parish into precisely the same condition as the newly cultivated land in a parish in which a district has been formed. On reading the two sections together, I can come to no other conclusion than this, that, there being no express limitation in the Act, there is nothing to show by necessary implication that we ought to confine the last provision of the 42nd section of 6 & 7. Will. 4, c. 71, to the case of a parish in which a district was formed at the original commutation. The whole argument for the plaintiffs depends on the correctness of the proposition, that the formation of a district in a parish at the time of the original commutation is a necessary condition precedent to the bringing of lands, newly cultivated as hop grounds or market gardens, under the operation of a new assessment. The argument has not satisfied me as to the correctness of that proposition, and I therefore think our judgment must be for the defendants.

Judgment for defendants. Attorneys for plaintiffs, Andrew and Atkins. Attorneys for defendant, White, Borrett, and Co.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER. Reported by H. LEIGH and R. A. KINGLAKE, Esqrs., Barristers-at-Law.

Tuesday, June 6, 1871.

THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL v. PHILLIPS. Revenue-Stamp duty-Benefit building societyReceipt given by secretary of, for rent of premises mortgaged by a member to the society—Liability of to stamp duty-10 Geo. 4, c. 56, s. 37— 6 & 7 Will. 4, c. 32.

By one of the rules of a benefit building society, duly registered pursuant to the 6 & 7 Will. 4, c. 32, every member receiving an advance was to give security by mortgage to the satisfaction of the board, and repay the amount, with interest, by agreed monthly instalments. K. was the occupier of a cottage and premises as tenant to the owner, who, being a duly enrolled member of the society, had mortgaged the said premises to the trustees of the society as security for an advance made to him out of the funds of the society pursuant to the provisions of the said Act. The mortgagor having made default in his payments of interest and other moneys to the trustees under the mortgage deed, the latter, in pursuance of the powers in such deed contained, entered into the possession and into the receipt of the rents and profits of the said mortgaged premises, and whilst in such possession, and whilst the mortgage deed was in force and unsatisfied, K. paid to the defendant, as the secretary to such society, the sum of 121. for rent of the said premises, and the defendant thereupon gave him an unstamped receipt for the same in the following form: "Temperance Land and Building Society (enrolled as the Temperance Benefit Building Society.) No. 2667. 4, Ludgate-hill, London. 15th Oct. 1870. Received of Mr. G. C. Knight 121. rent of premises, Barnhove Cottage, East Moulsey, due Michaelmas 1870. For the trustees of the society, Henry J. Phillips, secretary."

Held, by the Court of Exchequer (Kelly, C. B., and Martin, Bramwell, and Cleasby, BB.), giving judgment in favour of the Crown, that the receipt in question was liable to and required a stamp. It did not come within any of the several classes of documents exempted from stamp duty by sect.

[Ex.

37 of the 10 Geo. 4, c. 36, but was to all intents a document given as between landlord and tenant, in pursuance of a contract between them, and by the express terms of the document itself was stated to be a receipt for rent received by the landlord. SPECIAL CASE.

1. This is a proceeding brought by the AttorneyGeneral against the defendant, for the forfeiture by him of a penalty of 101. for signing the receipt hereinafter mentioned without the same being duly stamped, and by the consent of the parties, and by the order of Martin, B., dated the 6th Dec. 1870, according to the Act (22 & 23 Vict. c. 21, s. 10), this special case, without pleadings has been stated for the opinion of the court.

2. The Temperance Permanent Land and Building Society is a Benefit Building Society, duly registered under the name of "The Temperance Permanent Benefit Building Society," pursuant to the Act of 6 & 7 Will. 4, c. 32. The defendant, who is the secretary of the said society, on the 15th Oct. 1870 received from Mr. G. C. Knight the sum of 12., and thereupon signed and gave to the said G. C. Knight the receipt set forth in this paragraph, the said receipt not being stamped.

121.

For the trustees of the society,
HENRY J. PHILLIPS, Secretary.

