843
THE ESTATES GAZETTE,
Mat 20, 1899.
required, and the day (not being an earlier day than a reasonable time after the date of the service of suoh notice) upon which such supply is required to commence.” The company contended that under this section they were entitled to written notice that the plaintiffs required gas to be supplied them, and that they had not had such notice but merely a verbal notice. The plea was an ingenious one, but was not of the sort ■to be favourably regarded in a modern court of law. The complicated procedure under section 11 has nothing to do with the express provisions of section 39, and it is very fortunate for tenants that this is so.
Another case of interest reported by us last week was that of “Sherwood v. Keevil.” The def endant (her former landlord) had given an intending tenant of the plaintiff a reference, of which the essential part was : “ She (the tenant) paid fairly well, and carried on a respectable business.” Subsequently the plaintiff seems to have thought that he had been deceived as to the character of the tenant, a Madame Ouzman and the present action was for damages undei the above-quoted reference. It will be seen from our report that a good deal was said at the trial about what passed in the course of certain proceedings in Bow-street, to which the defendant had been a party, but, putting the details of the dispute aside, we think that the jury were thoroughly justified in returning the verdict for the defendant which they found. Very few house agents or men of business, we submit, would consider “ She paid fairly well and carried on a respectable business,” a sufficient reference or guarantee for a tenant, and it would be very hard if a man could be mulcted in damages for writing such a diplomatic and “ trimming ” letter. If the defendant had been held liable who would be safe! A document must be reasonably construed according to the intent of both parties, for instance, to quote a very old legeal jest on the subject, “if a man agree with B for 20 barrels of ale, he shall not ■ have the barrels when the ale is spent.”
In answer to “ S. L. C.,” where a lessee assigns his lease it is optional with the lessor, or assignee of the reversion, either to sue the lessee on his original covenants, or to sue the assignee of ■the term on the covenants as running with the land. In such a case it is usual for the assignee of the term to covenant with the assignor to perform all the covenants in the original lease, and to indemnify him against all suits brought by the lessor or his assignee in consequence of their non-performance. In “ Moule Garrett” (L.R. 7, Ex. 101), it was׳ decided by the Court of Exchequer that there is an implied promise on the part■ of each successive assignee of a lease to indemnify the original lessee against breaches of covenant committed by each assignee during the continuance o׳f his own term, and such promise will be implied though each assignee expressly covenants to indemnify his immediate assignee against all subsequent■ breaches. The damages in such a case would be measured by the loss which the plaintiff had sustained, a matter which must depend on the special circumstances.
Watek Finding־.—There are still some people who have faith in the wateifiuder’s art, while there are others who openly discredit it. In this connection two recent cases are noteworthy. A “ dowser ” was engaged at Partick, near Glasgow, for Messrs. Montgomerie, Ltd., and where the “ wielder of the rod ” predicted an abundant supply of water at 100ft. to 150ft. deep, a supply of over 60,000 gallons per day has been tapped at 110ft., which rose 13ft. above the surface of the ground ! Also at Messrs. Lloyd and Yorath’s brewery at New-po> t ( '״on.), where the same “ dowser ” predie , u a supply of 1,000 gallons per hour at 300ft. deep, 1,200 gallons per fiour have been tapped at 285ft. The “ dowsing ” expert was Mr. Leicester Gataker, of Bath (an appropriat• place for a water-finder to hail from).
NOW READY.
Crown 8vo. Price 6s. For Cash with Order 5s. net
THE VALUATION OF LAND
AND
HOUSE PROPERTY.
BY
CHARLES E. CURTIS, F.S.I.,
Professor of Forestry, Field Engineering and Surveying and General Estate Management at the College of Agriculture, Downton : Consulting Fort ster to the Right Hon.
Loid O’Neill. Shane's Castle, Antrim ;
Author of “Estate Management” (Fourth Edition) “Practical Forestry ” (Second!Edition), etc., etc.: with
VALUATION EXAMPLES
BY
D. THOS. DAVIES, F.S.I,
INDICATION, ETC., by
Ivor Curtis׳, B.A., Cantab.
