View report page

11
the use of the said county of Middlesex, and for other good and
???eseary purposes, for the better performance of the King's service
the county," which building was not to be rated or assessed for the
yment of the sewer tax, land tax, or any public, parochial, or other
e or tax whatsoever at a higher rate than it might be rated or
essed in 1777. The assessment in that year was, gross value,
35, rateable value, £113.* It so remained until 1879, when, in the
ovisional Valuation List, made under the Valuation Metropolis Act,
69, it was increa&d in respect of additions and enlargements to £800
oss and £667 rateable value. On appeal to the Assessment Comttee
these amounts were reduced to £<65 and £388. The Justices
w appealed against this decision.
Mr. E. S. Wright, for the appellants, contended that the rateable
lue ought to be as assessed in 1777—that was £113 only, and cited a
mber of authorities, relying chiefly on that of " Coomber v. Justices
Berkshire" (9,Q.B.D. 17), where the premises in question were
milar to the Clerkenwell Sessions House, and used not only for
dicial and assize, but also for county, business.
Mr. Poland (with whom was Mr. Castle), for tho respondents, conended
that the present case was distinguishable from that of " Coomber
Justices of Berkshire." The Sessions House was not exclusively
sed for the administration of justice, and the case showed that there
ere rooms in it assigned to the joint clerk of Committees to the
ustices, in which, as keeper of the Sessions House, he was bound to
eside. As to the new part of the Sessions House, that would be
ateable according to the ordinary law, as it could not be affected by
he Act of 1775, when of course it had never been contemplated.
Mr. 11. S. Wright having been heard in reply, Mr. Justice Denman,
n giving judgment, said it was impossible to distinguish the present
ase from that of "Coomber v. Justices of Berkshire." There the
question had been whether buildings in which the assizes for the
county of Berks were held, with the buildings surrounding the Courts,
were rateable, and there it was stated that there was a resident police
officer. In that case it had been found that the use of the buildings
was solely for official business, and it had been stated as a ground of
decision that, though strictly speaking the property was not Crown
* This statement from this point is incorrect. The facts are as follows :—
In 1879 the Sessions House was enlarged and the assessment was increased
from £135 £113 to £465, £388, the value of the buildings, 25 to 28, Clerkenwell
Green, formerly standing on the ground being added to the original assessment,
and this increase was accepted by the Justices. In 1880, during the
making out of the quinquennial List, the assessment was raised to £600 £500 by
the Vestry. The Justices then appealed to the Union Assessment Committee,
who confirmed the assessment. Tho Justices then further appealed to the Queen's
Bench Division against the rateability of the premises at all.—R.P.