The Express.
London, England, 1847-11-26 00:00:00

COURT OFCORMON PLRA.B.

eitth;gr
LAST DAT or Timms—Yesterday being the lad day of term
the court wee occupied with basing trifling motions upon
points of practice. The eases presented no features of in-
terest or importance. In the course of the day a notice to
the following effect wu reed by one of the oilcan of the
court:—" The court will, on Monday, the Bth December,
and three following days, hold sittinp, and will proceed to
dispose of the business now pending is the paper of new
trials, commencing with the new trials in Middlesex. and
London; and will also proceed to give judgment in certain
of the matters standing ores for the consideration of the

COURT OP EXCHEQUER.
Menem is peace;
Tau Qum e. Brsune.—issitionn Papua lIPON
cro Bactsz.—Jonomniv.—The Lord Chid Baron pro-
nounced judgment in this wee, whisk wee investigated
beam the *tins at the Ross grebe osmisset, and,
by seasent el the sorra on both dim, ultimately
tuned into It spitisi ome, and was argasti • few days
tem The Bement was Anther the debnitat, who is •
siesibter, had robed a mehda quantity of melt in ewe*
fromm, in as te-malte thins antein move then epos the
ottlinsry mods it sasemmateat they appeared to sombilm,
and whether he hest so bribe deininding the
emthe. The dirge otabily ea dr seldom d the
Was edema. Tor the it was osnlsmissi that
ibry hod mama wabirly la the made they smiegiled
to sairmafig the grain—ossedy, retersing it in
MINI Mt the Neel In the 'middle of the • korna, and
*sass Mosslbethi it gently over a lamer *WO thea it need
alliellirey creepy. It was submitted that that was an its-
poryaemedis of returning it, that it was isesodasmi with the
411111111111111 IMMO of the trade, and that the Mem iirisld hare
Bit and so forced: it in raw manner, Ws a
maw . The CYO framed for the again of the awn
dld set, bewever, state that the mods ideptei was monad
or improper. The court were, theorises, of opinion upon
the fact, found and the evident)e before the justices, that the
nosh of the return showed that there was an excess, and
OM the coons token by the emirs adstrawas within the act
itrliantast. It was said that that course operated nn-
iupon maltsters end the *die prosily, bet there was
a• proof that it was an improper 110111111. Though excise
edam were sot at liberty to do as they pleased on every oc-
casion, yet there must be a discretion left to them. In this
case it appeared to have been properly exercised, and upon
all the facts found the court thought the defendant should be
appointed.

LAWRS V. IHE BOARD OP ORDPIANC2.—TIx Pan.
Patiroas OP Lurtr TAXON IT GOVEINXIINT UNOIR TH2
STH AND STH VIC., C. 94, FOR PUBLIC PURP01128,121:11T
PAT ALL 1112 ENTHRALS OP A/ICHRTAINIXO ITS VALOR
2VRN T 2017011 THE AMOUNT AWAIDID =COMM TH•
BUNE TONDIIII.I3.—The above statute, which was pseud in
1842, empowers the Board of Ordnanos to take and per-
chase such lands ma might be statuary for the improvement
of the arsenals and naval defences of the eountry. Under
the provisions of that statue they took 114 scree of a pro-
perty in the county of Pembroke, called the " Bash estate,"
of which the claimant was trustee daring the minority of
the owner. A difference of opinion so to the value of the
lords between the parties rendered it nueseary that the
tumult should be ascertained by a jury. According, to the
provisions of the statute two of the neighbouring justices
summoned a jury to anus the amount of compensation to
which the claimant was entitled. The inquiry took place et
Pembroke, about a month ago, when the sum of 15,2601.
wu awarded, the government having previously offered
12,0001., which was declined. The justices, however,
felt themselves unauthorised to take into their eon.
adoration the expenses intoned by the claimant
in ascertaining the value of the property. The Attorney-
Omura, who attended the inquiry, objected to the admissibi-
lity of wridlisse upon the subject of expenses or costs, and,
tao Aisle bib. altogether silent on the matter. that they
dipwyyteath. included in the compensation awarded. A
ilia VW *Wined on the sth inst., calling on the defendants
1111 dww arm why there should Rot he a new inquiry,witk •


