95
THE ESTATES GAZETTE
January 21, 1899.
According to returns lately collected by the Board of Agriculture, the system of paying labourers for harvest work varies considerably in different parts of the kingdom. In the northern counties of England, where the majority of the men are hired by the year or half-year, the hired men are paid no extra harvest wages, but are frequently supplied with extra food and drink; the married men attached to the staff of a farm are, however, usually paid extra money wages, and often given food and drink. Extra hands, both English and Irish, get from £4 to £6 a month, frequently with an allowance of food and drink. Irishmen are usually given accommodation in bams. In other parts of the country the systems of payment are to give piecework; to contract for a certain sum for the harvest; to give the ordinary weekly wages, and, in addition, a bonus at the end of harvest; to pay double the weekly wages during harvest; to give extra wages for a month certain, and then to pay the ordinary weekly wages.
The first of the great spring sales of the season took place on Friday last week, when Mr. Alfred Mansell (Alfred Mansell and Co., Shrewsbury) occupied the rostrum. The attendance of buyers from all parts of the best feeding districts might be termed a record one for a January sale. Enquiries for the best class of cattle were numerous, and it was evident from the commencement that a good trade would be experienced; nevertheless several lots were purchased advantageously, and should leave a good margin for profit. The 49 lots catalogued were passed over the weighbridge, and subsequently sold in lots of six, eight, ten and twelve within two hours. The highest price realised was for a lot of cross-bred Angus bullocks, bred by Mr. A. J. Owen, J.P., Queen’s County, and were purchased for the Duke of Devonshire. The other classes of cattle were so much alike that there was but little variation in the prices per ewt. for the best lots, viz., £16, £15 15s., £15 10s., ; for several lots, £14 17s. 6d., £14; other lots fetched £13 15s., £13, £12 10s., £12 7s. 6d., £12, £11 10s., £11 5s., £11, £10 12s. 6d., £10 2s. 6d., £9 5s., £8. The date of the next sale is fixed for Friday, February 10, and breeders are invited to send their entries in early, so that feeders may be informed of the class of stock which will be offered for sale.
Strand Improvements (Betterment) Award.—London is one step nearer to the two improvements that have been so long contemplated, and which are provided for in the London County Council Improvements Act, 1897. The improvements provided for the removal of the “islands” between the Strand and Holywell-street, and that at the junction of Tottenham-eourt-road with Oxford-street. Under the Act, valuations had to be made of the interests of all present owners in properties that will be “ bettered ” by the improvements ; and a second valuation will ultimately be made after the improvements have been carried out, and when the betterment is realised. The Local Government Board appointed Mr. Jas. Green, F.S.I. (Weatherall and Green) as the valuer under the Act, and he, having held the necessary enquiries, has now deposited his awards with the Clerk to the Council.
House Property in the Borough : An Alleged Nuisance.—At the Newington Sessions House, on the 13th inst., Mr. W. R. McConnell (chairman) and a number of magistrates had before them an appeal by the owners of certain houses in Red Cow-alley, Borough, against a demolition order. It appeared from the evidence adduced that in March, 1895, the magistrates made a closing order in respect of the premises, and the appellants, who had since become entitled to the property, kept it closed and fenced off from the public. The medical officer for the district and oth er witnesses were examined as to certain smells which they said were noticeable, in consequence of imperfect drainage, whilst Mr. James F. Field, F.S.I. (Messrs. Field and Sons, 54, Borough High-street, and 52, Chancery-lane, W.C.) was called on behalf of the owners. The witness stated that he had examined the property and failed to discover anything that could be injurious to the health of the public. This evidence was supported by the tenants of adjoining houses. Mr. Gover, one of the owners, was called, and said they had no intention whatever of reletting the property, but had allowed the houses to stand for the purpose of preserving the boundaries of their estate. The learned chairman, in giving judgment, said the justices were unanimously of opinion that the section of the Working Classes Act, 1890, under which the proceedings were taken, did not apply to unoccupied houses, premises which, moreover, one of the owners had sworn they had no intention of reletting. The Court therefore quashed the order.
Jfarnt attir Jíátr
BY A LAND AGENT.
[SPECIALLY CONTRIBUTED.!
“ The rain it raineth every day. With heigh ho! the wind and the rain!” sang the great Shakespeare, and he might have sung the same for the last three months without being accused by anyone of departing from the truth, and put in “and night” as well, for it not only rains hard all day and every day, but comes down harder still all night and every night. Sodden are •the pasture lands, sodden are the plough lands, under water are the moors, little streams are rushing rivers, and ponds even on dry hill-tops are overflowing ; in fact, the whole country is thoroughly soaked. “ Oh, we shall have a fine spell by-and-by,” we have greeted each other for weeks with these hopeful words, but the hope has not been realised yet, and the weather is becoming a serious matter for the agriculturist, so dependent on atmospheric conditions.
