65

Highway.

Highway.

66

by whose order the traffic was conducted within section 23 of the Highways and Locomotive (Amendment) Act, 1878, so as to make them liable for the damage done to the highway by such extraordinary traffic.-PETHICK v. DORSET COUNTY COUNCIL, Q.B.D.

4. Liability to repair ratione tenure-Highway made a parish highway—Highway rate--Exemption -Highway Act, 1862 (25 & 26 Vict. c. 61), s. 35Estoppel-Res judicata-Judgment of quarter sessions -Quashing previous rate. By an order of petty sessions made in April, 1881, under section 35 of the Highway Act, 1862, a highway, for the repair of which the appellant company had previously, as occupier of certain land, been liable ratione tenuræ, was declared to be a parish highway, and a sum was fixed to be paid in full discharge of all claims thereafter in respect of the repair and maintenance of the highway. In August, 1881, the appellant company was rated in respect of its occupation of the land to a highway rate for the district in which the highway was situate. On appeal the quarter sessions quashed the rate. In 1897 the appellant company was again rated to a rate for highway expenses in respect of its occupation of the land.

Held, that the appellant company was not, by reason of the order made under section 35 of the Highway Act, 1862, exempted from liability to be rated for highway expenses, and that the question of the appellant company's liability was not res judicata by reason of the decision of the quarter sessions in 1881 that the rate then in question was invalid.-NORTH-EASTERN RAILWAY Co. v. DALTON OVERSEERS, Q.B.D., 582.

оп

5. Local government · Locomotive-"User" highway-Licence Highways and Locomotives (Amendment) Act, 1878 (41 & 42 Vict. c. 77), s. 32. -Section 32 of the Highways and Locomotives Act, 1878, gave county authorities power to make bye-laws for granting annual licences to locomotives used within their county, and under this section a county council made a bye-law that "No locomotive shall be used on any highway within the county until an annual licence for the use of the same shall have been obtained by the owner thereof."

Held, that a locomotive which is only passing along a highway for the purpose of proceeding to another district is being "used" on such highway within the meaning of this bye-law, and that the owner thereof required a licence for such user.LONDON COUNTY COUNCIL v. WOOD, Q.B.D., 143.

6. Nuisance-Defective fence adjoining highwayChild climbing on fence-Injury to child arising therefrom-Liability of owner of fence.-The defendant was the owner of a piece of waste ground separated from a highway by a fence belonging to him. A child, who was passing along the highway, put his foot upon the fence in order to look at some boys who were playing in the adjoining ground, when the fence, in consequence of its ruinous condition, came down and injured him. In an action by the child to recover damages for personal injuries,

Held, that the action was maintainable, as the fence in its ruinous condition constituted a danger to those lawfully using the highway, and therefore amounted to a nuisance, and the nuisance was the cause of the injury.-HARROLD v. WATNEY, C.A.,

642.

7. Public footway-Stile-Liability of occupier to repair ratione tenure-Evidence of liability.-The defendant was the yearly tenant of a farm through

which ran a public pathway at a certain point of which was a stile with stone steps. The steps being out of repair, the plaintiff in crossing fell and was injured, and he brought an action for the injuries against the defendant, as being liable ratione tenure to repair the stile. There was no evidence that the parish had ever repaired, or had ever required the defendant or any prior occupier to repair, but there was evidence that the defendant's predecessor, who was also owner, had done repairs to the path and stile; there was also some evidence that previous occupiers had repaired, and a witness stated that he had done some repairs at the defendant's instance. The repairs were all small and inconsiderable, and they were done on the defendant's own land.

Held, that evidence of such small repairs, done by the occupier on his own land and possibly for his own benefit, was not sufficient to show that the defendant was bound to repair ratione tenurœ.

Quare, whether an action will lie at the instance of a private person against one liable ratione tenure to repair.-RUNDLE v. HEARLE, Q.B.D.,

619.

9. Surveyor-Supplying team work-Member of district council--Surveyor or not-Highway Act, 1835 (5 & 6 Will. 4, c. 50), s. 46-Public Health Act, 1875 (38 & 39 Vict. c. 55), s. 144-Local Government Act, 1894 (56 & 57 Vict. c. 73), ss. 25, 46.-By the Highway Act, 1835, s. 46, the surveyor of the parish may contract for the purchasing, getting, and carrying of materials required for the repairing of the highways, but he may not share or have any interest in any such contract without the licence in writing of two justices of the peace previously obtained by him under certain penalties.

