any particular local tax, as the words civil and military plainly refer to the public taxes of the kingdom; that this related only to taxes on lands, which could not be referred to parochial rates under 43 Eliz. it having been held, that that statute imposes no tax on the land itself, but only on the occupier. And when this act of Car. I. was passed, there were taxes on lands on which the words could operate; as, for instance, subsidies and assessments, in lieu of which the modern land-tax was substituted. That by the latter part of the clause the exemp tion is confined to public taxes. Now the poor-tax never was considered as a public tax in the general acceptation of the term; and accordingly, whenever the legislature have intended to include it, they have done it by express woods, as contradistinguished from public taxes, as in 10 Ann. c. 23. s. 2. 12 Ann. st. 1. c. 5. s. 1. and 18 Geo. II. c. 18. s. 6. ever. Lord Kenyon, C. J. said, these lands having been given for eleemosynary purposes, the legislature seem to have intended to exempt them from all public taxes whatso And it is immaterial to the parish, whether these lands be exempted from the poor's rate or not, since if they be not exempt, greater contributions might be raised. If a construction of this act of parliament, manifestly erroneous, had hitherto prevailed, we should have been bound to correct it, though, indeed, had the words of the statute been very doubtful, the cotemporary and subsequent uniform usage would have had great weight. But without resorting to the usage in this case, the words of the statute are very clear and positive, for they speak of all public taxes whatsoever. The whole argument resolves itself into this, whether, in the idea of the legisla ture, at the time of passing this act, the poor's tax was a public tax. The acts which have been referred to in the argument 213 Rex v. Waldo. 1 Bot. 168. argument do not prove the point for which they were mentioned. But the other acts respecting the poor are decisive of this question. The statute of 3 W. and M. c. 11 s. 6. speaking of the means by which a settlement may be gained, says, that "if any person shall be charged with and pay his share towards the public taxes or levies of the said parish, he shall be adjudged to have a legal settlement in the same." Now on the construction of this statute, it never was doubted but that a payment towards the poor's rate was sufficient to give the party a settlement. His lordship was therefore of opinion, that the exemption which had hitherto prevailed ought to continue in future. The three other judges concurred, and the order of sessions was quashed. Mr. Waldo provided a house, previously rated, and placed ten poor girls in it, some being taken from that, 1 Nolan. 116. and some from other parishes, who were educated, maintained, and brought up on his charity. He provided and paid a woman as his servant, to superintend and instruct them in reading and working, and qualifying them for service; this woman and the children were the only persons resident in the house, which was solely appropriated to the purpose, all vacancies being supplied from time to time at his discretion. He was held not to be an occupier rateable for this house, for he made no profit of the building. 5 T. Rep. 79. Rex v. Woodward. So likewise a building, having been raised by voluntary contribution for a quakers' meeting-house, which was used only for religious and charitable purposes; and the remaining apartments were occupied by poor persons maintained by donations. No rent was received by the trustees who were subscribers to the fund for charitable donations; none of the seats were let or other advantage taken thereof. This building was held not rateable to the the poor-rate, the trustees not having any interest in the But if any profit is made by letting the seats, or other- Cald. 310. wise, the building is rateable. Where there is property but no occupier, there cannot be a ground for taxation; if any interest can be shewn to result to any persons, there taxation vests. Trustees for a toll, or for an hospital or charity, having no interest for their own benefit, hold for the purposes of mere distribution, and those who receive the benefit are transi→ tory, as in St. Luke's case abovementioned. It is otherwise where they are trustees for a corporation, which receives profits, and maintains its dignity and utility by its revenues, as in cities, dock, insurance, and bank and other companies. Tolls are exempted on the principle of the revenue being received and distributed for public purposes without any occupier receiving benefit. 1 Bot. 166. The charitable purposes for which land is given in Occupation does not excuse an occupier, who is otherwise within the act; land or houses granted to a charity are not less useful than the maintenance of the parochial poor, or even operating collaterally for their relief and assistance, and so far applied in exoneration of the rate, are notwithstanding liable, as in the following 1 Nolan, 116. case. 1795. The Rev. R. Dyer, as master of a free-school at Rex v. Catt. Woodbridge, was omitted in the assessment of the 5 T. Rep 334. poor-rate. He was appointed by the parish under a deed of foundation of the school, and in which the house was assigned to the master free of rent. Νο rates had been assessed upon it for many years, but he let part of the foundation-land, and the tenants were rated. It was held, that where a person is found to be the beneficial occupier, he must be rated, though the house be appropriated to charitable purposes. By the old landtax acts, certain property given for charitable purposes is exempted from that tax ; but there is no such exemption in the acts respecting the relief of the poor. Those lands that are appropriated for the establishment of the religion of the country, are in one sense of the word lands given for charitable purposes; but parsonage houses and glebe lands, &c. are rateable in the hands of the occupiers if there be any individual in the parish who objects to the omission of the defendant, the objection must prevail. As to the occupiers of St. Luke's hospital, which was one of the first cases on this subject, the ground was, not that the house was given to charitable purposes, but that there was no person who could be said to be the occupier of it: the rate there was not considered as im proper, because the property was not in itself rateable, but because no occupier could be found; but in this case there was an occupier. That part of the land given for the same purposes in this case, which was let out, was rated in the hands of the several occupiers: no objection was made to that part of the rate, and the court could not distinguish between the house and garden occupied by this defendant, and the land so let to those occupiers. The defendant was a beneficial occupier of the property for which he was rated-then here was that person an occupier, who could not be found in the case of St. Luke's hospital. But the superintendant of a public institution, not reaping any other profit than salary and residence, is not rateable: rateable: as the matron of the Philanthropic Society, in St. George's-fields, who had undertaken the management and tuition of the female children, under special agreement that all her and their earnings should be applied to the charity; in consideration of which, she was provided with a dwelling, free from rent and taxes, and with provision, residence, and a salary. She had no distinct apartment for herself, only a bed-chamber; her own family was not permitted to reside with her; and she had no other profit or benefit. She was, however, rated to the poor, and the sessions confirmed the rate with costs. 1794. But on application to the court of K. B. it was held, Rex v. Field, that this was not her house-she was the servant of a 5 T. Rep. 587. society established to rescue from ruin and infamy cer- 1 Nolan, 110, tain poor children, who are thrown upon the world without any protection; to improve the behaviour and morals of those children, and to render those, who without such assistance would probably prove a nuisance to society, useful and respectable members of it: the benefactors could not undertake this themselves-it was necessary to find some other person who could superintend the whole. She was engaged as their servant-she was the housekeeper appointed to look after the economy of the house she could neither put in or send out whom she pleased-she acted in a subordinate capacity, subject to the directions and control of the society. It might as well be said that servants are occupiers of their masters' houses, and so be rateable. She was liable to be dismissed at an hour's notice, on payment of her wages: the dwelling provided for her was mere lodging; if the bed-chamber constituted her an occupier, any maid-servant is such. The legislature meant only that beneficial occupiers should be rated.-The order was quashed. |