segradea thistiew taxed come *odd be Wad to the tom-
mamailm avaxisd, should the awn be of *Woo that under
the teems dam set of parliament dm jury might him takes

then illsin;Set. • -
TM Anney-General and Mr. Carpenter Rowe 'Dewed
owe eiy nein.% that rule. The am under which the
lase were taken gave only the value of land or
ether Menne at the time they were takes, and 'Obtained
no peonies for the payment of costs or expenses. Here
the proprietor was tenant for life; the compensation was not
payable to him, but paid into this court in the name of the
Queen's Remembrencer in trust fur the remainder
man, although the tenant for life should receive
the interest ea long as he lived. The principle
that the crown should not pay costa without en ex-
press provision was well known; but here it had been
contended that the word " satisfaction," which wee used in
this set, meant that all costa and expenses fairly and reason-
able incurred should be included. If that construction
could be put on the word " satisfaction," it was very strange
that the 63rd Geo. 111., a. 121, end other such statutes
which used precisely the same words " satisfaction" and
" compensation," contained an express provision for the
payment of costs, which clearly showed that three words,
however large or comprehensive, were not intended to in-
clude costs. Acts dealing with what might be called the
private property of the crown, usually contained an express
provision for the payment of costa where they were reason-
ably incurred ; but on looking over the statutes relating to
the purchase of property required fur the public defences
of the realm, it seemed that all such provisions were studi-
ously omitted.
Sir Fitzroy Kelly, Q.C., and Mr. M. Smith supported the
rule. The most liberal construction should be put on the
statute ander which these proceedings were had, otherwise a
manifest injustice would be done. In this case, a gentleman
was dispossessed of two isolated pieces of land, in the very
centre of him estate. Before the value was ascertained the
land was surveyed. The government first offered 6,0001. as
compensation ' afterwards 12,0001.; and ultimately, both
these offers having been declined, an appeal to a jury became
necessary, and it resulted in their finding that the claimant
was entitled to receive 15,2691. The words of the act were
not "price or value," but " coaspensation," for the purchase
date peeperty taken. How goad it be said that a party
was " mespensted " fee the hoe of his property, the value
of +Mawr ascertained he be • eertene mom, unless he was
also paid the fair and mumble espentee he was compelled
to inane ? The result of the *dry proved it was the
claimant's duty to refuse the Wes mode_ by the Board of
Ordnance. It was quite dear M UMW either sacri-
fice himself to the extent of USIL, or appeal to
a jury, which was the only mesas the law al-
lowed him to obtain a fair and reasonable price for
his land. How could it then be said that he was not en-
titled to cats? These expenses flowed as reasonably from
the determination of the Board of Ordnance not to give the
claimant the full value of his property they had taken' as
if they bad stopped up • road of his, or cut through his
house, or orchard, and rendered the building of a wall or
some other repairs for such acts mceseory. There was no
Mouse in this act for " severance,' although there were dis-
tinct provisions on that subject in all the early acts to which
reference had been made. It was quite clear that the legis-
lature must have intended that the word " compensation"
should include all costs, damages, and expenses reasonably
incurred, not only for severance, hut for all incidental in-
juries sustained, even though they constituted no part what-
ever of the value of the property. Supposing the meta ne-
cessarily incurred in ascertaining the compensation hap-
pened to exceed it in amount, how could it be said that the
claimant had been compensated, if he was obliged to expend
in costs a larger sum than was awarded to him ?
The Lord Chief Baron, after consulting with the other mem-
bers of the court, said they were all of opinion that the rule
mut be discharged. It was to be regretted that there was no
provision in the act for the payment of such costs as were
fairly and reasonably incurred to enable the claimant to
ascertain the value of his property. The court regretted
very much that they felt themselves *lmpelled to announce
their opinion, which was that the compensation awarded
was for " the absolute purchase" of the land itself, and that
it did not include anything fee expenses or oats, however
remonable or neceasery they might be. The claimant
might, however, obtain redress either by direct application
to the crown, or by some other means.—The rule was dim-
charged accordingly.