By the Public Health Act, 1875, s. 144, urban authorities have the powers of surveyors of highways and of parish vestries under the Highways

Acts.

By the Local Government Act, 1894, s. 25, the district council of every rural district ". shall also have, as respects highways, all the powers, duties, and liabilities of an urban sanitary authority under sections 144 to 148 of the Public Health Act, 1875, and those sections shall apply in the case of a rural district and of the council thereof in like manner as in the case of an urban

district and an urban authority." And by section 46 of that Act a person is not to be disqualified from being a member of the council "by reason of being interested in the transport

of materials for the repair of roads or bridges in his own immediate neighbourhood."

He

The respondent H. was a member of the Saddleworth District Council, and in March, 1897, he on his own account let to hire a team to be used in repairing a highway within the district of the council of which he was a member, and he received from the council payment in respect thereof. did not, before letting for hire as aforesaid, obtain any licence in writing from two justices of the peace. He was thereupon summoned before the magistrates for the penalties contained in the Highways Act, 1835, s. 46, who, however, dismissed the summons.

Held (dismissing the appeal), that the magistrates were right.-BUCKLEY v. HANSON, Q.B.D.

See also Local Government, 13-15, 23, 32, 34; Vendor and Purchaser, 11.

HOTCHPOT.-See Will, 16.

HUSBAND and WIFE.-See Divorce, 1-7, 10-19; Domicil; Inland Revenue, 2; Married Woman, 1, 2, 6, 7, 9; Practice, 34.

INCLOSURE ACTS:

1. Award-Bed of river ad medium filumSeveral fishery.-An award under an Inclosure Act dealing with moors, commons, and waste grounds will not by implication convey the bed of a river adjoining the land awarded usque ad medium filum.

A fortiori, such an award will not convey the bed of the river where it has been treated as a separate tenement, and not subject to commonable rights, and is exclusively in the possession of lessees of the lord at the date both of the Act and the award.

Decision of North, J. (ante, p. 119), affirmed.— ECROYD v. COULTHARD, Č.A.

3. Custom-Parish bull and boar-Parson-Great tithes, Charge on-Allotment of lands in lieu of tithes -Transfer of liability to custom.-Where, under an Inclosure Act, lands have been allotted "in satisfaction and discharge of" the great tithes, the burden of keeping up a custom that the parson as owner of the great tithes shall provide and keep a bull and boar for the common use of the parishioners is not, in the absence of express words in the Act to that effect, shifted to the allottees of those lands.-LANCHBURY v. BODE, Ch.D. Kekewich, J. INCOME TAX.-See Inland Revenue, 8-12. INFANT:

1. Agreement to settle action-Plea in bar-Contract to benefit.-The plaintiff, an infant, commenced an action by his next friend for wages and damages for assault, false imprisonment, and malicious prosecution.

He voluntarily came to the defendant and offered to take 30s. in respect of all his claims as he wished to go abroad, which was paid him, and he signed an acknowledgment that all his wages had been paid, and that he had brought the other claims out of vengeance.

The next friend continued the action, and the plaintiff came over to give evidence.

The defendent pleaded the agreement in bar to the action.

The jury found for the defendant as to the wages and malicious prosecution, but for the plaintiff upon the false imprisonment with £20 damages.

The infant never ratified the agreement. Held, that under the circumstances the infant was not bound by the agreement, so as to make it a bar to the action. -MATTEI v. VAUTRO, Q.B.D.

2. Necessaries-Contract-Racing bicycle.-A racing bicycle may be a necessary for an infant apprentice earning 21s. a week, and living with his parents.-CLYDE CYCLE Co. v. HARGREAVES,

Q.B.D.

See also Divorce, 8

INJUNCTION:

1. Letters-Property in-Right of writer to restrain publication. The defendant H., who was the proprietor of a newspaper, published on the 2nd of October, 1897, a violent attack upon the plaintiff's

Inland Revenue. 68

conduct in certain Stock Exchange transactions some years ago, founded upon letters written by the plaintiff to B. The same supplement contained a threat to publish on the 1st of January, 1898, proofs which the defendant had in his possession that the plaintiff had carried on similar transactions in later years.