3. The said G. C. Knight was, prior to the attornment hereinafter mentioned, the occupier of the cottage and premises mentioned in the said receipt as tenant to the owner thereof, who, being a duly enrolled member of the said society, had mortgaged the same to the trustees of the said society, as security for an advance made to him out of the funds of the said society, in accordance with the provisions of the Act 6 & 7 Will. 4, c. 32. In the mortgage deed were contained the following provisions :

And it is hereby agreed that if three of the monthly subscriptions herein provided for shall be in arrear and unpaid, or if default be made by the said mortgagor, his trustees, executors, administrators, or assigns, in observance or performance of same agreement, covenant, rule, or bye-law, herein contained or incorporated by reference, or if the said mortgagor shall be bankrupt, or in insolvent circumstances, or make any general arrangement with his creditors, whether by deed or otherwise, then, and in any and each of such events, the said trustees may at any time thereafter, and from time to time, in their absolute discretion, do all, any, or either of the following acts, that is to say, distrain for the amount of any monthly subscriptions and fines which shall be in arrear and unpaid, and of any payments made by the said trustees under the power hereby conferred upon them, as for rent in arrear upon a common demise; or enter into possession of the premises, or receipt of the rents and profits thereof, or appoint a collec tor of such rents or profits at a reasonable remuneration, or demise the premises, or any part thereof, for any terms, and upon any conditions, or complete any unfinished buildings thereon, or repair the said premises when and as the said trustees shall deem any repair needful or expedient, and for such purposes enter into such contracts as they may think proper and expedient, or insure any buildings on the said premises from fire in such sums as the said trustees shall deem expedient, or pay any rates or taxes due in respect of the said premises, and may, in their absolute discretion, either before or after doing any such act as aforesaid, and subject or not to any such

demise, sell the premises, or any part thereof, by public auction or private contract, subject or not to any special or other conditions, as to title or otherwise, and may buy in or rescind and resell without responsibility for loss, and may do all things necessary for effectuating demises and sales, and allow the whole or any part of the purchase-money to remain on security of the premises, on such terms as they shall think fit, and shall, out of the said rents and profits and moneys arising from sales, or any or either of them (so far as the same will extend), firstly pay the rates and taxes in respect of the premises, the costs, charges, and expenses of distraining, taking possession, or of the collection of rents and profits, and of the letting and sale, and of the completion of any buildings, and the repairs and insurance of the premises, and all other costs and outgoings incurred or payable in respect of the premises, together with interest thereon respectively, at the rate of 51. per centum per annum, from the respective times of any such payments; and next retain for the said society all subscriptions, interest, fines, and other moneys due or payable by the said mortgagor, his heirs, executors, administrators, or assigns, to the said society, in respect of any share or shares therein, or otherwise by virtue of the rules or bye-laws for the time being of the said society, or of these presents, as on a redemption by the said m rtgagor of the said premises, at the date of the receipt of such moneys; and pay the surplus (if any) to the said mortgagor, his executors, administrators, or assigns. And it is hereby further agreed that every such demise and sale as aforesaid may be made with or against any further consent from the said mortgagor, his heirs, executors, administrators, or assigns; and that the receipts of the said trustees shall discharge lessees, tenants, occupiers, purchasers, and other persons paying rents, profits, purchase, and other moneys to such trustees or to the said society, from the same and from seeing to the application thereof. And that the rules for the time being of the society shall apply to this mortgage, and be taken by reference as incorporated herein, except so far as the same has been waived by these presents.

A print of the said rules is annexed hereto, and is to be taken as part of this case.

[Ex.

money deposited in the funds of any such society; nor for any money received by any member, his or her executors, administrators or assigns, or attorneys, from the funds of such society, nor any bond or other security to be given to or on account of any such society, or by the treasurer or trustee, or any officer thereof; nor any draft nor order, nor any form of assurance, nor any appointment of any agent, nor any certificate or other instrument for the revocation of any such appointment; nor any other instrument or document whatever required or authorised to be given, issued, signed, made or produced in pursuance of this Act, shall be subject or liable to or charged with any stamp duty or duties whatsoever.