FRANK P. WILSON,
Estates Gazette” Office, 6. St. Bride-st’ eet Lon ton. E.O
legal ®0pns.
By a Barrister.
[The writer will answer any question relating to real property law, or to tbe practice of Agents, Auctioneers, and Surveyors, under “ Queries and Replies.”]
“ I know that there is suoh an association as the Institute of Estate and House Agents, but its decisions are no more binding than the decision of the man in the ■street.” These were the words with which his Honour Judge Edge prefaced his decision in “ W-inckworth v. Ellis, Clarke and Co.,” which we report in another column׳. The amount involved in the case was not large, nor did any point of general interest arise in it. We think, however, that the words of the judge which we have quoted call for some comment, and we should be speaking strictly by the card if we began by saying that though we know that there are such people as County Court Judges, their decisions and dicta are no more binding than the decision of the man in the street. But we have no desire to speak of any class of judges with anything but the respect which their office commands, and will, therefore, pass over the point that what comes either by way of judgment or opinion from a County Court judge or a police magistrate cannot possibly constitute a precedent of any authority whatever. Coming to the essential question, we ׳should like to know why Judge Edge went out of his way to cast what looks very much like ■a slur on the Institute of Estate and House Agents? A custom, or usage, whether endorsed by such an institute or not, must, of course, be reasonable and clear, whether it relates to charges or anything else. If A goes into a barber’s shop to be shaved, and when the operation has been performed, the barber tells him that it is his custom or usage to charge 2s. 6d., A would be justified in refusing to pay that sum—in putting the barber to proof of the alleged custom or usage, of its reasonableness, and of its prevalence, and in the meantime of declining to pay anything more than a quantum meruit for the service performed.
We agree then with the learned judge that the existence of a custom in any business must be proved, but surely a very good proof is that the custom is approved of and upheld by a society such as was the subject of what we must think the somewhat■ captious criticism of Mr. Edge. The rule׳s and regulations of such societies are usually considered and drawn up with the greatest care, and it is not, in our opinion, for ■the good of the professions, businesses or trades with which they are concerned that their authority should be unduly made light׳ oh On the other hand Judge Edge gave a distinctly valuable hint when ׳he said, “If they wanted to rely on the scale of the Institute the defendants should have put it in their circulars׳, and then persons could inquire what the scales were. ’ In any transaction it is always best and safest to let people know what they will have to pay and to get them to expressly or impliedly assent to it. A propos of this we may direct attention to another commission case, “ Challen v. Silcock,” in which the superiority of documentary to merely verbal evidence was shown for about the ten thousandth time or thereabouts. “The commission note,” said Mr. Justice Big-ham, “is ‘as clear as a pikestaff’,” and he gave judgment for the plaintiff for the amount claimed. A man has to argue very ably and swear very hard before he can argue and swear away what stares him in the face in black and white.
By section 39 of the Gasworks Clauses Act, 1871 (34 and 35 Viet., c. 41), it is provided that “ In case any consumer of gas supplied by the undertakers leaves the premises where such gas has been supplied to him, without paying the gas rent or meter rent due from him, the undertakers shall not be entitled to require from the next tenant of such premises the payment of the arrears left unpaid by the former tenant, unless such incoming tenant has undertaken with the former tenant to pay or exonerate him from the payment of such arrears.” The section formed the ground upon which Mr. Justice Mathew gave judgment for the plaintiffs in “ Griffiths and another v. the Ilford Gas Light and Coke Company ” (Estates Gazette, May 13), his lordship briefly remarking ■that the evidence was that the defendants under a misapprehension required the new occupiers to pay the arrears of the outgoing tenant, and that such a claim was expressly forbidden by tlie section. The technical defence raised by the company was founded on section 11 of the Act, which provides (inter alia) that the undertakers “shall, upon being required so to do by ■the owner or occupier of any premises .... give, and continue to give, a supply of gas for such premises under such pressure in the main as may be prescribed,” and that “every owner or occupier of premises requiring a supply of gas shall serve a notice upon the undertakers at their office, specifying the premises in respect of Which such supply is
wood, the extensive and beautiful woods, and 3| miles of salmon and trout fishing in the Usk river and Berthin brook, the whole containing 1,116 acres, together with the Manor of Pal-lerniy, which includes the right of presentation to the living of Monkswood. The price realised was £27,000, exclusive of timber, which is to be taken at a valuation.