The plaintiff, who was also the proprietor and editor of a newspaper, published on 7th of October, 1897, an article dealing with and denying the defendant's charges, in which he wrote: "You may publish and republish my letters to B. as often as you please," adding that he could restrain their publication by injunction if he chose, but that he had no intention of doing so.

The plaintiff afterwards published a letter, alleged to have been written by the defendant to a third person, as proof that the defendant was a person wholly unworthy of confidence.

The plaintiff afterwards discovered that the proofs referred to in the defendant's threat consisted wholly or partly of letters written by the plaintiff to S., and obtained by the defendant H. from S.'s widow.

The plaintiff now moved to restrain the defendants H. and S.'s widow from publishing any letters written by the plaintiff to S., and from informing anyone of the contents thereof.

Held, that the court will restrain any person in the possession of letters from publishing them against the will of the writer, except under special circumstances-e.g., where the publication is necessary for the purpose of clearing the defendant's character; that there was nothing in the plaintiff's conduct to disentitle him to this relief, and the defendant had not shown that his purpose in publishing the letters was to clear his own character.

The injunction was granted against publication of the letters from the plaintiff to S., but not against informing anyone of the contents thereof.

S.'s widow was not proved to have given the letters to H. for the purpose of publication, or to have colluded with him, and the action was dismissed against her with costs.-LABOUCHERE v. HESS, Ch.D. North, J.

2. Trader Misleading advertisement Sale of goods at less than cost price.-A trader may offer for sale goods at any price he chooses, and it is immaterial whether such goods are actually in his possession or not. Consequently, where a trader advertised for sale goods at less than cost price, not having any such goods in his possession, and by so doing injured the plaintiffs,

Held, that he could not be restrained from so doing, as the damage to the plaintiffs arose not from the misrepresentations in the advertisements, but from the underselling of their goods, which was not an actionable wrong.—AJELLO v. WORSLEY, Ch.D. Stirling, J., 245.

See also Contract, 6, 7; Copyright, 1, 2; County Court, 1; Election Law, 2; Libel, 2; Local Government, 20; Practice, 10; Trade-Name, 1-4; Vendor and Purchaser, 1. INLAND REVENUE:

1. Building society-Reconveyance of mortgageExemption-Building Societies Act, 1874 (37 & 38 Vict. c. 42), 88. 41, 42-Stamp Act, 1891 (54 & 55 Vict. c. 39). By the Building Societies Act, 1874, s. 41, certain documents, including transfers and receipts, are not to "be subject or liable to be charged with any stamp duty or duties whatsoever, provided that the exemption shall not extend to any mortgage."

And by section 42, where moneys secured by any mortgage or further charge are paid a receipt in the form in the schedule to the Act indorsed on the deed is sufficient release.

A deed was executed by the society, its trustees and the mortgagor, reconveying the mortgaged property as all the money due under the mortgage had been duly paid.

Held, that the deed was exempt from duty.OLD BATTERSEA BUILDING SOCIETY v. INLAND REVENUE COMMISSIONERS, Q.B.D.

2. Estate duty-Exemption-Husband and wifeIncome of wife's fund settled on husband for lifeFinance Act, 1894 (57 & 58 Vict. c. 30), s. 21 (5).— By a marriage settlement after-acquired personal property of the wife was settled upon trust (in the events that happened) for the husband for life, with remainder to the wife, the survivor, absolutely.

The husband having died after the commencement of the Finance Act, 1894,

Held, that section 21, sub-section 5, of that Act did not apply, and that estate duty became payable immediately upon the husband's death.ATTORNEY-GENERAL v. STRANGE, C.A., 6€3.