And by sect. 4 of 6 & 7 Will. 4, c. 32 (the Act for the regulation of Benefit Building Societies), it is enacted that

All the provisions of the above-mentioned Act, 10 Geo. 4, c. 56, and also the provisions of 4 & 5 Will. 4, c. 40, amending the same, so far as the same or any part thereof may be applicable to the purpose of any benefit building society, and to the framing, certifying, enrolling, and altering the rule thereof, shall extend and apply to such benefit building society and the rules thereof, in such and the same manner as if the provisions of the said Acts had been herein expressly enacted.

The object of the society, as stated by Rule 1 of the printed rules thereof, was to raise, by subscription of the members, and in shares of 301. each, a fund out of which each member should receive the amount or value of his share or shares for the erection or purchase of a dwelling-house or dwelling-houses, or other real or leasehold estate, pursuant to 6 & 7 Will. 4, c. 32.

By Rule 11 the Board were empowered to advance to members, out of the funds of the society, the amount of their shares; and by Rule 12 every member receiving an advance shall give security by mortgage to the satisfaction of the board, and shall repay the amount, with such interest as may be agreed upon, by such monthly instalments as shall be agreed upon.

Crompton Hutton (with him were The AttorneyGeneral (Sir R. P. Collier, Q. C.) and The SolicitorGeneral (Sir J. D. Coleridge, Q. C.) for the Crown. -Independently of any statutory exemption from stamp duty, the form of this instrument is such that it would be liable to the ordinary penny

4. The question for the opinion of the court, which is to have power to draw inferences of fact, is, whether the said receipt was liable to stamp duty?

If the court should answer the question in the affirmative, judgment is to be entered for the Crown for a penalty of 101. with costs; and if the court should answer the question in the negative judgment is to be entered for the defendant, with

costs.

By sect. 37 of the old Friendly Societies Act (10 Geo. 4, c. 56) it was enacted that-

No copy of rules, power, warrant, or letter of attorney, granted or to be granted by any person as trustee of any society established under this Act, for the transfer of any shares in the public funds, standing in the name of such trustee, nor any rece pts given for any dividend in any public stock or fund, or interest of Exchequer bills, nor any receipt nor any entry in any book of receipts for

(He

emption under sect. 4 of 6 & 7 Will. 4, c. 32 (the Benefit Building Societies Act), which has been held to incorporate into it the exemption given by the 37th section of the previous Act (the Friendly Societies Act, 10 Geo. 4, c. 56). The defendant will, it is understood, contend that this instrument is exempt under this section as being a "receipt given for money deposited in the funds of any such society," &c., or at all events that it comes within the latter words of that section, any other instrument or document," &c. was here stopped by the court, who called upon) Quain, Q. C. (with whom was Crompton), for the defendant, to support the claim to exemption.— The 6 & 7 Will. 4, c. 32 (the Benefit Building Societies Act), clearly contemplated, in express terms (see sects. 1, 3, and 5), the carrying out its objects by the machinery of mortgages by means either of members or strangers mortgaging their property to the society. A mortgage, therefore, is the chief means and machinery upon which the society depends, and they have therefore to carry such mortgage out and enforce it in all its consequences. On such mortgages themselves it will be admitted by the Crown no stamp duty is required. One of the ways or means of enforcing such a mortgage is by the trustees becoming

