Franks v. Weaver, 8 L. T. O. S. 510, 10 Beav. 297, distinguished.

Batty v. Hill, 11 W. R. 745, 1 H. & M. 264, approved. - TALLERMAN v. DOWSING RADIANT HEAT Co., Ch.D. Stirling, J., 146; [1900] 1 Ch. 1; 68 L. J. Ch. 618.

See also Patent, 3; Peer; Railway, 2; Trade Name, 2, 3; Trade Union, 1; Water, 1.

INLAND REVENUE:

1. Auctioneer's licence-" Same town or place "City of London and Sydenham.-The respondent, an auctioneer, as agent for T., sold certain wine at Sydenham, in the county of London. T. was duly licensed to sell intoxicating liquors in the City of London, in the same county.

Held, that Sydenham and the City of London are not "in the same town or place " within 27 & 28 Vict. c. 56, s. 1.-CASEY v. ROSE, Q.B.D.; 82 L. T. 616.

2. Estate duty-Annuity-" Full consideration in money or money's worth" Finance Act, 1894 (57 & 58 Vict. c. 30), s. 3, sub-section 1.-In 1862 the defendant inherited under a settlement a life interest in estates in Lincolnshire, subject to a jointure rent-charge of £400; he also inherited a life interest in estates in Dorsetshire. In 1870 he sold the Lincolnshire estates subject to the jointure rentcharge, investing part of the purchase-money in the name of trustees on trusts to indemnify the purchasers against the rent-charge. In 1883 an arrangement was made by which the rent-charge owner released the Lincolnshire estates from the payment of the rent-charge, in consideration of which and in consideration of the money invested in the name of trustees being released from the trusts for indemnity, the defendant charged his life interest in the Dorsetshire estate and certain policies on his life with the payment of an annuity of £400.

Upon the death of the annuitant the Commissioners of Inland Revenue claimed estate duty from the defendant in respect of the benefit which accrued or arose to him as the tenant for life of the Dorsetshire estates upon the cesser of the annuity.

Held, that the annuity was not granted by the defendant for "full consideration in money or money's worth" paid to him "for his own use or benefit" so as to be exempt from the payment of duty by virtue of section 3, sub-section 1, of the Finance Act, 1894.-ATTORNEY-GENERAL v. SMITHMARRIOTT, Q.B.D., 12; [1899] 2 Q. B. 595; 68 L. J. Q. B. 59; 81 L. T. 359.

3. Estate duty-Life policy-Policy brought into settlement-Finance Act, 1894 (57 & 58 Vict. c. 30), 8. 2 (1) (d).—By the Finance Act it is enacted that estate duty shall be payable upon property passing on the death of any person dying after the commencement of the Act, and by section 2 (1) (d) it is provided that property passing on the death of the deceased shall be deemed to include "any annuity or other interest purchased or provided by the deceased, either by himself alone or in concert or by arrangement with any other person, to the extent of the beneficial interest accruing or arising by survivorship or otherwise on the death of the deceased."

A. effected a policy of assurance on his own life, payable on his death to his wife, and in pursuance of an agreement on his marriage assigned the policy to the trustees of his marriage settlement upon trust to hold the proceeds thereof for the benefit of his wife for life, he, A., covenanting to keep up the policy and pay the premiums during his life.

Held, that on A.'s death estate duty was payable under section 2 (1) (d) on the proceeds of the policy. -ATTORNEY-GENERAL v. DOBREE, Q.B.D., 413; [1900] 1 Q. B. 442; 69 L. J. Q. B. 223; 81 L. T. 607.

4. Estate duty-Property passing on death-Settlement-Surrender of life estate to remaindermanFinance Act, 1894 (57 & 58 Vict. c. 30), s. 2 (1) (c).— Where a tenant for life of settled property surrenders the life estate to the remainderman and dies within twelve months of the surrender, estate duty is not payable under the Finance Act, 1894, on the death of the tenant for life.

Decision of the Divisional Court (Day and Lawrance, JJ.), [1899] 2 Q. B. 238, reversed.ATTORNEY-GENERAL v. DE PREVILLE, C.A., 193; [1900] 1 Q. B. 223; 69 L. J. Q. B. 283; 81 L. T. 690.

