In the course of the hearing his Honour made a remark which, we think, calls for some notice. Mr. Mades, the purchaser of the business in question, who was called as a witness for the defendant, admitted in cross-examination that the suggestion had been made that by saying that he had known of the business being for sale before the plaintiff had communicated with him, he was likely to get a reduction in the price as there would then be no agent’s commission to pay. Upon hearing this Judge Lushing-ton remarked that though “it was not very elevating, it was very natural, and he was not prepared to say that it was dishonourable.” Wo must emphatically differ from his Honour here. We think that a subterfuge which has for its object the repudiation of a just liability is by no means natural to an honest man, and is most distinctly dishonourable. It is not very elevating to hear of such an observation being made, and, to be very plain, we are surprised that Mr. Lushington should have made it. Surely the judicial bench is not the place whence should proceed anything which might possibly be construed as a slurring over of moral laxity or commercial sharp practice.
In answer to “E. E. T.,” where the tenant has paid his full rent without deduction, under protest, because of a threat of distress, he may recover by action the amount of rates and taxes which he has paid for the landlord, and which the latter has improperly refused to allow ; but where a tenant has omitted to deduct a landlord’s tax, or voluntarily paid his full rent without deducting a landlord’s tax for a considerable time, he cannot recover it back. Thus, where the tenant of premises under a lease, which contained no reservation as to the payment of land tax, claimed a deduction for such tax, which was refused by the landlord, who afterwards distrained, and was paid the whole rent, and the tenant afterwards paid his full rent for five successive years without claiming to deduct such tax, it was held that his acquiescence was equivalent to an abandonment of his claim in the first instance, and that he could not recover back any of the sum so paid by him for land tax in an action for money paid on the ground of their being involuntary payments. Where, again, an occupier of lands had, during a course of 12 years, paid to the collector of taxes the landlord’s property tax, and the full rent as it became due to the landlord, without claiming any deduction on account of the tax so paid, it was held that the occupier could not recover back from the landlord any part of the property tax so paid (“Denby v. Moore,” 1 B. and A., 123).
Section 86 of the London Building Act, 1894, exempts from the provisions as to licenses for wooden structures “ structures or erections erected or set up upon the premises of any railway company and used for the purposes of, or in connection with, the traffic of such railway company.” The Queen’s Bench Division had before them the case of “Elliott and Co. v. The London County Council,” in which the question was whether one of those little wooden coal offices, with which we are familiar, and which, in this case, was situate in the Carlisle-sitreet coal yard of the Great Central Railway Company, came within the above exemption. Mr. Curtis Bennett had decided that it did not, but now Mr. Justice Day said that he had no doubt the learned magistrate was wrong, and, Mr. Justice Lawrance concurring, the appeal was allowed. Broadly speaking, perhaps, an office of the kind may be said1 to be used “for the purposes of, or in connection with, iihe traffic,” but we really cannot say why Mr. Justice Day should have been so confident in the face of “ Code v. Lovegrove,” which was a case of a structure used for distributing firewood, and is certainly an authority in favour of the view taken by Mr. Curtis Bennett, though it was decided not under the Act c.f 1894, but the Metropolitan Building Act, x855
Dorchester Sewage Works.—Recently Mr. H. Percy Boulnois, M.I.C.E., held an inquiry at the Town Hall on behalf of the Local Got emment Board into the propriety of certain works of sewerage and sewage disposal which the Dorchester Town Council proposed to execute beyond the limits of the borough, for which the local authority had applied for a loan of £16,000. Mr. Henry Symonds, Town Clerk, with !the Borough Engineer and Surveyor (Mr. G. J. Hunt) and Mr. C. J. Lomax, consulting engineer, appeared on behalf of the Town Council; and the scheme was opposed by Mr. R. R. Talbot (Syward Lodge), for whom Mr. Longstaffe, barrister (instructed by Messrs. Glutton), appeared: also by Mr. W. H. Wells on behalf of !the Earl of Uchester. Mr. G. Chatterton, E.S.I., C.E., Mr. J. H. Clutton, F.S.I., of Whitehall, and Mr. E. B. Duke, F.S.I., Dorchester, gave evidence.
[The writer will answer any question relating to real property law, or to the practice of Agents, Auctioneers, and Surveyors, under “ Queries and Replies.']