Possession

3. Estate duty Gift inter vivos · assumed to entire exclusion of donor-Interest reserved -Power of revocation-Customs and Inland Revenue Act, 1881 (44 Vict. c. 12), s. 38 (2) (a) (c), as amended by Customs and Inland Revenue Act, 1889 (52 Vict. c. 7), 8. 11.-G. by deed transferred his estates, including a manor-house, to the defendant, his nephew, subject, as regards property other than the mansion-house, to an annual rent-charge in favour of G. for life, and subject also to the manorhouse being enjoyed as theretofore by G. By the same deed the defendant entered into several covenants relating to the estates, and a power of revoking the deed and reassuming the property in the estates was reserved to G. upon the breach of certain of the said covenants by the defendant. The annual value of the estate at the death of G. was considerably in excess of the rent-charge reserved.

Held, that a sufficient interest and a sufficient power of revocation were reserved in the property so as to bring it within the description of property contained in the Customs and Inland Revenue Act, 1881. s. 38 (2) (c), and that, on the death of G., in October, 1894, the whole of the property became chargeable with estate duty under the Finance Act, 1894, s. 1.—ATTORNEY-GENERAL v. GREY (EARL), Q.B.D., 251.

4. Estate duty. Property passing on deathSettlement―Tenant for life and remaindermanSurrender of life estate to remainderman-Finance Act, 1894 (57 & 58 Vict. c. 30), ss. 1, 2 (1) (b).— Under a marriage settlement the wife was entitled to certain property for her life, with remainder to her son absolutely. More than twelve months before her death the wife surrendered her life interest in the property to the trustees of the settlement, to the end and intent that such life interest might merge in the interest in remainder of her son. Upon the death of the wife,

Held, that, as by the surrender her life interest had ceased to exist more than twelve months before she died, no property passed on her death within the meaning of section 2, sub-section 1 (b), of the Finance Act, 1894, and estate duty was not payable.

Judgment of the Queen's Bench Division (ante, p. 44) reversed.-ATTORNEY-GENERAL v. BEECH, C.A., 435.

5. Estate duty-Settled property-Value of property passing on death-Mortgage created by tenant for life and remainderman-Annuity charged upon estate in favour of remainderman during life of tenant for life-Finance Act, 1894 (57 & 58 Vict. c. 30), ss. 1, 2, 7.-Property was settled upon a person for life, with remainder to his son in tail. The tenants for life and in tail by deed barred the entail and reserved to themselves a joint power of appointment over the property, the limitation in default of the exercise of the power being to the father for life, with remainder to the son in tail. They then joined in creating mortgages whereby, in the exercise of their joint power of appointment and by virtue of their respective estates, they conveyed the property in fee simple to the mortgagees to secure £230.000. Part of this sum was applied for the benefit of the tenant for life, the remainder being paid to or for the benefit of the tenant in tail. By a resettlement subsequently executed this property was charged with an annuity of £3,000 in favour of the tenant in tail during the life of the tenant for life. The tenant for life died in 1895.

Held, that, in determining the value of the property passing on the death of the tenant for life, no deduction could be made in respect of either (1) the £230,000; or (2) the capital value of the annuity of £3,000.

Decision of the Divisional Court (45 W. R. 538, [1897] 2 Q. B. 47) reversed as to (1) and confirmed as to (2).-COWLEY (EARL) ESTATE DUTY, RE, C.A., 223.

6. Estate duty-Settlement estate duty - Settled legacy-Duty payable out of residue-" The deceased" -Finance Act, 1896 (59 & 60 Vict. c. 28), ss. 19, 24, 39.-By section 19 of the Finance Act, 1896, the settlement estate duty leviable in respect of a legacy or other personal property settled by the will of the deceased shall (unless the will contains an express provision to the contrary) be payable out of the settled legacy or property in exoneration of the rest of the deceased's estate.

Held, that this section is not retrospective and does not apply to the estate of a testator who died before the commencement of the said Act of 1896.

In re Webber, Gribble v. Webber, 44 W. R. 489, [1896] 1 Ch. 914, followed.-GIBBS, RE, THORNE v. GIBBS, Ch.D. Stirling, J., 477.

7. Estate duty-Specific sum payable out of policy moneys-Finance Act, 1894 (57 & 58 Vict. c. 30), s. 14. The holder of a policy of assurance on his own life for £5,000 by his marriage settlement assigned the policy to trustees upon trust to raise at his death £4,000 to be held on certain trusts, and as to the remaining part of the policy moneys in trust to pay the same to his executors.