5. Estate duty-Settlement-Reservation of interest -Finance Act, 1894 (57 & 58 Vict. c. 30), s. 2, subsection 1 (c).-Any gift inter vivos of property not involving the entire cessation of any interest therein by the grantor, and excluding his possession and enjoyment thereof, is insufficient to avoid the payment of estate duty under the Finance Act, 1894. The property so granted or assigned and existing at the death of the grantor will be deemed to have passed on his death, and therefore liable to estate duty.

A transfer of property reserving a rent-charge to the grantor and providing for the payment of grantor's debts by the grantee, to the full exhaustion of the grantor's estate, is, therefore, ineffectual for the purpose of avoiding the said duty under section 2, sub-section 1 (c), of the Finance Act, 1894.

Decision of the Court of Appeal (47 W. R. 37, [1898] 2 Q. B. 534) affirmed.-GREY v. ATTORNEYGENERAL, H.L., 383; [1900] A. C. 124; 69 L. J. Q. B. 308; 82 L. T. 62.

6. Estate duty--Settlement estate duty-Contingent settlement-Finance Act, 1894 (57 & 58 Vict. c. 30), s. 5(1)(a)—Settled Land Act, 1882 (45 & 46 Vict. c. 38), 8. 2(1)-Finance Act, 1898 (61 & 62 Vict. c. 10), s. 14.The construction put on section 5 (1) of the Finance Act, 1894, in Attorney-General v. Fairley, 45 W. R. 589, [1897] 1 Q. B. 698-viz., that a contingent settlement of property is a settlement within the meaning of the section-has been adopted by the Legislature in section 14 of the Finance Act, 1898, and will not now be questioned by the courts. ATTORNEY-GENERAL v. CLARKSON, C.A., 216; [1900] 1 Q. B. 156; 69 L. J. Q. B. 81; 81 L. T. 617.

7. Estate duty-Settlement estate duty-Legacy by testator in satisfaction of previous covenant-Settlement of legacy by instrument outside will-Finance Act, 1894 (57 & 58 Vict. c. 30), 88. 5, 6 (2), 8 (4)—Finance Act, 1896 (59 & 60 Vict. c. 28), s. 19-Effect of covenant to pay "without any deduction."-Settlement estate duty arising under section 5 of the Finance Act, 1894, is in all cases primarily payable, in the absence of indications of a contrary intention, out of the settled property.

In re Webber, Gribble v. Webber, 44 W. R. 489, [1896] 1 Ch. 914, overruled.

This primary incidence may, however, be shifted on to the residuary estate by the presence of clear indications of intention-e.g., by a direction to pay "without any deduction."

Decision of Kekewich, J. (47 W. R. 635, [1899] 2 Ch. 489), affirmed on the point of law, but reversed on the point of construction.-MARYON-WILSON,

RE, WILSON v. MARYON-WILSON, C.A., 338; [1900] 1 Ch. 565; 69 L. J. Ch. 310; 82 L. T. 171.

8. Estate duty-Wills Act, 1837 (7 Will. 4 & 1 Vict. c. 26), s. 33—“ Property passing on death," Finance Act, 1894 (57 & 58 Vict. c. 30), 8. 1Property of which the deceased was at his death competent to dispose," Finance Act, 1894, s. 2 (1)— Settled property.-A. died in 1899, having by his will left property valued at £16,000 to trustees for his widow and daughter, and after the death of the widow to the daughter absolutely. Six months after A.'s death his father died, having by his will left property to A. valued at £80,000. Estate duty was paid on this amount in respect of A.'s father's death. By section 33 of the Wills Act the devise to A. did not lapse, but took effect as if he had survived his father. On a claim by the Commissioners of Inland Revenue for further estate duty on the £80,000 as property passing on A.'s death, or of which he was competent to dispose at the time of his death under the Finance Act, 1894,

Held, that this was not property passing on A.'s death within section 1 of the Finance Act, 1894, but that it was property of which he was at the time of his death competent to dispose under section 2 (1) of the Act, and that it was disposed of by his will. By virtue of the Finance Act, ss. 5 and 22 (1) (.), and of the Settled Land Act, 1882, s. 2, it was settled property, and only liable to such duty as could be charged having regard to those provisions.