Of the freehold properties in and ¡near the town of Usk, the Rhadyr Earm of 328a. 37p., with excellent woods, sold for £11,000 (timber £640) ; two cottages, lr. 31p., £155 ; five cottages, 3r. 25p., £250 ; two stone cottages, 23 perches, £80 each ; accommodation grass land, 10a. 30p., £760 ; sporting estate opposite Usk-bridge, with building land, 151a. 3r. 32p., £5,100 (timber £690) ; Llan-llwyd accommodation holding of upland grass, 38a. 35p., £1,100 (timber £244) ; sporting and investment property, comprising Baldwin’s, Castle and Little Castle Farms, Lady Hill Park and game coverts, the Castle Brick and Tile Works, building estate, the well-preserved ruins of Usk Castle, Castle House, Bomford Orchard, building land fronting Castle-parade, and two enclosures of building land fronting Upper Raglan-road, area 475a. 2r. 32p., sold in one lot, for £16,250 (timber £2,120) ; enclosure of building land, 3r. 19p., £155 ; 2a. 3r. 38p. of building ■land, £420 ; 2a. 2r. 30p. of building land, £360 ; 2r. 37p., similar land, £125 ; 2a. 2r. 8p. of building land, £200 ; 2a. 6p. accommodation land, £300 ; 2a. lr. 3p. of similar land, £305 ; 3a. 29p. of similar land, £295 ; 3a. 4p. of similar land, £305 ; Graig-yn-Allt Wood, building site, 3a. 9p., £265 ; Kensington Cottage and part of Graig-yn-Allt Wood, 3a. 24p., £425 ; accommodation land on the banks of the Usk, 5a. 2r. 23p., £410 ; land adjoining, six acres, £520 ; similar land, 6a. lr. 20p., £540 ; three enclosures of accommodation grass land, 57a. 2r. 32p., £1,750 ; similar land, 20a. 3r. 5p., £1,550 ; enclosure of similar land, la. lr. 23p., £165 ; two other enclosures, 8a. 8p., £510 ; Brook Cottage and garden, 3r. 14p., £275 ; building site in Four Ash-street, £65 ; stone house, £70 ; estate timber yard, £165 ; building land fronting St. Mary Port-street, £110 ; Vine Tree Cottage and land, three roods, £425 ; and the Town Hall (2.500 square feet), and market tolls and land, called Twyn-square, £560.
THIRD DAY’S SALE.
On Friday, May 12, freehold property on and near Glascoed Common was disposed of.