mortgagees in possession, and receiving the rents of the mortgaged property; and clearly if, instead of taking possession, the society had received this money from the member himself, no stamp duty could have been enforced on the receipt. Ali, therefore that they have done is by the machinery of the mortgage, which the Act of Parliament expressly authorises, to enforce payment of the subscriptions; and the money received from the tenant, though it may, as between landlord and tenant, be rent in a sense, yet in the hands of the society it is merely a mode of enforcing the payment of the member's subscription. It was purely a building society's transaction within and contemplated by the Act of Parliament, and entirely different from the recent case in this court of The Attorney-General v. Gilpin and others (40 L. J. 134, Ex.; L. Rep. 6 Ex. 193) with reference to the stamp duty upon a negotiable instrument, where it was held that the drafts there in question were liable to stamp duty, because the transaction was clearly a banking transaction, and not one within the operations of either a benefit building society or a friendly society. The only difficulty in the defendant's way in the present case is that the receipt was given to the tenant. [BRAMWELL, B.-By your contention the Crown would needlessly lose a penny, because, if the society had paid it, they would be entitled to deduct it as part of their mortgage costs from the mortgagor; and if the society had not entered into possession, and if the mortgagor himself had given the receipt, the Crown would have got a penny stamp upon it. The truth is that, if you are right, the mortgagor will save a penny.] The Act of Parliament meant to exempt from stamp duty, not only the mortgagor and mortgagee, but all persons dealing with the society, and it has been expressly decided that a mortgage made to a stranger, not a member of the society, did not require a stamp: (see the case in Chancery before Sir W. Page Wood, V.C., of Thorn v. Croft, 15 L. T. Rep. N. S. 205; 36 L. J., 69, Ch.; L. Rep. 3 Eq. 193.) [MARTIN, B., refers to The Trustees of the Royal Liver Friendly Society v. The Commissioners of Inland Revenue, 21 L. T. Rep. N. S. 721; 39 L. J. 37, Ex. s. c. nom. In the matter of the Royal Liver Friendly Society (L. Rep. 5 Ex. 78.)] That was not the case of a building society, but one under the new Friendly Societies Act (18 & 19 Vict. c. 63, s, 37), in which certain words ("other security"), which were in the corresponding section of the old Act (10 Geo. 4, c. 56, s. 37) were omitted. The present case, however, was under the old Act of Geo. 4. What the Act intended was, it was submitted, to faci litate in every way the bona fide transactions of a society of this kind, and what was done here was an Act bona fide carrying out the objects of the society; and it was exempt from duty. Had the mortgagor directed the tenant to pay his rent to the society in payment of his subscriptions, it could not be contended that the receipt would be liable to duty, and how does what was done differ from that? The fact of Knight being a stranger was immaterial, according to Thorne v. Croft (ubi sup.), in which Wood, V.C. considered himself bound by the case of Walker v. Giles (6 C. B. 662; 18 L. J. 323, C.P.), the decision in which case, the ViceChancellor said, was solemnly affirmed in Barnard v. Pilsworth, cited in a note to Walker v. Giles. (6 C. B. 698, and 18 L. J. 330, C.P.) The words of sect. 37 of 10 Geo. 4, c. 56, cover moneys received

[Ex.

from the society, and moneys received by the society in carrying out the purposes of the Act, and although the word "deposited in that section may not strictly be applicable, yet it is simili casu to a benefit society. The only moneys received by a building society are the subscriptions of members in repaying advances, and the court would construe this as a receipt for money "deposited in the funds of the society." The latter words of that section too were very wide, " nor any other instrument,"

&c., and might be called in aid of the defendant's argument. This being clearly a document given for carrying out the machinery of the mortgage, authorised and contemplated by the Act, and if the court see it to be such a document they will hold it to come within these last words, if not within the earlier portion of the section. The construction put by the Vice-Chancellor upon that section was that it gave a general exemption from stamp duty, being drawn in the largest terms, and extending to every period of the existence of the societies formed under the Act. As a matter of fact this was the first time since the Act of Geo. 4, that the Crown had sought to charge the duty in such a

case.

66

KELLY, C.B.-I think it is quite clear that the instrument in question in this case requires a stamp. It is not, and indeed it cannot be, contended under the Stamp Act, that a receipt between landlord and tenant for a sum of money for rent due is not within the Stamp Act, and does not require a stamp. The only question is whether this instrument comes within any of the classes of exemption to be found in the 4th section of the 6 & 7 Will. 4, c. 32. The only exemptions which could possibly apply to an instrument of this description are, first, "any receipt given for any dividend in any public stock or fund, or interest of Exchequer bills;" it is not within those words; nor any receipt nor any entry in any book of receipt for money deposited in the funds of any society"-it is not within those words; "Nor for any money received by any member from the funds of such society," it is clearly not within those words. Then comes this further exemption, "Nor any bond nor other security to be given to or on account of any such society." It is clear that this is not a "bond or any other security" given to the society. But it has been contended by Mr. Quain that, because a mortgage given to a society, or on account of a society, of this description, does not require a stamp, therefore this receipt does not require one. I am quite at a loss to understand the connection, or even to see the slightest resemblance between the one and the other. It is quite clear that a mortgage, whenever it is executed, on account of a society of this description, is a "security" given to or on account of that society. That, however, has nothing to do with this receipt. Then come these final general words of the section,