Per Channell, J.-The Wills Act, s. 33. gives the Crown the same duties as if the son had survived the father, and the devisees of the son take subject to the payment of the same duties as if the son had survived. The rate of duty payable is to be arrived at by taking the rate applicable to the property when aggregated with A.'s other property, but the Crown is not entitled to an increased rate on the £16,000 by reason of such aggregation.SCOTT (JOHN), RE, Q.B.D., 205; [1900] 1 Q. B. 372; 69 L. J. Q. B. 121; 81 L. T. 610.

9. Estate duty-Succession duty-Company registered in England-Donor of property to company reserving life interest-Donor a foreigner domiciled abroad-Property situate abroad-Beneficiaries abroad --Succession on death of donor-Succession Duty Act, 1853 (16 & 17 Vict. c. 51)-Finance Act, 1894 (57 & 58 Vict. c. 30), 8. 2 (1) (b) (c).—An association was in 1891 formed into a company and was registered in England under the Companies Acts with the object of benefiting Russian Jews and of assisting the emigration of Jews from Europe or Asia to other countries. The affairs of the company were to be administered by a council, and the registered office of the company was to be in England. At a meeting of the council in 1892 Baron H. (chairman of the council) proposed to hand over to the company, and the council agreed to accept, various securities on condition that he was allowed to receive the income therefrom during his life, and a deed was executed in which Baron H. (the donor) gave to the company certain stocks, shares, and securities, mostly situate abroad, on condition that the company would permit the donor to receive the whole income from the property during his life, and would after his death apply such stocks, shares, and securities for the objects of the company. The registered office of the company was in London, where the general meetings were held and where the register of members was kept. The council met in Paris in offices there, where the company had its headquarters, its officers, clerks, and staff, and where most of its business was

Inland Revenue. 72

transacted, the business transacted in London being generally formal. Baron H. was an Austrian subject, domiciled in Austria and died so domiciled, and the property represented investments for the most part situate in foreign countries. On the death of Baron H. in 1896 the Crown claimed succession duty and estate duty upon the principal value of the property of the company.

Held, that, although the donor was a foreigner domiciled abroad and the property of the company was locally situate abroad and the beneficiaries were abroad, the company itself was an English company and was domiciled in England, and the property was owned in England by this English company, and that upon the death of Baron H. and the cesser of his life interest in the property the succession devolved upon this English company, and that therefore upon such succession the Crown became entitled to succession duty under the Succession Duty Act, 1853, and to estate duty under section 2 (1) (b) of the Finance Act, 1894, as upou property passing on the death of the donor in which the donor had an interest ceasing on his death. ATTORNEY-GENERAL v. JEWISH COLONIZATION ASSOCIATION, Q.B.D.; 69 L. J. Q. B. 692; 82 L. T. 679.

10. Income tax-Assignment for benefit of creditors-Trustee currying on debtor's business-Income Tax Acts, Schedule D.-The appellant was trustee under a deed of assignment for the benefit of creditors made by a firm. The firm were lessees for a term of years of certain mills, and prior to the execution of the deed of assignment they had sub-let part of the mills, and from the portion which they still retained they supplied steam power to their sub-tenants at agreed rents. The appellant entered into occupation of that portion of the premises for the purpose of winding up the firm's business, and he continued to supply steam power to the sub-tenants for the purpose of increasing the dividends for the benefit of the firm's creditors. As trustee under the deed he had realized the firm's assets except the lease to them of the mills, and had paid dividends to creditors amounting in all to 8s. 6d. in the pound on admitted claims. The amount received by the appellant from the subtenants considerably exceeded the cost of supplying the power, and the general commissioners assessed him at the sum of £800 under Schedule D. in respect of "profits of power."

Held, that the appellant was liable to income tax under Schedule D. in respect of the profit derived by him from carrying on the trade or business of supplying the steam power.-ARMITAGE v. MOOR, Q.B.D.; [1900] 2 Q. B. 363; 69 L. J. Q. B. 614; 82 L. T. 618.

11. Income tax--Branches abroad-Dividends from securities out of United Kingdom-Constructive receipt in United Kingdom of dividends received outsideIncome Tax Act, 1842 (5 & 6 Vict. c. 35), s. 100, Schedule D., 4th case.-A life assurance company, having its head office and directors in the United Kingdom, carried on business in the East Indies by means of branches with agents and committees of management.