Upon the demise of mineral or other subjacent strata to a lessee to be worked, the lessor as a general rule retains his right of support. But he will not do so if it appears from express words in the lease, or by necessary implication therefrom, that he has waived or qualified his right. This was decided in the House of Lords case of "Davis v. Treharne,” and “Davis v. Treharne ” was followed by Mr. Justice North when he gave judgment- in December last in the case of the "Earl of Westmorland v. The New Sharlston Collieries Company, Limited.’ The company did not contend that a grant or lease of minerals of itself gave a right to let down the surface. What they urged was that the covenants on the part of the grantees, particularly׳ a covenant to make compensation, were sufficient to raise an implied right to work in a proper manner even if subsidence was the result. Mr. Justice North, however, decided against them on the authority of the House of Lords case. They were not satisfied, and went to the Court of Appeal, from whom they received but cold comfort, for the Master of the Rolls, Sir Francis Jeune and Lord Justice Romer said that they thought “ Davis v. Treharne ” had settled the law, though Sir -Nathaniel Lindley added that he thought that the House of Lords might just as well have decided “ Davis v. Treharne ” the other way consistently with the previous cases ; whilst the injunction granted was suspended for the defendants, if they pleased, to take the opinion of the highest tribunal in the land.
It is not- a very pleasant thing for a litigant to hear that the case upon which the Court has pronounced in his favour is in the Court’s opinion of doubtful authority, and his feelings must be rendered gloomier still when his opponents are, in a sense, encouraged to fight out the litigation to the bitter end. But if Lord Westmorland’s case ever comes before them, we do not think that the House of Lords are likely to stultify their own decision in “Davis v. Treharne.” What was decided there really was tha-t a grant- or lease does not alone render it necessary for the grantor or lessor to reserve a right to the support of the surface, hut that he has such a right unless there is something in the grant or lease inconsistent with it. Lord Blackburn put the matter very simply : —“ In common right the person who owns the surface has a right to have it properly supported below by minerals. A Court of Law has to look at the documents to see whether the parties have agreed upon something different from the common right.” In other words, every case of the kind must stand on the construction of the particular documents with which it is connected. The parties make their own agreement either expressly or by necessary implication. “ The person who owns the surface,” said Lord Blackburn, “has a right to have it properly supported below by minerals, and, if there are mineral workings under the surface, to have a proper support left for it by pillars. ' The question here arises whether upon these deeds that
right of support was taken away............
What I apprehend a Court of Law has to do is to look at the documents and see whether the parties have agreed upon something different from the common right.”
In some of the commission cases reported by us in the past and the present week, points of interest have arisen, though no questions of any novelty were involved. In “Farmer v. Carey” (Estates Gazette, June 10) the defence raised was that Mrs. Carey’s husband never had her authority to sign the commission note upon which the action was founded. The husband confirmed this, and if it- was true, as alleged, that he was a bricklayer and could not write, it is certainly difficult to see how he could sign a commission note or any other document-. It really looked as if he were endeavouring to “ cut up ” the commission, but after the plaintiff’s counsel had said that the husband " had apparently practised systematic fraud, and what looked very much like forgery, on the plaintiff,” and the Recorder had remarked that secret commissions were the curse of commercial life, the jury returned a verdict for Mrs. Carey. Between the case we gave last week of “ Robins, Snell and Gore v. Heifer,” and that of “ Todd v. Hanson,” which is reported in another column, there was more than a little resemblance, inasmuch as in both actions the plaintiffs claimed to have been the effective introducers of the business done, and obtained judgments for the full amount of their claims with costs. In the well-known Conduit-street house agents’ action the defence does not appear to us to have been in any way a substantial one, hut the dispute in
Wm. K. h (CHOLAS ft Co. Auctioneer! ft Eitate Agents,
B1 agrave Street, Reading, & 60, Pall Hall, 8.W
AND SOMERSETSHIRE.
M ESSRS. WM. R. NICHOLAS and CO. beg
tllat *key will Sell the following -PKijl ER11ES by Auction (unless previously disposeu of by private treaty): —
THAMES AND KENNET VALLEYS.
BERKS HILLS (Bradlield), 300ft. above sea level, on gravel soib within four miles of Theale Station (on the Newbury and Devizes line of the G.W.R..).— In the centre of one of the most delightfully wooded! spots in the South of England, some very valuable Freehold/ Pieces of Meadow and Wocd Land, ranging in area from one to 20 acres, offei-mg an opportunity seldom to be met with oi securing some unique sites for the erection ol gentlemen’s houses׳; also over a dozen Cottages. The above will be Sold, in Lots, at the QueenY Hotel, Reading, on Tuesday, July 18, 1899, at Thre o clock.
Solicitors, Messrs. Longbourne, Stevens anc. Powell, 7, Lincoln׳’st-inn-fields, W.C.
THE COTTAGE, OHADLINGTONT, OXFORDSHIRE With pretty and extensive grounds of about 6, acre¿. It contains three reception rooms, bath room, eight bed and dressing rooms, and good domestic offices, well-stocked kitchen garden with range of glasshouses, paddocks, farmery, etc. A detached Villa Resid-ence and Five Cottages, on the property, estimated to produce £55 per annum, rhree miles from Charlbury and Chipping Norton Stations. In the centre of the Heythrop Hunt.
