. Saviour, and Trinity parish, — for all ecclesiastical purposes whatever, in accordance with and in pursuance of the provisions of the said Act; and that such division had, before the constitution of the Burial Board, and before the passing of any resolution by the vestry of the parish that a burial ground be provided for the parish, become complete by the resig nation of the spiritual person who was the incumbent of the parish of Walcot at the time of such division, and had so continued from thence hitherto; and that, before and at the time of such division so becoming complete, there was, in each of the divisions into which the parish of Walcot was divided respectively, a separate and distinct church or chapel duly consecrated in that behalf and as required by law; and that, after the said division had become complete, and before the constitution of the Burial Board, and before the passing of any resolution by the vestry of the parish of Walcot that a burial ground should be provided for the parish, the said churches or chapels respectively became and were used and appropriated as the parish churches of the said three distinct and separate parishes respectively, and had so continued from thence hitherto. Demurrer, and joinder therein. Kinglake Serjt. (T. W. Saunders with him), in support of the demurrer.-Although the original commonlaw parish of Walcot had been divided, under The Church Building Act, 58 G. 3. c. 45. s. 16., into three separate and distinct parishes for ecclesiastical purposes, it retained the right to appoint a Burial Board for the whole parish, in pursuance of sect. 11 of stat. 15 & 16 Vict. c. 85., which is the Burial Act for the metropolis, but by stat. 16 & 17 Vict. c. 134. s. 7. is extended to parishes not in the metropolis. The parish of Walcot remains one parish for the purposes of the poor rate; and therefore is within the interpretation clause, sect. 52, of stat. 15 & 16 Vict. c. 85., which says, "Parish' shall mean every place having separate overseers of the poor, and separately maintaining its own poor." By sect. 19 the expences incurred by the Burial Board in carrying the Act into execution in any parish are to be paid out of the poor rates raised throughout the parish, and therefore it is proper that the ratepayers of that parish should have control over the Board. [Crompton J. referred to Regina, on the prosecution of the Burial Board of Amersham, v. The Overseers of Coleshill (a), argued a few days previous, and in which judgment was delivered in the ensuing Trinity Term.] (a) 31 Law Journ. Q. B. 219; 9 Jur. N. S. 226. 1862. The QUEEN V. Overseers of |