New Jerusalem Cottage and grass land, 11a. 3r. 21p., sold for £750 ; occupation at Glascoed, 25a. 3r. 32p., £560 ; market garden ground, 26 perches, £13 ; Poplar Tree House and land, la. lr. lip., £135 ; accommodation meadow, garden and orchard, 3r. 9p., £50 ; stone cottage and buildings, 2a. 4p., £130 ; grass field, 3a. 17p., £120 ; accommodation holding adjoining Twyn-y-Cryn Common, 13a. 3r. 23p., £460 ; Maesmawr Farm) and wood, 148a. lr. Ip., £1,970 (timber £264) ; grass field, 2r. 20p., £34 ; grass land, 2r. 30p., £30 ; two enclosures of grass land, la. 2r. 34p., £60 ; cottage, orchard and garden, 3a. lr. 9p., £155 ; holding of 10a. lr. 25p., £265 ; farm of 32a. 15p., £550 ; enclosure of grass, one rood, £12 ; grass field, la. lr. 20p., £50 ; two strips of frontage land, lr. 37p., £21 ; Upper and Lower Cwm Hir Cottages and land, 24a. 34p., £540 ; Hill Wood, 15a. 18p., £130 (timber £108) ; the Ton Holding, 6a. 3r. lip., £165 ; Holly Bush Farm, 17a. 2r. 28p., £510 ; accommodation grass land near Jenny’s Bushes, 4a. lr. 17p., £95 ; four closes of fruit orchards and garden land, with cottage, la. 2r. 5p., £70 ; Pear Tree Cottage, la. 9p., £90 ; cottage and pasture, 2a. 25p., £105 ; holding, with dwelling, stable and buildings, 17a. 2r. 19p., £525 ; the Cross Cottage and land, 7a. 3r. 38p., £315 ; grass land, la. 2r. 34p., £28 ; occupation of 3a. lr. 31p., with Ashford Cottage, stone quarry and land, £285 ; several enclosures fronting Monks-wood-road, 7a. 3r. 35p., £320 ; Ty Mawr House and land, 8a. 3r. 10p., £180 ; Green Tree Holding, 5a. lr. Ip., £200 ; 'house, orchard and pad-dock, 3a. 33p., £140 ; thatched cottage and orchard, 2r. Ip., £40 ; Upper House Farm, 35a. 9p., £660 ; the Cherry Orchard Holding and fruit land, 11a. 2r. 32p., £285 ; Upper l’wyn Dwelling and orchard, la. 3r. 9p., £80 ; Lowei Twyn, la. 2r. 13p., £85 ; grass and orchard lands, 3a. 2r. 36p., £95 ; accommodation holding, 2a. 35p., £80 ; cottage and orchard, 2a. lr 21p., £155 ; grass land on Monkswood-road, 3a. lr. 20p., £200 ; sporting property, approached from Little Wern Hir, and Craig-y־Coed, 69a lr. 32p., £560 (timber £364) ; accommodation holding, 3a. 3r. 38p., £120 ; grass and orchard land, la. 2r. 34p., £80 ; orchard and woodland 12a. 3r. 18p., £320 (timber £92) ; grass and woodland, 46a. 2r. 9p., £430 (timber £105) ; a similar investment, 39a. lr. 33p., £310 (timber £81) ; and Coed Brith Wood, 3a. 25p., £30 (timber £56).
Auctioneers and Estate Agents desiring to secure Partners, Purchase a Business, or engage Professional Assistance, should consult the “Wanted” Advertisements in tbe centre of the Paper.
THE DUKE OF BEAUFORT’S MONMOUTHSHIRE ESTATES.
SALE AT USK.
The s׳ale of the first portion of the Usk section of the above-named estates by Messrs. Driver and Co., of 23, Pall-mall, acting upon instructions from the Marquis of Worcester (now Duke of Beaufort), took place at the Town Hall, Usk, on Wednesday, May 10 and two following days.
The estates, which comprise a total area of 3,578 acres, only form a small portion of the Beaufort property, which is about to be put into the market, and will altogether take, perhaps, some four or five years to realise. There was at one time an impression that the properties submitted last week would not find buyers among the tenants and the landholders in the district, but this supposition was proved to be entirely unfounded by the result of the three days’ sale, both tenants and landowners being throughout the chief buyers, the former becoming owners of their occupations. On each day the floor of the large hall was well filled with bidders, and others, among the number being discernible many well-known solicitors and others prominently connected with the landed interests in Monmouthshire. The gallery was also occupied by many spectators, who watched the proceedings with the keenest interest.
The sale was conducted by Mr. Henry Jonas, who had no difficulty in performing the difficult task of disposing of the 151 lots in three days. At the commencement of the proceedings he gave the company adequate reasons for the estates being disposed of. The total amount realised by the sale was £99,573, exclusive of timber, which will probably increase the amount to £109,000, a result which may be regarded as highly satisfactory.
Mr. Romer Williams, of Messrs. Williams and James, the Duke’s solicitors, was present throughout the entire proceedings, and arranged for free conveyances and free mortgages for the smaller purchasers, a generous act which was much appreciated. Details of the sale are ap-' pended.