Accounts were made up yearly, and from the aggregate results of the entire business both at home and abroad, it was determined what amount of profits should be divided between the shareholders and policy-holders.

The moneys received at the branches in India included interest and dividends arising from securities in Her Majesty's dominions out of the United Kingdom, and were used as far as required in

Any

liquidating payments at those branches. balances were retained for use as required, or were dealt with as required by the directors in London. An equivalent for the amount of such interest and dividends, if not retained abroad, would have to be sent out from the United Kingdom to India for the general conduct and due discharge of the obligations of the society's business in India.

Held that the interest and dividends were constructively received by the society in the United Kingdom, and as such, were assessable under Schedule D., 4th case, to income tax.--UNIVERSAL LIFE ASSURANCE SOCIETY v. BISHOP, Q.B.D.; 81 L. T. 422.

12. Income tax-Business carried on in foreign branches-Investments in foreign countries-Constructive receipt in United Kingdom-Income Tax Act, 1842 (5 & 6 Vict. c. 35), s. 100, Schedule D., 4th case. -The plaintiff society carries on the business of life assurance, with head offices and directors in London.

The society has funds invested in securities in foreign countries, and the interest is reinvested in those countries or remitted direct to other foreign countries for investment.

In addition to this the society carries on its business in other foreign countries by means of local agents or managers, and has funds invested in securities in those countries.

The interest on such securities is either reinvested in those countries, applied in establishment and other expenses in the country where such interest is earned, or remitted to other foreign countries.

If such interest had not been retained abroad or remitted from one foreign country to another the society would have been obliged to send out money from the United Kingdom to their agencies to meet their obligations.

Held, that these amounts were constructively received in the United Kingdom, and were liable to be assessed to income tax.-GRESHAM LIFE ASSURANCE SOCIETY v. BISHOP, Q.B.D.; 81 L. T. 442.

13. Income tax-Deduction-Poor law officer-Contribution to superannuation fund-Income Tax Act, 1842 (5 & 6 Vict. c. 35), s. 146-Poor Law Officers' Superannuation Act, 1896 (59 & 60 Vict. c. 50), 8. 12.-An officer or servant in the employ of poor law guardians is entitled, by section 146 of the Income Tax Act, 1842, to deduct from the amount of his salary on which income tax is payable the amount deducted from his salary for the purpose of the superannuation fund under the powers conferred by the Poor Law Officers' Superannuation Act, 1896.-BEAUMONT v. BOWERS, Q.B.D., 557; [1900] 2 Q. B. 204; 69 L. J. Q. B. 600.

14. Income tax-Deduction of tax from interest or annuities-Customs and Inland Revenue Act, 1888 (51 & 52 Vict. c. 8), s. 24, sub-section 3.-The London County Council, when they paid the dividends due on Metropolitan Consolidated Stock, deducted a sum therefrom at the rate of 8d. in the pound in respect of income tax, in accordance with section 24, sub-section 3, of the Customs and Inland Revenue Act, 1888. The dividends were paid out of the Consolidated Loans Fund.

The

Consolidated Loans Fund was made up (inter alia) of rents received by the county council from their tenants, interest received by the county council from local authorities in respect of loans made by the county council, and money raised by rates. The Consolidated Loans Fund was applicable, first, to the payment of the said dividends, and then to the redemption of Consolidated Stock and the payment of various debts and liabilities. The county

council claimed to be entitled to retain, as against the Crown, the amount deducted as income tax in respect of so much of the dividends as they stated to have been paid out of rents from tenants and interest from local authorities.

Held, first, that the county council were not entitled to retain any income tax in respect of so much of the dividends as they stated to have been paid out of rents; secondly, that they were entitled to retain the tax on so much only of the dividends as was equal to that rateable proportion of the interest received from local authorities which was applicable to the payment of the dividends.ATTORNEY-GENERAL v. LONDON COUNTY COUNCIL, C.A., 294; [1900] 1 Q. B. 192; 69 L. J. Q. B. 241; 81 L. T. 698.