The above will be sold at the Golden Cross Hotel, Oxford, on Tuesday, June 27, 1899, at Three o’clock.
Solicitors, Messrs. Bridges, Sawtell and Co., 23 Red Lion-square, London, W.C.
THE MANOR HOUSE, STANDLAKE, OXON.
A charming Elizabethan Estate of about 35 acres The estate is situate in high position near church and post office, 3¿ miles from Southleigh Gardens 1J miles from Oxford. The house, which is a gooc specimen of the Elizabethan period, contains si> bed rooms and dressing rooms, bath room, four reception rooms, excellent offices The pleasure grounds include tennis lawns, old-fashioned flowei and kitchen garden, orchard, meadow and arable land, in all about 35 acres.
The above will be sold in One or Two Lets, a’ the Golden Cross׳ Hotel. Oxford, on Tuesday, June 27 1899, at Three for Four o’clock.
Solicitor, A. W. Pierce, Esq., 21, John-street
YOUNG & HOWES & CO.,
Auctioneers, Valuers, Estate Agents, etc., Albion Chambers, Small Street, BRISTOL.
Sale of valuable Freehold Farms and] Accommodation Lands at WICKWAR, in the county of GLOUOES-TE RSHIRE.
VOUNG and HOWES (in conjunction with A. NICHOLS, MATTHEWS and! CO.) have reeeiveJ instructions to Sell by Auction, at the Grand] Hotel, Bristol, on Thursday, June 22, 1899, at Three o'c.oclt in the afternoon, the undermentioned FREEHOLD PROPERTIES, viz.: —
Lot 1.—All that valuable Freehold Pasture or Accommodation Farm, known as The Castle Farm, situate at Wickwar, aforesaid, in the occupations of Messrs. O. H. Puffin and D. T. Daniell, and containing 68a. lr. 14p., viz.:—	a. r. p.
The Homestead .......................... 1	i	13
Orchard ................................ 2	0	32
Arable Land ............................ 3	0	27
Pasture Land ...........................61	2	22
The house, which- is built in a most substantial manner, and was at one time an old family residence, contains large entrance hall, dining and drawing rooms, breakfast room, kitchen, dairy, and other offices; on the first floor are six bed and dressing rooms, and on the second floor three bed rooms and four attics.
The outbuildings are most complete and ample for the size farm. The lands all adjoin, and are situate on the north and east sides of the house. The farm is well watered, and, being situate in the midst of the Badminton and Berkeley country and within ten minutes' walk of the railway station, it would form a most suitable bunting box.
Lot 2.—Two rich Pieces of Pasture and Arable Land׳, situate on the south side of the main street of the town of Wickwar, also in the occupation of Mr. Pullen, and containing 15a. 3r. 30p., viz.: —
No. on	Area.
O.S Map	Name.	State.	a, r. p,
347 Tobaccoleaze ... Pasture ... 6 013 346	Highleaze ... Arable ... 9 2 37
Particulars and conditions of sale of the abovi properties may be had on application to the Solid tors; or to Messrs. Wm. R. Nicholas and Co., a׳ their Offices, Blagrave-street, Reading, and 60, Pal Mall. London, S.W. Telephone:	Reading 221;
DEVONSHIRE.
MESSRS. HUSSEY & SOH
(Established over a Century), Auctioneers, Estate Agents, Agricultural Tenant-Right, Timber and other Valuers,
EXETER, DEVON.
Stock, Timber, and all Classes of Sales and Valuations undertaken on Moderate Terms. Telephone : No. 21, Exeter.
Auction on Friday next.
The MATFORD ESTATE. EXMINSTER, DEVON-Within two miles of the City of Exeter.
MESSRS. HUSSEY and SON have received
instructions to offer for Sale by Public Auction at the Half Moon Hotel, Exeter, on Friday, June 23, 1899, the undermentioned outlyirg portions of the above Estate, comprising about 46a. 2r. 23p. Excellent accommodation, Dairy, and Feeding Marshes, situate in the well-known Exminster Vale, and being some of the most productive meadow land in the district, in the following or in such other Luts as may be determined upon
Lot 1.—All that capital close known as Greenland Maish compiising 4a. 3r. 8p., let to Mr. F. W. Wren at an apportioned rent of £18 per annum.
Lot 2.—The adjoining close of Rich Dairy Land, known as Sandifoid Marsh, with an area of 8a. 3r. 14p., also let to Mr. F. W. Wren at an appoitioned estimated rental of £32 per annum.