66

nor any other instrument or document whatever required or authorised to be given or signed, made, or produced in pursuance of this section." Is this a document made in pursuance of the Act? It has nothing in the world to do with the Act; and has not the remotest connection with it. It is a receipt given between the landlord and tenant, in pursuance of the contract which they had entered into, creating a tenancy between them, and in pursuance of that only. Under that contract the tenant is, at certain periods, liable to pay a certain amount of rent to his landlord; he

has paid it in this case, not indeed to the landlord in person, but to somebody who has the authority of the landlord, whether in law or in fact, to receive it on his behalf, and it is simply the case of a receipt between the landlord and tenant, having nothing whatever to do with that section of this Act of Parliament. But it has to do with the operation of the Stamp Act, and therefore I am of opinion that this document requires a receipt stamp.

MARTIN, B.-I am clearly of the same opinion. In my judgment this exemption ought to be read according to its plain and ordinary meaning, namely, that those receipts are to be exempted from duty which are given for money deposited, belonging to the funds of the society. I am of opinion that this is not a receipt for money deposited, belonging to the funds of the society. The fact that this money, after it was paid by the tenant, was deposited in the funds of the society, seems to me not at all to affect the question; and, as to the concluding words of the exempting clause, nor any other instrument or document whatever, required or authorised to be given, issued, signed, made, or produced, in pursuance of this Act," the receipt in question had nothing to do with that. It is a common receipt, as between the assignee of the landlord and the tenant, under an original tenancy. The truth is that it is not arguable.

66

BRAMWELL, B.-I am of the same opinion, and I think that all that is necessary, to show that the question is not arguable, is to read the receipt, which is as follows: Received of Mr. G. C. Knight 121., rent of premises, Barnhove Cottage," &c. It is given as a discharge of the rent due from the tenants' landlord to a building society, because they are assignees of the lease granted to him. If the original mortgagor had given that receipt it would have borne a penny stamp. Why therefore should not the trustees pay it? As to the general words, at the end of the section, they manifestly apply to some document which is contemplated by the statute, and not to a document of this description which is given in pursuance of the requirements of the building society, apart from the purposes contemplated by the Act.

CLEASBY, B.-I am of the same opinion. The receipt is the discharge of the rent to whoever it is due, and might be an important document to him, but he has no claim on that ground to be exempted from stamp duty.

Judgment for the Crown. Attorney for the Crown, The Solicitor of Inland Revenue, Somerset House, W.C.

THE MAYOR, ALDERMEN, AND BURGESSES OF BATH (apps.) v. THE COMMISSIONERS OF INLAND REVENUE (resps.)

Revenue Stamp duty-Conveyance of land to local board of health-Liability of to ad valorem stamp duty-The Public Health Act 1848 (11 & 12 Vict. c. 63) s. 151—Exemption of documents therein specified from stamp duty-Local Government Act 1858 (21 & 22 Vict. c. 98), 88. 4, 5, 6, and 75-Local Government Act Amendment Act 1861 (24 & 25 Vict. c. 61) s. 29-City of Bath Act 1851 (14 & 15 Vict. c. civ.) ss. 19 and 85-Local Government Supplemental Act 1869 (No. 2) (32 & 33 Vict. c. cl.)-Construction.

By sect. 151 of the Public Health Act 1848 (11 §-12 Vict.

[Ex. c. 63) "no deed, award, submission, instrument, contract, agreement, or writing, made or executed by the general or local board, their officers or servants, under or for the purposes of the said Act, shall be chargeable with any stamp duty whatever." By their local Act, The City of Bath Act 1851 (14 & 15 Vict. c. civ.), the Mayor, Aldermen, and Burgesses of Bath were constituted the local board of health for that city, under the Public Health Act 1848, and by sect. 19 of the same local act it was enacted that the said Public Health Act, except (amongst other portions of it) the above mentioned sect. 151, should be incorporated with and form part of the said local Act. By sect. 4 of the Local Government Act 1858 (21 & 22 Vict. c. 98), which Act is under sect. 5 in force at Bath, that Act is incorporated with and is to be construed with and deemed to form part of the said Public Health Act; and by sect. 29 of the Local Government Act Amendment Act 1861 (24 & 25 Vict. e. 61), the provisions of the Local Government Act 1858 are to apply to all local boards constituted under or by virtue of local Acts.