15. Income tax Life insurance company "Annual profits and gains"-Participating policyholders-Return of surplus by way of bonus-Income Tax Act, 1853 (16 & 17 Vict. c. 34), Schedule D.By the articles of the charter of a life insurance company which had a capital divided into shares, it was provided that the company could issue participating policies, that the insurance business should be conducted on the mutual plan, and that, after the owners of the capital stock had received dividends to the amount of 7 per cent., the other earnings of the company should be allowed to accumulate, and that every five years a balance should be struck and the surplus (after deducting a sufficient sum to cover risks and obligations) be divided among the policyholders.

Held, that such surplus was an annual profit or gain of the company liable to be assessed to income tax under Schedule D of the Income Tax Act of 1853.

Last v. London Assurance Corporation, 34 W. R. 233, 10 App. Cas. 438, and New York Life Insurance Co. v. Styles, 14 App. Cas. 381, 38 W. R. Dig. 89, considered.

Decision of the Divisional Court (Darling and Channell, JJ.), 47 W. R. 556, [1899] 2 Q. B. 439, affirmed.-EQUITABLE LIFE ASSURANCE CO. OF UNITED STATES v. BISHOP, C.A., 341; [1900] 1 Q. B. 177; 69 L. J. Q. B. 252; 81 L. T. 693. 16. Income tax· Non-payment Distress-Authority of collector-Taxes Management Act, 1880 (43 & 44 Vict. c. 19), ss. 73, 86.-The power to distrain in the event of non-payment of taxes, conferred upon a tax collector by section 86 of the Taxes Management Act, 1880, may be lawfully exercised after the expiration of the year in respect of which the tax is payable, provided that, at the time of the distress, the collector has not been required to pay over the sums collected by him, and to deliver a schedule of arrears, as provided by section 103 of the Act.-ELLIOTT v. YATES, C.A., 610; [1900] 2 Q. B. 370; 82 L. T. 812.

17. Income tax-Profits or gains of trade-Deductions-Wear and tear of plant-Ships-Income Tax Act, 1843 (5 & 6 Vict. c. 35), s. 100, 1st case, r. 3— Customs and Inland Revenue Act, 1878 (41 Vict. c. 15), s. 12.—The Customs and Inland Revenue Act, 1878, by section 12, provides that "the commissioners shall, in assessing the profits or gains of any trade chargeable under Schedule D allow such deduction as they may think just and reasonable as representing the diminished value by reason of wear and tear during the year of any machinery or plant used in the

concern.

The commissioners allowed to the appellant company, in respect of the diminished value of their fleet of ships by reason of wear and tear, a deduc

tion which was less than that to which the company claimed to be entitled. Upon a case stated the Queen's Bench Division dismissed the appeal of the company.

Upon a further statement made by the commissioners, pursuant to a direction of the Court of Appeal, the appeal was dismissed upon the ground that no question of law arose.-PENINSULAR AND ORIENTAL Co. v. LESLIE, C.A.; 82 L. T. 137.

18. Inhabited house duty - Exemption - Publichouse-48 Geo. 3, c. 55, Schedule B., r. 3-57 Geo. 3, c. 25, 8. 1-5 Geo. 4, c. 44, s. 4-Inland Revenue Act, 1878, s. 13, sub-section 2. - By section 13, sub-section 2, of the Inland Revenue Act, 1878, “ every house or tenement which is occupied solely for the purposes of any trade or business or of any profession shall be exempted from the duties (on inhabited houses) by the said commissioners upon proof of the facts to their satisfaction.

Appellant was owner of a building of two storeys. The ground-floor was occupied by appellant to carry on the trade of a licensed retailer of spirits. The upper storey was occupied as his dwellinghouse. Access to the dwelling-house was by a door opening from the public street and by a staircase from that door which led to the upper storey. Access to the public-house was by a different door, also opening from the public street. There was no internal communication between the dwelling-house on the upper storey and the public-house on the lower storey.

Held, that the public-house was not liable to inhabited house duty, and that the duty ought to be confined to the value of that portion of the building used as a dwelling-house.-GRANT v. LANGSTON, H.L. (Sc.); [1900] A. C. 383; 69 L. J. P. C. 66; 82 L. T. 629.

19. Inhabited house duty Hall Library Liability to be assessed-48 Geo. 3, c. 55, Schedule B, r. 5—House Tax Act, 1851 (14 & 15 Vict. c. 36), 8. 1.-The dining-hall and offices of the Middie Temple, which are used and occupied during the daytime only, in which no one sleeps or resides, and which have no communication with any premises in which anyone sleeps or resides, are liable to inhabited house duty, as coming within the words "hall or office" in rule 5 of Schedule B of 48 Geo. 3, c. 55; but the library is not a "hall" within the meaning of that rule, and is not liable to inhabited house duty.

