annexed; the company were incorporated by Act of Parliament, which empowered them to purchase land, and erect buildings, in which the proprietors were to be beneficially interested in proportion to their subscriptions, and such interest was to be deemed personal property; and it was enacted that two or more rooms should be provided and used as public rooms for transacting business relating to trade and commerce, and suitably furnished for the purpose. Of the two rooms fitted up for this purpose, one was let, at a rent of £200 a year, to the underwriters, who were rated for it to the poor; the other, (the subject of the present rate,) the company formed into a news-room, to which the proprietors were admitted without payment, and persons not proprietors upon payment of a subscription of three guineas a year; and proprietors having more shares than one, and proprietors not using the rooms, were paid three guineas per share. This room, if let simply with reference to its size, situation and accommodation as a news-room, was of the annual value of £600 only; if it was to be considered with relation to its actual profits, it was of the annual value of £1000; and if to this were to be added the value of the privilege of the proprietors in attending it without payment, it would be of the annual value of £1200. Stock in trade, profits, and personal property, were not rated in Liverpool at the time. The Court held, that the proprietors' privilege could not be taken as any part of the annual value; and on the other hand, it ought not to be rated merely for what it might let at with reference to its size, situation, &c. for it had certain advantages as a public room permanently attached to it by the Act of Parliament, producing a certain net revenue to the company, and upon the amount of that they should be rated. The Court accordingly ordered the rate to be reduced to £1000. 1 Ad. & E. 465. T. 1834. Where rateable. 1572. R. v. Pitt. The defendant owned all the coal and coal-mines under a common called Tanfield Moor, in the township or chapelry of Tanfield, A. B. & C. owned the soil, stone, and all mines of other metal, and several persons had right of common upon it in respect of lands lying in the adjoining townships; the common was inclosed by Act of Parliament, by which one-sixteenth of the land was to be allotted to A. B. & C., and which was to be deemed to be in Tanfield, and the residue was to be allotted amongst those who had rights of common, each allotment to be deemed to be in the township where the lands lay in respect of which the right of common was claimed; but it was provided that nothing in that Act should prejudice or affect the defendant's right or interest in the coal or coal-mines under the common: some part of the common being allotted to persons having rights of common in respect of lands lying in the township of Kyo, the defendant was rated to the poor in Kyo for his coal-mines lying under these allotments: but the Court held that he was rateable only in Tanfield; before the Act his coal mines were in Tanfield, and as by the above proviso these were not to be affected by the Act, they must be deemed to be still in Tanfield, though the surface of the land was in Kyo. 5 B. & Ad. 565. M. 1833. Remedy for a Rate. 1573. Weaver v. Price & another. The plaintiff was rated to the poor by the parish of Overton for a close of land which he occupied; the rate being demanded and not paid, the overseers applied to the defendants, two justices of peace, for a distress warrant, which was granted them, and they accordingly distrained for the amount of the rate; the plaintiff then paid the rate, and brought an action of trespass against the justices who signed the warrant, and, upon his proving that his close in fact was not in the parish of Overton, obtained a verdict. Upon a motion for a new trial, it was contended that trespass would not lie against a magistrate in such a case, and that the plaintiff's only remedy was by appeal against the rate; but the Court held, that as the plaintiff had no rateable property in the parish, the justices had no jurisdiction to grant a warrant of distress against him, and therefore that the action well lay. 3 B. & Ad. 409. E. 1832. Appeal against a Rate. 1574. R. v. JJ. of Hertfordshire. An appeal against a rate being called on at sessions, and the appellant being then ready to prove his notice and proceed with the case, the respondents applied to put off the trial until the next sessions, which application was granted on payment of costs, and the respondents' counsel handed a copy of the notice of appeal to the clerk of the peace, to enable him to draw up the order; at the next sessions both parties appeared, but the respondents objected to the appeal being heard until the appellant first proved service of the original notice of appeal, and he not being prepared to do so, the sessions confirmed the rate. But upon an application for a mandamus to the justices to enter continuances and try the appeal, the Court held that the respondents had acted upon the notice so as to render any further proof of it unnecessary, and therefore the justices ought to have heard the appeal. 4 B. & Ad. 561. H. 1833. 1575. R. v JJ. of Cambridge. Upon an application for a mandamus to justices to enter continuances and try an appeal against a rate, it appeared that the rate was duly made, allowed and published; but, upon its being appealed against by one of the parishioners, the parish officers gave him notice that they abandoned it, and that he need not therefore prosecute his appeal; and they tendered him the amount of some rates which he had paid under it, which, however, he refused to receive. The appellant, notwithstanding this, proceeded to the sessions, and, upon the appeal being called on, applied to quash the rate; but the justices, being informed of the fact of the abandonment, said that they had no longer any jurisdiction, and refused to entertain the case. The Court now held, that the overseers had no power to abandon a rate which had been duly allowed and published, and that such rate existed as a valid rate until it was quashed; that the justices therefore had jurisdiction, and ought to have heard the appeal; and the Court accordingly made the rule for the mandamus absolute. Ad. & E. MS. M. 1834. INDEX. A. ABLE bodied poor, how and in what cases relieved. 66 Relief." See Accounts: overseers and other officers, having the collection or Action against a commissioner or other officer, 146: limitation Action, what, for a distress, where the proceedings are irregular, Administration of relief to the poor, subject to the direction and 127. Aged and infirm paupers, relief of, 4, 53, and n. See "Relief." Appeal against an order of removal, 7; notice of appeal, 7; a Appointment of commissioners, by whom and how, 13, 29; for Apprenticeship, settlement by, 2; see "Settlement." No settle- ment hereafter by apprenticeship to the sea service, 2, 109. Assistant commissioners, by whom appointed, 15, 33; how of office, 35; commissioners may delegate to them any of Attachment of wages, in repayment of relief, 5, 19, 98-100. B. Bastard all statutes relating to the affiliation of bastards born Bastard to follow the settlement of the mother, 1, 112; Act relates only to bastards born after the passing of it; Birth, settlement by, 1. See "Settlement." See "Commissioners." Board of Guardians, 69. See "Guardians." |