well be considered 1860. han ordinary quick- The QUEEN We have no means on with reference to no more than point ink it must be deter 0, we are of opinion V. NORTH STAFFORD SHIRE Railway Company. amended, if necessary, inciples laid down in the OP MICHAELMAS TERM. 1860. The QUEEN V. NORTH STAFFORDSHIRE Railway Company. It it equally clear that no deduction should be allowed as to the second. As to the third, the question is finally settled by the decision of this Court in the case of Regina v. Southampton Dock Company (a). The third question, whether the Company are entitled to a deduction in respect of the floating capital therein referred to, is one of considerable nicety, and which, as it appears to us, must depend on whether, on the whole capital employed, a greater delay occurs in realizing the returns than is ordinarily incidental to the employment of capital. No doubt as the rent which the imaginary tenant, contemplated by The Parochial Assessment Act, could afford to pay, would be the difference between the gross earnings (after the necessary deductions) and the amount of profits due (reference being had to the nature of the undertaking) on the capital employed; whatever tends to diminish such profits must go, pro tanto, to diminish the rent. Any delay in realizing the profits, beyond such as is generally incidental to the ordinary employment of capital, may therefore (as it must be presumed that it would be taken into account by the tenant) be fairly taken into account in determining the rateable value. On the other hand, it must be observed that, as a very large proportion of the earnings of a railway Company is of a ready money character, it may well be that, when the whole of the capital and of the earnings are taken into account, the profits on the whole capital may be realized in a shorter time in this species of undertaking than on the average of commercial enterprises. If this should be the case, the delay in realizing that profit which might arise (a) 14 Q. B. 587. 1860. V. NORTH STAFFORD as to a part of the capital might well be considered to be compensated by the more than ordinary quick- The QUEEN ness of the return on the rest. We have no means before us of determining the question with reference to this view of the case. We can do no more than point out the principle by which we think it must be determined. As regards the fourth question, we are of opinion that the deduction to be allowed in respect of stations, buildings and sidings must be calculated on the actual value at which they ought to be assessed, and not on the original cost of construction. Rates to be amended, if necessary, on the principles laid down in the SHIRE Railway Company. END OF MICHAELMAS TERM. 1860. Tuesday, 408 CASES ARGUED AND DETERMINED IN MICHAELMAS VACATION, XXIV. VICTORIA. The Judges of the Court of Queen's Bench who sat in [Reported in the Queen's Bench, and in the Exchequer Chamber on error from that Court, 2 B. & S. 232.] 1860. IN THE EXCHEQUER CHAMBER (a). (Error from the Queen's Bench.) The Company of Proprietors of the STOURBRIDGE Tuesday, ERROR November 27th. mines should carry on any work for the getting of coal or minerals within the distance of twelve yards from the canal, nor should any coals or other minerals be got under any part of the canal, or the towing-paths thereunto belonging, or under any reservoir to be made by the canal Company, or within or under any land or ground lying within the distance of twelve yards of either side of the canal, or of any reservoir, except as thereinafter mentioned, without the consent of the Company. By another clause it was provided, that when the owner of any coal mine &c. lying under the canal or reservoirs, or within the distance thereinbefore limited, should be desirous of working the same, then such owner should give a written notice of his intention to the Company three calendar months before he should begin to work such mines lying as aforesaid; and upon the receipt of such notice it should be lawful for the Company to inspect such mines, in order to determine what coal or other minerals might be come at and be actually gotten; and if the Company should neglect to inspect such mines within thirty days after the receipt of such notice, it should be lawful for the proprietors of such mines, and they were thereby authorized, to work such part of the said mines as lay under the canal or reservoirs, or within the distance aforesaid: and if upon inspection the Company should refuse to permit the owners of the said mines to work such part of the said mines lying as aforesaid, or any part thereof, as they might have come at and actually gotten, then the Company should, within three calendar months, pay to the owners the value thereof. By another clause it was provided, that nothing in the Act contained should defeat, prejudice, or affect the right of any owner of lands or grounds in, upon, or through which the canal &c. should be made, to the mines lying within or under the lands or grounds to be set out and made use of for such canal &c.; but all such mines were thereby reserved to such owners respectively; and it was declared that it should be lawful for such owners, subject to the conditions therein contained, to work all such mines: Provided that in working such mines no injury were done to the said navigation. The owner of a coal mine gave the statutory notice to the Company of his intention to work it under and within twelve yards' distance of one of the Company's reservoirs. The Company did not thereupon either inspect the mine, or refuse to permit it to be worked, or pay the owner the value of it. Held that the mine owner, after the expiration of the time limited by the Act for the (a) Before Willes, Byles and Keating Js., Martin, Channell and Wilde Bs. |