The wheat fields in most parts of the country are sodden and waterlogged, except where die land lies very high and dry, and this condition of things1 is beginning to tell on the wheat plant, which, owing to the abnormal mildness of the season, is of coarse and luxuriant growth, but is now presenting a somewhat flagging and unhealthy appearance. The favourable prices which prevailed for this cereal last summer may have induced many a farmer to make up his mind to reserve a greater breadth for this year’s crop, but the wet autumn prevented these good intentions from being carried out in all cases. How the wheat was got in at all seems a mystery when one reflects on the weather of October and November and tries to pick out a day when drilling would have been possible, to say nothing of the preliminary tillages and dressings.
Lambing amongst the Dorset Horn flocks is in progress, but not under very favourable circumstances. True, the fields are full of grass, and hay ricks, are numerous and bulky, but the pasture lands are very wet, and the rough winds and rain are not very suitable for young lambs. In the case of small flocks it is a very good plan, if convenient shedding can be provided on the homestead, to get the ewes and lambs under cover of a night and let them have their hay in the dry. They will be found to do much better than if left out in the cold and wet. Large flocks cannot, of course, be treated so luxuriously, but perhaps some sort of shelter can be rigged up for them in the field. Foot-rot is naturally proving troublesome, and many a lame sheep, and lamb too, may be seen in the fields. It is difficult and dangerous to attend to ewes heavy in lamb, but as soon as they have lambed the feet should be looked to and properly dressed.
The last draft of cheese made at the Somerset County Council Cheese School, which is conducted for that body by the Bath and West and Southern Counties Agricultural Society, at Long Ashton, near Bristol, has recently been sold to the well-known cheese factors, Messrs. Hill Bros., of Evercreech, at 60s. per cwt. With the exception of that made during the early months of the year, which did not quite reach 60s., all the produce of last season was sold at this figure, a price which must be considered highly satisfactory as times go, though our grandfathers would have turned pale at the mere breathing of such a quotation. Foreign competition has a lot to answer for, and as much in the dairy industry as any other, as anyone will understand who sees the quantity of Canadian, American and other foreign cheeses which fill our grocer’s and stores
A propos of cheese—and Cheddar, too—a good story is told in that little village under the Mendips of three of our American cousins who were doing the sights of the old country, and amongst them the marvellous caverns and cliffs of Cheddar. They turned in to the Bath Arms to refresh themselves, and whilst doing so espied several fine cheeses stored on a shelf. Of course they had heard of the noted English Cheddar cheese, and—although this was before the Anglo-American alliance was in force—nothing would satisfy them but to have one of these fine cheeses each to take back home with them and show their friends there a bit of old English Cheddar. Mine host arranged a deal with them and off they went happy in their purchases. Those three cheeses had come from America! Whether they made the return journey and were eaten by our friends as genuine English Cheddar is not recorded. Perhaps they were. Ignorance is bliss.
A highly instructive paper on “ The Potato ” is contributed by Mr. Arthur W. Sutton to the current number of the Royal Agricultural Society’s Journal, which deserves careful attention at the hands of agriculturists and market gardeners.
MB. EDWARD BOYLE, Q.B.
IN continuation of the aeries of portraits of counsel who practise at the — Parliamentary Bar — and whose names are well known in compensation and rating cases—we propose to add to the list, which already includes the late Mr. George P. Bidder, Q.C., and Mr. J. H. Balfour Browne, Q.C., by presenting to our readers this week a portrait of Mr. Edward Boyle, who was called to the Bar at the Inner Temple, in November, 1887, and was made one of Her Majesty’s Counsel only last year. Mr. Boyle was originally educated for the army, with the view of following in the footsteps of his forefathers, but having lost his parents at an early age, he was articled by his trustees to a firm of architects and surveyors, and until 1886 he carried on a considerable practice, having successfully developed various well-known building estates in and around London. He was the architect for a large number of houses, factories and buildings, and his time was fully occupied in getting out plans, sections and estimates for various railway schemes and extensions. For some years Mr. Boyle advised the Northern Assurance Company, the Sun Assurance Office, and many other large public bodies upon their investments in mortgage securities, and real and personal property.
It was much to the surprise of his many friends when he gave up his practice for the uncertainty of a stuff-gownsman’s, but he must be considered as one of the exceptions to the rule that a rolling stone gathers no moss, as the pages of this journal have clearly demonstrated for some years past, that he has enjoyed one of the largest junior practices as a compensation and rating lawyer, although his appearances before the Parliamentary Committees are more limited.
The first case of any real importance in which the subject of our sketch appeared was the Railway Rates Inquiry, in 1890. This lasted nearly three months, and Mr. Boyle was the junior appearing for the Associated English Railway Companies, the leading counsel being Sir Henry James, Q.C., now Lord James of Hereford, and the other junior counsel, Mr. R. S. Wright, now Mr. Justice Wright, and Mr. Cripps, now Q.C., M.P.
Although with so many leaders he took no active part in the inquiry, since that date Mr, Boyle may be considered as an example of rapid success at the Bar, bis practice having grown by leaps and bounds. Owing to his past associations and the class of his present practice he may be considered essentially a railway man.
