1854. GAMBIER V. Overseers of WIGHTMAN J. The question is, What part of these premises is rateable, or rather what is exempt from rate. It is hardly contended that the prison itself is rateable, or that the governor is not rateable for the excess, which is found as a fact. As to the official residences without the walls, I think we may draw the line there; we certainly must draw it somewhere; either rent is paid, or there is an equivalent in the way of salary. The separate residences seem to me to fall within the ordinary rule as to beneficial occupation. On the other points, also, I agree with my Lord. The case of the convict farm is clearly not distinguishable from Governors of Bristol Poor v. Wait (a). (No fourth Judge was present.) Lord CAMPBELL C. J. There is no victor: and there will be no costs. The following order was drawn up: "It is considered and adjudged by this Court: That the appellant is rateable in respect of all the lands and buildings assessed except the prison and the governor's house within the prison; and that the appellant is also rateable in respect of the excess of accommodation in the coach-house and stable within the prison: It is thereupon ordered that the rate do stand, except as aforesaid, and that the same be amended, and judgment entered accordingly by the Sessions." (a) 5 A. & E. 1. 1854. The QUEEN against EVANS. Wednesday, January 25th. The rules of a benefit society, established, entified under rolled and cer stats. 10 G. 4. H. J. HODGSON, in last Hilary Term, obtained a rule calling on the prosecutors to shew cause why an order, made by persons named in the rule, being five justices of Caernarvonshire, on 28th March 1853, "upon the complaint of David Davies, whereby they did order Rowland Evans, as president and officer of The Bangor Rechabites Benefit Society, to reinstate the said David if any mis Davies as a member of the said society, and, in default of his so doing, to pay the said David Davies the sum of 50%, should not be quashed." c. 56., 4 & 5 W. 4. c. 40. and 9 & 10 Vict. c. 27., provided that, Vic understanding should happen between the Society and any of its members, the matter should to the decision of arbitrators From the affidavits in support of the rule it appeared be submitted that The Bangor Rechabites Enrolled General Benefit Society was, in 1841, established and enrolled according to the provisions of stats. 10 G. 4. c. 56. and 4 & 5 W. 4. according to stat. 10 G. 4. c. 56., nine of whom should be elected in the first quarterly meeting after the passing of the said laws; and that, when any dispute should arise, the names of the arbitrators should be shuffled in a box or glass, and the first five names taken up by the complaining party should be the arbitrators for the question at issue, and their decision should be final. The Society, at their first quarterly meeting, appointed a general committee for the purpose of electing arbitrators; and nine arbitrators were shortly afterwards elected. Afterwards, in consequence of some of them having left the neighbourhood, and of others having refused to act if called on, the general committee elected nine new arbitrators in the place of the first set. After the first election, but before the second, D., a member of the Society, was expelled for an infringement of one of the rules, as directed by the rule itself. He applied, after the second election of arbitrators, to have the question of his expulsion referred to arbitration. The Society appointed a day for that purpose; and D. and six of the arbitrators last elected attended. D. refused to draw five names out of the nine, according to the rule; and he eventually, with the consent of the Society, signed an agreement, submitting the dispute to five out of the six arbitrators then present (he having been previously allowed, on his own request, to reject any one of the six he chose); their decision to be final. The five arbitrators made their award, adjudging him to be properly expelled. D. applied for a rehearing, which was granted; but, upon the meeting for a rehearing, D. refused to select his arbitrators according to the rule; and he subsequently made a complaint before justices, under stat. 4 & 5 W. 4. c. 40. ss. 7., 8.; and the justices made an order requiring the Society to reinstate him, or to pay him 50%. Held, that the justices had no jurisdiction to make such order, there having been no neglect or refusal by the arbitrators to make an award, and it not being open to D. to contend that the application for settlement by arbitration had not been complied with in forty days, he being estopped, by the written agreement, from disputing the validity of the appointment of the arbitrators. 1854. V. EVANS. c. 40. The rules of the Society were duly certified as The QUEEN directed by those Acts; and were afterwards altered in 1849, and the rules, so amended, duly certified according to the provisions of stat. 9 & 10 Vict. c. 27. The 2d rule required every person becoming a member of the Society to sign a pledge to abstain from every intoxicating beverage: and, by the same rule, it was declared that, if any member should break the said pledge, he should be no longer a member, unless the Society should choose to readmit him as a new member upon his paying a fine as specified in the said rules. The 40th rule provided that, should any misunderstanding happen between the Society and any of its members at any time thereafter, the matter should be submitted to the decision of arbitrators according to stat. 10 G. 4. c. 56., nine of whom should be nominated and elected in the first quarterly meeting after the passing of the said laws, no one of them having any claim to any benefit from the Society; and that, when any dispute should arise, the names of the arbitrators should be written on a slip of paper and shuffled in a box or glass; and the first five names taken up by the complaining party should be the arbitrators for the question at issue; and that their decision should be final. In July, 1849, a general committee of the Society, previously appointed for the purpose at their first quarterly meeting, elected nine persons as arbitrators under the 40th rule. Some of these arbitrators having refused to act if called upon, and others having left the neighbourhood of Bangor, nine other persons, none of whom had any claim to any benefit from the Society, were, in June 1852, at a general meeting of the Society, elected as arbitrators in the place of the nine arbitrators first elected. It was deposed that this was done for the In mere purpose of having a full number of arbitrators; "Memorandum of agreement made and entered this 6th day of October 1852, between David Davies of Lonypobty," &c., " of the one part, and Rowland Evans, of" &c., "on behalf of The Bangor Rechabites Enrolled General Benefit Society, of the other part: Whereas certain dispute has arisen between the said David Davies and the said Society as to the expulsion of the said David Davies from the said Society, it is witnessed that the said David Davies and Rowland Evans do hereby agree to refer such dispute to the arbitration 1854. The QUEEN v. EVANS. 1854. and decision of the following gentlemen" (here followed The QUEEN the names of the five arbitrators chosen by Davies), V. EVANS. "whose decision shall be final and conclusive between the said parties hereto. As witness" &c. Davies's statement, in his affidavit in answer, as to his signing this agreement, was as follows. "That this deponent thought he was bound to submit the case to them, and accordingly did so. That, before the case was gone into, he, deponent, was told by Mr. Henry Lloyd Jones, one of said persons so acting as arbitrators as aforesaid, that he must sign a paper agreeing to abide by the decision which should be come to, and that the case could not be entered into until he did so: that, said H. L. J. being an attorney, he, deponent, supposed that it was required by law that such a document should be signed, and he therefore signed" the paper: "that said Henry Lloyd Jones did not, either directly or indirectly, state to deponent or in his this deponent's hearing, that his object in getting the said agreement signed was to prevent any dispute arising as to the sufficiency of the appointment of the persons about to act as arbitrators ; nor did he, this deponent, propose or consent to refer the dispute in question to any of the arbitrators who were then present; nor did he select or agree to any of them for that purpose, except by signing the said paper." The affidavits in support of the rule further shewed that, immediately upon the signing of the agreement, these five arbitrators proceeded with the reference, and, on the same day as that on which the meeting was called, published their award, in the following terms. "We, the major part of the arbitrators duly appointed by The Bangor Rechabite Enrolled General Benefit Society, established at Bangor, in the county of Carnarvon, do hereby |