MIDDLE TEMPLE

Judgment of Wills and Bruce, JJ. (47 W. R. 383), affirmed. STYLES SOCIETY, C.A., 164; 81 L. T. 426.

บ.

20. Licence for male servant - "Gardener". "Under gardener "-Employed "in any capacity involving the duties" of gardener or under-gardenerSpade work in garden-32 & 33 Vict. c. 14, 88. 18, 19 (3). Whether a workman employed all his time in working in a garden is or is not a gardener or under-gardener or & person employed in any capacity involving the duties of a gardener or under-gardener within 32 & 33 Vict. c. 14, ss. 18, 19 (3), is a question of fact to be decided by the justices on the evidence submitted to them.

The mere employment in a garden of a man doing work which a single-handed gardener would have to do does not necessarily make the man a gardener, and justices, in deciding the point, are entitled to consider whether or not the work done by him is work for the proper execution of which skill in gardening is required.-DILLON v. BATH (MARQUIS), Q.B.D.; 81 L. T. 186.

Iniand Revenue. 76

21. Probate duty-Testator resident and domiciled abroad-Taking possession and administering the estate-Executor de son tort-55 Geo. 3, c. 184, s. 37 -Customs and Inland Revenue Act, 1881 (44 & 45 Vict. c. 12), s. 40.-The foreign executors of a testator who died domiciled abroad, and was the registered owner of shares and debentures in an English company, requested the company to transfer these shares and debentures into their names. The company were aware that the executors did not intend to take out probate in this country, but the transfer was made.

Held, that the company had taken possession and administered the estate of the deceased in this country, and constituted itself an executor de son tort, and become liable to probate duty and the statutory penalties.

Decision of the Court of Appeal (46 W. R. 193, [1898] 1 Q B. 205) affirmed.-NEW YORK BREWERIES Co. v. ATTORNEY-GENERAL, H.L., 32; [1899] A. C. 62; 68 L. J. Q. B. 135; 79 L. T. 368.

22. Stamp duty-Agreement - Promissory noteStamp Act, 1891 (54 & 55 Vict. c. 39), s. 33 (1).– The defendant gave the plaintiff the following document: " April 4, 1899.-Re The Mitre Hotel, Tooting Graveney, S. W.-On the day of the transfer of the licence I agree to pay you the sum of twenty-five pounds.-W. J. Dean.-To Mr. G. W. Smith.-Witness, T. M. Wales, 174, Victoria-street,

S.W."

Held, that this document ought to be stamped as a promissory note within section 33 (1) of the Stamp Act, 1891.-SMITH v. DEAN, Q.B.D.; 69 L. J. Q. B. 331; 81 L. T. 755.

23. Stamp duty-Agreement in consideration of fixed annual payments-" Bond, covenant, or instrument of any kind whatsoever "—"Only or principal or primary security for an annuity" for indefinite period-Stamp Act, 1891 (54 & 55 Vict. c. 39), Schedule I.-By an agreement in writing not under seal, R. agreed to pay a telephone company the sum of £12 per annum for the use of a telephone wire and apparatus which the company was to affix to his house. The rent was to be payable every year in advance, and either party might put an end to the agreement by giving the other three months'

notice.

Held, that this instrument was within the words "Bond, covenant, or instrument of any kind whatsoever, being the only or principal or primary security for any annuity for an "indefinite period" in Schedule I. of the Stamp Act, 1891, and chargeable with the ad valorem duty therein stated.

Decision of the Court of Appeal (47 W. R. 247, [1899] 1 Q. B. 250) affirmed.-NATIONAL TELEPHONE Co. v. INLAND REVENUE COMMISSIONERS, H.L., 210; [1900] A. C. 1; 69 L. J. Q. B. 43; 81 L. T. 546.