FIRST DAY’S SALE.
The freehold properties situate in the parish of Usk and townships of Gwehelog and Trostroy, submitted on May 10, were as follows: —
The Tump Farm, 8a. 38p., sold for £220 ; two enclosures of grass land, 2r. 16p., £28 ; the Oak Stock Farm, 129a. lr. 23p., £2,100 (timber £383) ; cottage, 2r. 29p., £110 ; garden of 19 perches, £27 ; two enclosures of grass land, 3a. 3r. 3p., £175 ; cottage, garden and meadow, la. 15p., £115 ; cottage and land, 2a. lr. 20p., £190 ; farm, 11a. 4p., £285 ; cottage holding, la. 3r. 19p., £250 ; Poplar Cottage Farm, of 11a. 2r., £350 ; two enclosures of grass land, 6a. 2r. 14p., £230 ; Wainfield Farm, 12a. 2p., £265 ; Birch Grove Farm, 21a. lr. 16p., £490 ; five enclosures ■of grass׳ land on common, 9a. 18p., £225 ; stone cottage, storehouse and 9a. 2r. Ip., £250 ; four enclosures- of grass land and cottage, 7a. 3r. 7p., £305 ; eight enclosures, 7a. 28p., £170 ; cottage ■and 3r. 4p., £100 ; pasture field, 2a. 3r. 38p., £160 ; two cottages, gardens and meadows, 6a. 2r. 5p., £200 ; cottage, buildings and 10a. 3r. 16p., £245 ; four enclosures at Coldharbour, 6a. 3r. 13p., £175 ; cottage and land, la. 13p., £175 ; farm of 9a. 2r. lip., £390 ; farm of 10a. 3r. 5p., £370 ; two enclosures of grass land, 3a. 2r. 15p., £150 ; sheep farm of 60a. 2r. 16p., £910 (timber £128) ; sporting estate at Coldharbour, of 93a. 2r. 29p., £1,050 (timber £582); cottage holding, 11a. 3p., £285 ; Wood Farm, of 9a. 2r. 3p., £320 (timber £60) ; cottage holding, 3a. 16p., £140 ; three enclosures of arable and grass land, 7a. lr. lOp., £100 ; Pant-y-Llaca Farm of 17a. 2r. 15׳p., £385 (timber £140) ; two enclosures of grass land, 3a. lr. 27p., £105 ; cottage’holding, 3a. Ip., £105 ; thatched cottage, piggery and 4a. 30p., £120 ; cottage and grass land, la. 3r. 3p., £95 ; three enclosures of pasture, £35 ; Walnut Tree Cottage, and 4a. lr. 9p., £115 ; New Wood Farm, 22a. 3r. 21p., £410 ; two enclosures of grass land, 3a. 2r. 4p., £55 ; Dyffryn House and 8a. 3r. 38p., £200 ; enclosure of grass land, £150 ; cottage holding on Trostrey Common, and 8a. lr. 25p., £155 ; cottage holding, la. 36p., £50 ; cottage holding, 2a. lr. 20p., £75 ; five enclosures of arable and grass land 6a. 3r. 35p., £165 ; stone cottage and 9a. 5p., £280 ; Red House and 6a. 16p., £200 ; stone cottage and grass land, 5a. 33p., £180 ; Louver House Farm, 19 acres, £345 ; cottage and land, 3r. 25p., £50 ; Walnut Tree Cottage and 9a. lr. 23p., £200 ; the Bank Farm, 10a. lr. 24p., £300 ; grass field of 3r. 29p., £40 ; two enclosures of grass land, £65 ; stone cottage and 2r. 4p., £40 ; six enclosures of arable and grass land, £275 ; Bradus Cottage, and 7a. 3r. 32p., £145 ; and two enclosures of grass land, 4a. 3r. 32p., £80.
SECOND DAY’S SALE.
The principal item in the sale of Thursday, May 11, was the freehold sporting estate known as Monkswood, situate between Usk and Ponty-pool, comprising the entire parish of Monks-