Held, that section 14, sub-section (1), of the Finance Act, 1894, was not applicable, and that the estate duty on the fund must be borne by the residue remaining after payment thereout of the £4,000.-WADE v. WADE, Ch.D. Kekewich, J.

8. Income tax-Bodies corporate or unincorporateExemption-Property appropriated for promotion of science-Customs and Inland Revenue Act, 1885 (48 & 49 Vict. c. 51), s. 11 (3).—By section 11 of the Customs and Inland Revenue Act, 1885, a duty of 5 per cent. is imposed upon the annual value, income, or profits of all property, real and personal, belonging to or vested in any body corporate or unincorporate during the year of assessment, after deducting the costs and expenses of the management of such property, subject to the exemption from duty in sub-section 3 in the property which, or the income or profits

case of "

For some time past the purposes of the college had been mainly the examination of persons for certificates of proficiency in surgery, and the largest source of income and the surplus of expenditure had arisen from such examinations.

Held, that the general offices, the examination hall, and the library were liable to be assessed under the above section; but that the museum and the conservator's official residence came within the exception provided by sub-section 3.-ROYAL COLLEGE OF SURGEONS, RE, Q.B.D., 538.

9. Income tax-Distress-Costs and charges-Man in possession-Constructive possession-Abandonment of possesssion-57 Geo. 3, c. 93, s. 1, Schedule-7 & 8 Geo. 4, c. 16-Taxes Management Act, 1880 (43 & 44 Vict. c. 19), s. 86.-Where a distress is made upon the goods of a taxpayer for unpaid income tax not exceeding £20, the collector is not entitled to charge 2s. 6d. a day for a man in possession, if the man has only been in constructive possession and not in real possession of the goods distrained upon, unless the taxpayer, in order to avoid the inconvenience of having a man in real possession, has expressly agreed to pay that sum.-LUMSDEN v. BURNETT, C.A., 664.

10. Income tax-Distress for non-payment by former occupier-Owner not in possession-Income Tux Act, 1842 (5 & 6 Vict. c. 35), s. 70-Income Tax Act, 1853 (16 & 17 Vict. c. 34), 8. 35.-On the 22nd of April, 1897, a lease was granted to the plaintiff of premises, beginning the 25th of December, 1896, for sixty years at £65 a year rent. The rent was to be paid quarterly, the first payment being payable on the 29th of September, 1897. He did not take possession until April, 1897, and for several years before he entered the premises had been unoccupied. An assessment for income-tax of £9 38. 4d. was made for the year April, 1896, to April, 1897. In August and again in September, 1897, demands were made for payment, aud as the plaintiff refused to pay, on the 17th of November a distraint was put in.

The present action was then commenced against the defendant, a duly appointed collector for the purpose of the Income Tax Acts, for wrongful distress.

Held, that this was a lawful entry, and that no action would lie, as it was covered by section 70 of the Income Tax Act of 1892.-READING v. CHEW, Q.B.D.

11. Income tax-Profits of trade-DeductionsMoney expended for repairs of premises-Money expended for purpose of trade-Brewers-Tied houses -Income Tax Act, 1842 (5 & 6 Vict. c. 35), s. 100, Schedule D., case 1, r. 3; cases 1 and 2, r. 1.-The appellants, a brewery company, were owners of a number of tied public-houses, which they bad acquired for the purpose of increasing their trade.

Inland Revenue. 72

The tied houses were in the occupation of the appellants, tenants in part for the purpose of the trade of publicans and in part as the private dwelling apartments of themselves and their families. The appellants, in making up their return of profits for assessment to the income tax, sought to deduct the sum which they had spent in repairing the tied houses.

Held, that they were not entitled to make such a deduction.-BRICKWOOD v. REYNOLDS, C.A., 130.

12. Income tax-Trade exercised within the United Kingdom-Foreigner resident abroad-Income Tar Act, 1842 (5 & 6 Vict. c. 35), s. 42-Income Tax Act, 1853 (16 & 17 Vict. c. 34), s. 2, Schedule D.-Provision merchants in America consigned goods for sale on commission to the respondents, commission merchants in England. The goods were invoiced in the name of the respondents, who sold the goods and received the proceeds, rendering an account to the merchants in America. The respondents, beyond their charges and commission, made no profit or gain out of the sales.

