View report page

128
The other way, and although it is not the view which
would be taken at first sight, still, I am of opinion it is the
true view, and the only way to avoid a construction which
lands us in an absurdity, is to regard the legislature as
having in Section 37, employed the words "domestic
purposes," "domestic uses," and "sufficient supply," in
connection with dwelling houses, as co-extensive with
family supply, supply to residences, supply for household
use, as such use and supply should exist from time to time,
and usins common and familiar words in their common and
familiar meaning.
Then Section 39 would enact that supplies which were
really, and in fact, trade or business supplies, and which
were not for domestic purposes, or household or family use
in reality, should not become domestic, and be included
under the domestic rates or rates for domestic supply,
merely because they happened to be used in connection
with a dwelling house.
If, therefore, a bath or baths used for purposes of
letting and of profit, and by others than the family of the
dwelling house holder, are found in a dwelling house,
payment must be made for them, or their business or trade
use abandoned; and if a mail keeps a carriage or vehicle
and horses for trade or business, he is to pay, although the
stable and coach-house may be connected with and used
with his dwelling house; but if the carriage and horse is
for private or family use, and not for trade or business, no
extra charge, other than the increased annual value of the
premises is to be made.
The intention of the Section then would be, that