From time to time he has appeared for the School Board for London, the City of London Union, the Machinery Users’ Association, the London Docks, etc., etc., and for nearly ail the large railway companies having a terminus in London, indeed, there is seldom a case of the South Eastern Railway Company in which his name is not seen.
In 1890, the proprietor of this paper published the first edition of Boyle and Davies on the Principles of Rating, 600 copies of which were promptly disposed of. The second edition appeared in 1895, and we understand that this work has had one of the largest sales of any recent law book. It has certainly taken a place of its own amongst the text books on this most intricate subject.
At the last quinquennial assessment appeals for the County of London, out of over 800 cases set down for hearing, Mr. Boyle was retained for one side or the other in more than half of them.
Many interesting anecdotes are told of Mr. Boyle’s examination of surveyors not so proficient as himself.
From the Law List we gather that he has taken silk in almost the shortest time on record, and has the distinction of being (so far) the only Fellow of the Surveyors’ Institution upon whom that rank has been conferred.
Mr. Boyle must indeed have a busy life, as we notice he is Deputy Chairman of the East and West India Docks Company, and a Director of the Imperial Life Insurance Office. He resides in London, at Queen’s-gate, and his country house is Ockham Farm, Robertsbridge.
Mr. Justice Darling: As much as that! Then perhaps the defendant would prefer to pay High Court costs.
Mr Little thought that he had gone as far as he possibly could.
Mr. Justice Darling : Would you go as far as my room!
Mr. Little: With great pleasure.
The learned counsel on both sides had a long interview with his lordship in his private room with a view to a settlement; but no settlement was arrived at, and the hearing of the case proceeded.
Mr. William John Bailer, managing clerk of the plaintiff, said that on August 31, 1897, he called at the defendant’s place. The defendant mentioned the Paulet Arms, and said that he wanted £7,750 for it, and that if sold for that there would be a commission of £250. They advertised the place, and gave an order to view to Mr. Charles Morrell, to whom the house was sold for £7,000, and that gentleman was still in possession. The present defendant afterwards sued and recovered £100 for commission and costs, and witness was in that action called as a witness for the present defendant.
Cross-examined : His employer now claimed not less than one-half of what the present defendant received. He did not know how the amount of £100 was arrived at. There was no j suggestion as to the commission being divided | into three parts until after he gave the card : to Mr. Morrell. He thought up to that time that Mr. Williams, who was a financial agent, had bought the public-house. Afterwards he , knew that he was׳ a broker, and at a later time he wanted to divide that commission of £100 into thirds.
Mr. Chapman submitted that it had not been proved that Mr. Williams had received the commission now in question.
Mr. John S. Williams, the defendant, said that he was a financial agent in Queen Victoria-street, and he had also sold a number of public-houses. When he wrote the letter of Mai׳ 19, it related to other houses, and long before he had anything to do with this house or any agreement that this particular commission was to be divided into three parts. When the plaintiff’s managing clerk called upon him, witness told him that he had a public-house for sale, and that if a sale could be effected for £7,750 there would be a commission of £250 ; that he would have to divide the money with Mr. Wheal, so that there would be a third of the commission for each of them. Wheal would be as much entitled to a share in the commission as the plaintiff, for one had found the house, and the other the purchaser of ic, whilst witness was the intermediary between the two. It was agreed between them and the plaintiff’s managing clerk, that whatever commission he got in this case should be divided into thirds, and be shared between the parties.
Cross-examined : He was- perfectly willing to divide the commission that he got, two-thirds of the £100, with the plaintiff, but he did not pay that amount into Court because the plain tiff made his claim before the money was due.
Mr. Martin Wheal, a clerk, spoke to his having given the particulars of the Paulet to the present defendant, and as to his claiming for himself one-third of the commission of £100.
His Lordship left it to the jury to say whether the plaintiff agreed to take a third of the commission received by the defendant, after deducting expenses, when the defendant had go! the money. If so, he said that the verdict must be for the defendant, because this action was brought before the defendant received any commission.
The verdict and judgment were for the defendant.
FIRES IN MANSIONS.
To the Editor of the ESTATES GAZETTE.
Sir,—•I am glad to see your note respecting fires in country mansions, as, although, sinct the publication of my book some years ago, the subject has received increased attention by owners, there are a large number of these buildings, situated at distances from fire brigade stations, which are absolutely unprotected. I quite agree with your suggestion that a fire engine should be provided for such houses, and that private brigades should be formed, in fact, my firm have over a dozen fire inspectors always travelling about the country instructing and drilling such brigades. The difficulty as regards water supply, to which you refer, can in most cases be overcome, and the consideration of means of protecting the house from fire has in many cases led to improved water supply being provided by owners.
Yours, etc.,
J. COMPTON MERRYWEATHER, Author of “Fire Protection of Mansions.” Greenwich-road, S.E.,
January 17, 1899.