Held, that the merchants in America exercised

trade within the United Kingdom within Schedule D. of the Income Tax Act, 1853, s. 2, and that the respondents, their agents in England, were assessable to the income tax in respect of the profits arising therefrom.-WATSON v. SANDIE, Q.B.D.,

202.

13. Probate duty-Executor de son sort-Foreign will-Transfer of shares in English company to foreign executors-Liability of company.-A testator, the registered owner of shares and debentures in an English company, was domiciled and died in America. By his will, made according to American law, the shares and debentures passed to his executors. At the request of the executors the company transferred into their names two of the shares and one of the debentures, and paid them the dividends and interest due thereon, The executors, to the knowledge of the company, had not obtained, and did not intend to obtain, probste of the will in England.

Held, that the company had intermeddled with the estate of the deceased so as to constitute itself an executor de son tort, and had rendered itself liable to the payment of probate duty.

Judgment of Wills and Grantham, JJ. (45 W. R. 606), reversed.-ATTORNEY-GENERAL v. NEW YORK BREWERIES Co., C.A., 193.

14. Probate duty-Proceeds of plantation in Jamaica -English testator Share bequeathed to English legatee-Death of legatee —Liability of estate to probate duty.-An English legatee of a share of the proceeds of sale of a West Indian plantation, which was devised by an English testator, after the expiration or failure of certain prior interests, in trust for sale and division of the proceeds, died before the expiration of prior interests for life.

Held, that his share ought to be regarded as an English, and not as a foreign, asset; and probate duty was consequently payable in respect thereof. Sudeley (Lord) v. Attorney-General, 45 W. R. 305, [1897] A. Č. 11, applied and followed.-SMYTH, RE, LEACH v. LEACH, Ch.D. Romer, J., 104.

15. Stamp duty--Agreement for sale-Equitable estate Property locally situate out of the United Kingdom-Purchase in England of equity of redemptionAd valorem duty-Stamp Act, 1891 (54 & 55 Vict. c. 39), s. 59, sub-section 1-Trust Property Act of 1862, New South Wales (26 Vict. No. 12), s. 25.-By the Stamp Act, 1891, s. 59, sub-section 1, "any contract or agreement made in England under seal, or

under hand only, for the sale of any equitable estate or interest in any property whatsoever, or for the sale of any estate or interest in any property except property locally situate out of the United Kingdom," is charged with ad valorem duty.

By the New South Wales Trust Property Act of 1862, s. 25, "All mortgages of real or personal estate shall hereafter be deemed at law, as now in equity, pledges only of the property thereby mortgaged; and nothing in any such mortgage shall prevent the title of any mortgagor, or person claiming and being in possession, from being deemed a good title at law, subject to such pledge, as against all persons other than the mortgagee and those claiming under him."

The appellants entered into a written agreement in England to purchase property in New South Wales, subject to a mortgage.

On a case stated by the Commissioners of Inland Revenue, pursuant to section 13 of the Stamp Act, 1891,

Held, that the words of exception in the Stamp Act, 1891, s. 59, sub-section 1, do not apply to an equitable estate or interest in property locally situate out of the United Kingdom, and therefore the general words, "any equitable estate or interest any property whatsoever," apply, and ad valorem duty is payable on an agreement made in England for the purchase of such an estate:

in

Held, also, that the New South Wales Trust Property Act does not confer the legal estate in mortgaged property on the mortgagor:

Held, therefore, that ad valorem duty was payable on the purchase by the appellants of the equity of redemption.-FARMER v. ÎNLAND REVENUE COMMISSIONERS, Q.B.D.

16. Stamp duty - Agreement between the county council and urban council-Repair and improvement of roads-Local Government Act, 1888 (51 & 52 Vict. c. 41), s. 11-Stamp Act, 1891 (54 & 55 Vict. c. 39), Schedule. On the 26th of November, 1897, an agreement was made between the appellants and the Urban District Council of Frizington, whereby the payment for the year ending March, 1898, in pursuance of the Local Government Act, 1888, towards the cost of maintenance, and repair and reasonable improvement connected with maintenance and repair of all main roads within the district of the urban council was fixed at a certain sum.

the

The money was to be paid in four instalments, and there was a proviso that nothing, except as expressly declared, should alter the rights and liabilities of the parties thereto.