Let 3.—All that very fertile enclosure of Accommodation Marsh Land with shed for 12 bullocks and lock-up Corn and Root-house, known as Fcrds Marsh, compris-10a. 3r. 24p., now let to Mr. James Bray at an annual rental of £44 10s. (apportioned.)
Lot4.—A similar Marsh, also known as lores March, adjoining, containing 7a. lr. 18p., and also lented by Mr. James Bray at £30 10s. per annum (apportioned.)
Lot 5.—The adjoining Valuable Giazing Marsh, containing about 14a. 2r. 39p., known as Great Maish, and let to Mr. James Bray at £56 per annum.
Theses Marthts are splendidly situate, practica’ly adjoining the main road, and from their excellent qual.ty and clothe proximity to the City of Exeter and the Cattle Market, always command accommodation rentals.
Printed particular, with plan, may be obtained 10 days prior to the sale, of the Auctioneers, 14, Queen-street, Exeter; of Messrs. Ellis and Son, land agents, Exeter ; or of Messrs. Geaie and Mathew, solicitors, Exeter.
Exeter, May 18, 1899.
Lot 3.—A valuable Freehold and! compact Property, known as Poplar Farm, situate on the east side of, andl adjoining Lot 1, in the occupation of Mr. D. T. Daniell, and/ containing 68a. Or. 37p., viz.: —
a. r. p.
0	3 11
1	1 12 1 1 9
64 3 5
Homestead! ..
Orcharding .... Arable Land .. Pasture Land
.	68 0 37
This property is situate close to the main road and town of Wickwar, and access to it is by a private roadway. The house isi substantially erected, and the outbuildings most complete and well arranged. The lands are situate on the south and east sides of the farm, lie well together, and! are well watered. It forms a most compact property, and undoubtedly is desirable either for occupation or investment.
Plans, particulars and conditions of sale will shortly be issued; meanwhile for further particulars apply to the Auctioneers, Albion-chambers, Bristol, and Kingswood-hill; or to Messrs. Guscotte, WadJham and Bradbury, solicitors, 19, Essex-street, Strand, London, W.C.
Estate of Dr. Henry Grace, deceased.
Sale of valuable Freehold Building Land, at
KINGSWOOD, near BRISTOL.
VOUNG and HOWES (in coni unction with -1- NICHOLS, MATTHEWS and CO.) have received instructions from the representatives of the above Estate to Sell by Auction, at the Kii gswood Hotel, Kingswood-hill, on Tuesday, June 20, at Six for Seven o'clock in the evening, the undermentioned valuable FREEHOLD BUILDING LAND:
Lot 1.—All that valuable Piece of Building Land, situate at Downend-road, Kingswood, to which it has a very valuable and extensive frontage, numbered) 214 on the Ordnance Survey Map, and1 con-taing 3a. Or. 7p.
Lot 2—A valuable Piece of Building Land adjoining, numbered 957 on the O.S.M., also having a long frontage to Downend-roadi, and) containing la. Or. 27p.
Lot 3.—A Piece of Building Land, situate on the north sidle of and! adjoining Messrs. Grant’s Factory. bounded on the west side by Downend-road, on the north side by Tower-road, part 952 on the O.S.M., and containing by estimation 0a. 2r. Op.
Lot 4.—A Building Site, situate on the east side and adjoining the last Lot, having a long frontage to Tower-road, also numbered part 952 on the O.S. Map, and containing by estimation la. 2r. Op.
Lot 5.—A Piece of Orchard or Building Land, situate on the south side and adjoining the last Lot, also fronting Tower-road, numbered parts 215 and 216 on the O.S.M., and containing by estimation 0a. 2r. Op.
The whole of the above Lots are situate in a ring fence and close to the main road at Kingswood; the estate is wholly bounded on the west side by Downend-road and on the east side by Tower-road¡: anil will first be offered in One Lot as a Building Estate. Lots 1 to 4 are in the occupation of Mr. Cole; and Lot 5 of Dr. Perrott.
The mines and minerals are reserved.
Plans and particulars will sihortly be issued; meanwhile for further information apply to the Auctioneers, at Albion-chambers, Small-street, Bristol. and Kingswood-hill; or to Messrs. Lawrence, Williams and Watts, solicitors, Shannon-court, Corn-Street, Bristol.
TUG BE LET, Furnished, for tliree, six or J- twelve months a charming and commodious Family Residence, with extensive and well laid out grounds, ornamental lake, rockeries, etc.; also conservatory, green and hothouses, stabling and other buildings; the whole comprising about four acres. The above is most picturesquely and charmingly situated in a good social residential neighbourhood, within four miles of the city of Bristol, and five of Clifton, ani thirteen of the city of Bath. Stapleton-road Station (on the G.W.R.), and Mangotsfield (on the M.R.), are also within easy distance.—For rent and particulars, apply Young and Howea and Co.