In Oct. 1870, the Mayor, &c., of Bath, being em powered by the said Local Government Act 1858, sect. 75, and the Local Government Supplemental Act 1869 (No. 2.), (33 & 34 Vict., c. cl.), to purchase and take lands as the Bath Local Board for street improvements, &c., purchased certain property from Sir H. C. Rivers, Bart., for that purpose, and thereupon the conveyance in question was made, and was executed both by Sir H. C. Rivers the grantor, and the said mayor, &c., the grantees; and the appellants contended that such conveyance was exempt from stamp duty under the above mentioned sect. 151 of the Public Health Act 1848, the whole of which Act was incorporated in the Local Government Acts, and that the exception of that section from the City of Bath Act 1851, did not affect the deed in question. Upon a case stated by the Commissioners of Inland Revenue for the opinion of the Court of Exchequer, it was

Held, by Kelly, C. B., and Martin, Bramwell, and Cleasby, BB., giving judgment for the appellants (Martin, B. not feeling so clear upon the point as the rest of the court, but not meaning to differ) that, as the land had been purchased and taken by the appellants under, and for the purposes of, the Local Government Act, and not under the City of Bath Act 1851, the exception of sect. 151 of the Public Health Act from the City of Bath Act did not apply to the transaction, and that, in whatever they did under the powers of the Local Government Act, the corporation of Bath were as free from stamp duty as any other corporation or body carrying into effect the powes and objects of that Act would be: But quære, per Martin and Bramwell, BB., whether sect. 151 of the Public Health Act 1848 includes or applies to a conveyance of this kind at all? THIS was a case on adjudication for stamp duty, which was stated by the Commissioners of Inland Revenue pursuant to the 13 & 14 Vict. c. 97, on the requisition of the mayor, aldermen, and burgesses of the city and borough of Bath, in order that they might appeal to the Court of Exchequer against the determination of the Commissioners as to the liability of the indenture hereinafter mentioned to stamp duty.

SPECIAL CASE.

1. By an indenture dated the 19th Oct. 1870, between Sir Henry Chandos Rivers, Bart., of the first part, the Honourable Philip Pleydell Bouverie,

Henry George Hamilton, Joseph Hoare, and Lambert Pole, of the second part, John George Priestly, of the third part, Martin Harris and Alfred Thomas Rackham, of the fourth part, dame Catherine Rivers, of the fifth part, William Frederick Haseler, and Thomas Frederick Inman of the sixth part, and the said mayor, aldermen, and burgesses, being, and acting as, the local board of health in and for the district of the city of Bath, of the seventh part. After reciting, amongst other things, that the said mayor, aldermen, and burgesses, acting as the said local board, and requiring the messuages and hereditaments thereinafter mentioned and thereby conveyed, for a street improvement within their district, had agreed with the said Sir Henry Chandos Rivers for the purchase thereof in fee simple in possession for the sum of 48321. It is witnessed that, in consideration of the sum of 48321., paid as therein mentioned, certain freehold hereditaments, numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6, Quiet-street, in the city of Bath, were conveyed to the said mayor, aldermen, and burgesses, their successors, and assigns, for the purposes of the said local board for ever.

2. The said mayor, aldermen, and burgesses, by their solicitors, on the 10th March last, presented the said indenture, which was then unstamped, to the Commissioners of Inland Revenue at their office at Somerset House, under the provisions of the 14th section of the said Act of the 13 & 14 Vict. c. 97, and desired to have the opinion of the said commissioners whether the said indenture was in their judgment chargeable with stamp duty, and tendered and paid to the commissioners the fee of 108., as required by the said Act.

3. The said mayor, aldermen, and burgesses were, by "The City of Bath Act 1851," constituted the local board of health, under the Public Health Act 1848, for the municipal city and borough of Bath.