Held, that this was not an agreement made pursuant to the Highway Acts for or relating to the making, maintaining, and repairing of highways, which would only require a 6d. stamp, but that it was made under the Local Government Act, and came under the heading "deed of any kind whatsoever not described in the schedule" of the Stamp Act, and so required a 10s. stamp.CUMBERLAND COUNTY COUNCIL v. INLAND REVENUE COMMISSIONERS, Q.B.D.

17. Stamp duty-Annuity payable quarterlyBond, covenant, or instrument"-Stamp Act, 1891 (54 & 55 Vict. c. 39), Schedule.-By a deed of separation between a husband and wife, the husband agreed that so long as the wife observed the stipulations of the deed he would pay her every three months £625 by quarterly payments on the 29th of September, the 25th of December, the 25th of March, and the 24th of June in every year.

Held, that this was an annuity of £2,500, and

that ad valorem duty was payable on that sum, and not on £625.-LEWIS v. INLAND REVENUE COMMISSIONERS, Q.B.D.

18. Stamp duty-Annuity secured by bond—“ Conveyance on sale"-Stamp Act, 1891 (54 & 55 Vict. c. 39), 88. 54, 60, 87 (2), Schedule I.-Mersey Dock Acts Consolidation Act, 1858.-A dock company had statutory powers to borrow money for certain purposes, and "all money so borrowed by the board of directors was to be secured either by bonds or by annuities." The company having by deed granted a large number of annuities, the question was raised by the Commissioners of Inland Revenue at what rate the instruments by which they were secured to the annuitants should be charged with stamp duty under section 87 (2) of the Stamp Act, 1891, the annuity deeds having been presented to the Commissioners stamped as securities on an ad valorem duty of 2s. 6d. per cent. under the head " Mortgage, Bond, Debenture, Covenant, &c."

Held, that, as the annuities were payable for an indefinite period, and could only be redeemed or extinguished by the board purchasing them at the then market price, the deed securing such an annuity was in the nature of a conveyance on sale" and not a bond to secure the repayment of an advance or loan to the company, and was therefore chargeable at the rate of 10s. per cent. as a contract of sale and purchase.

Decision of Queen's Bench Division (45 W. R. 448) affirmed.-MERSEY Docks Co. BOARD v. INLAND REVENUE COMMISSIONERS, C.A.

19. Stamp duty-Conveyance on sale Agreement -Leasehold interest in licensed house-GoodwillStamp Act, 1891 (54 & 55 Vict. c. 39), s. 59 (1).— By an agreement under seal the vendor agreed to sell the goodwill of the business of an hotel proprietor and licensed victualler, and the lease of the hotel in which the business was carried on, together with the household furniture, stock-intrade, cash, and book debts; of the total consideration £4,085 was apportioned to "lease and goodwill," £1,462 to furniture, stock-in-trade, and cash, and £37 to book debts. The vendor was to show a good title to the lease and to assign the lease and goodwill to the purchasers; in the event of the consent of the landlords to the assignment of the lease not being obtained, it was provided that the vendor should, at the option of the purchasers, execute a declaration of trust of the leasehold premises in their favour. The consent of the landlords not having been obtained, a declaration of trust was executed in favour of the purchasers, which was stamped with the fixed duty of 10s.

Held, (1) that the agreement was not an agreement for the sale of an equitable interest in property within the meaning of section 59, subsection 1, of the Stamp Act, 1891; (2) that, inasmuch as the goodwill was incapable of being severed from the enjoyment of the leasehold premises, the instrument was not an agreement for the sale of an estate or interest in any property except lands," and was therefore not liable to ad valorem duty upon that portion of the consideration attributed to " lease and goodwill"; (3) that it was liable to ad valorem duty upon the amount of the book debts only.-WEST LONDON SYNDICATE v. INLAND REVENUE COMMISSIONERS, Q.B.D.

20. Stamp duty-Conveyance on sale-Ad valorem duty-Stamp Act, 1891 (54 & 55 Vict. c. 39), 88. 54, 57-Heritable Securities (Scotland) Act, 1894 (57 & 58 Vict. c. 14), 88. 8, 9.-A bond and disposition in