4. By the 19th section of the City of Bath Act 1851, it was enacted that the Public Health Act 1848, except certain portions thereof, including the section 151 providing exemptions from certain duties, should be incorporated with and form part of that Act.

5. It was and is alleged on behalf of the said mayor, aldermen, and burgesses that, although the 151st section of the Public Health Act 1848 was, by express enactment, not incorporated in the City of Bath Act 1851, the said indenture was, nevertheless, by virtue of some provisions contained in the Local Government Act 1858, and the Local Government Supplemental Act 1869 (No. 2), or one of them, exempt from stamp duty, under or by reference to the said 151st section of the Public Health Act 1848; but the commissioners were of opinion that the said indenture was not exempt from stamp duty, but was liable, as a conveyance on sale for 48321., to the stamp duty of 241. 58., and also to nine progressive duties of 10s. each, and they assessed the duty thereon accordingly.

6. Thereupon the said mayor, aldermen, and burgesses paid to the Receiver-General of Inland Revenue the sum of 281. 158., and the said indenture was thereupon stamped with the proper stamp for denoting the said duties, and also with the particular stamp provided by the said Commissioners under the said Act, to signify and denote that the full amount of stamp duty with which the said indenture was chargeable had been paid.

[Ex.

7. But the said mayor, aldermen, and burgesses declared themselves dissatisfied with the determination of the said Commissioners, and having deposited with the Commissioners the sum of 40s. for costs and charges, pursuant to the 15th section of the said Act (13 & 14 Vict. c. 97), have required the said Commissioners to state, specify, and sign the case on which the question with respect to such stamp duty arose, together with their determination thereon, which the said Commissioners do hereby state and sign accordingly.

8. Prints of the City of Bath Act 1851 and the Local Government Supplemental Act 1869 (No. 2), are annexed, and are to be taken as part of this case.

The question to be decided by the court is, whether the said indenture is chargeable with stamp duty or not.

The following sections of the various Acts of Parliament, upon the construction of which the decision of the case rested, and which were fully discussed and commented on in the course of the arguments of counsel, and in the judgment of the court, are material to this report. The Public Health Act 1848 (11 & 12 Vict. c. 63) by s. 151, enacts that:

No advertisements, &c. . under this Act, or for the purpose of carrying the same into effect, nor any deed, award, submission, instrument, contract, agreement, or writing, made or executed by the general or local board, the r officers or servants, under or for the purposes of this Act... shall be chargeable with any stamp duty what

ever.

By sect. 19 of the City of Bath Act 1851 (14 & 15 Vict. c. civ.) (local), it was enacted that the Public Health Act 1848, except (amongst other parts of it) the above sect. 151, providing exemptions from certain duties, should be incorporated with and form part of the said City of Bath Act 1851.

By sect. 85 of the said City of Bath Act 1851, it was enacted that such Act should be subject to the provisions of any Act for amending or extending the Public Health Act 1848, passed in the present, or any future session of Parliament.

The Local Government Act 1858 (21 & 22 Vict. c. 98), which was An Act to amend the Public Health Act 1848, and to make further provision for the local government of towns and populous districts, enacted, inter alia

By sect. 4:

That this Act shall be construed together with, and be deemed to form part of, the Public Health Act 1848; that words used in this Act shall be interpreted in the sense assigned to them in the said Public Health Act; bye laws framed under this Act shall be subject to confirmation, enforced and dealt with in all other respects, as bye laws under the said Public Health Act, and the provisions of each of the said Acts hall, so far as may be consistent with the provisions of this Act, respectively be applicable to all matters and things arising under the other Act. By sect. 5:

That this Act shall take effect from 1st Sept. 1858, in places where the Public Health Act is already in force, wholly or partially. Provided always that nothing in this Act shall affect the qualification and number of the members of local boards of health in such places, or any power, right, privilege, or liability of any board of improvement commissioners, exercising powers of the Public Health Act 1848, or of any town council or local board of health, under or by virtue of any general or local Act of Parliament other than the said Public Health Act. By sect. 6:

Local boards under this Act shall, subject to this Act, have all the powers, rights, duties, and liabilities of local boards of health constituted under the Public Health Act 1848 and the Acts incorporated therewith.