24. Stamp duty-Agreement to sell book debts— Guaranty of payment before completion-Consideration-Stamp Act, 1891 (54 & 55 Vict. c. 39), 8. 59 (1). -A. Co. (Limited) agreed to sell their entire undertaking together with the book debts owing to them to B. Co. (Limited). By the agreement the book debts were to be taken as they were at the making up of the books of the A. Co. at the end of the preceding year, and the A. Co. gave a guaranty that they would be paid in full before the date fixed for completion of the conveyance; and the A. Co. were to be taken as conducting the business as agents for the B. Co. since the end of the preceding year till completion.

At the date of the agreement only a small part of the debts due at the end of the preceding year was still owing, and they were all in fact paid before completion of the conveyance.

Held, that the sale of book debts was a sale of property within section 59 (1) of the Stamp Act, 1891, and that consequently the B. Co. were liable to pay stamp duty on that part of the consideration appropriated as representing the consideration given for those debts.-MEASURE v. INLAND REVENUE COMMISSIONERS, Q.B.D.; 82 L. T. 689.

25. Stamp duty-Conveyance on sale-GoodwillContract "made" in the United Kingdom-" Equitable interest in property”—“ Property locally situate out of the United Kingdom"-Stamp Act, 1891 (54 & 55 Vict. c. 39), s. 59, sub-section 1.-By section 59, sub-section 1, of the Stamp Act, 1891, "Any contract or agreement made in England or Ireland under seal or under hand only for the sale of any equitable estate or interest in any property whatsoever, or for the sale of any estate or interest in any property except (inter alia) property locally situate out of the United Kingdom" is chargeable with the same ad valorem duty as if it were a conveyance on sale.

A contract is "made," within the meaning of that section, in that country in which the signature of the last necessary party to it is affixed.

A contract for the sale of an option to purchase property at a particular price is not a contract for the sale of an "equitable estate or interest in any property" within the section.

Where the goodwill of a business is sold together with the premises where the business is carried on for a lump sum the goodwill is primâ facie annexed to the premises, and, therefore, if the business premises so sold are situate abroad, and there are no circumstances to rebut the presumption of annexation, the goodwill also will be treated as property locally situate out of the United Kingdom within the meaning of that section.

West London Syndicate v. Inland Revenue Commissioners, [1898] 2 Q. B. 507, distinguished.— MULLER & Co.'s MARGARINE v. INLAND REVENUE COMMISSIONERS, C.A.; [1900] 1 Q. B. 310; 69 L. J. Q. B. 291; 81 L. T. 667.

26. Stamp duty--Conveyance on sale-Leaseholds— Assignment Consideration-Rent-Stamp Act, 1891 (54 & 55 Vict. c. 39), s. 57.-The lessee of land with three houses thereon, conveyed in consideration of a sum of money two of the houses for the residue of the term, subject to a duly apportioned part of the rent reserved by the original lease. The assignee covenanted to pay the rent and to observe and perform the covenants contained in the original lease.

Held, that the rent payable by the assignee was not part of the consideration in respect whereof the conveyance was chargeable with ad valorem duty under section 57 of the Stamp Act, 1891.

Judgment of the Divisional Court (47 W. R. 300, [1899] 1 Q. B. 335) affirmed.-SWAYNE v. INLAND REVENUE COMMISSIONERS, C.A., 197; [1900] 1 Q. B. 172; 69 L. J. Q. B. 63; 81 L. T. 623.

27. Stamp duty-Debenture-Option to redeem on paying premium-Sum secured-Stamp Act, 1891 (54 & 55 Vict. c. 39), s. 86; Schedule I., " Marketable security."-A limited company issued a series of debentures of £100 each, each debenture stating that the company would, as and when the principal moneys thereby secured become payable, pay to the registered holder the sum of £100. By one of the conditions indorsed thereon, a certain

number of debentures were to be redeemed by annual drawings on the 1st of July, 1902, and on the 1st of July in each succeeding year up to the 1st of July, 1917, when the balance outstanding was to be redeemed. By another condition the company might at any time after the 1st of July, 1900, redeem the debentures at £103 on giving six months' previous notice in writing, and upon the expiration of such notice the sum of £103 was to become payable as if the same was the amount of the principal moneys secured. The debentures were "marketable securities," not transferable by delivery within the meaning of Schedule I. to the Stamp Act, 1891.

Held, that each debenture was a security for £100 only, and was, therefore, liable to ad valorem duty upon that amount, and not upon £103.

Judgment of the Divisional Court (47 W. R. 415, [1899] 1 Q. B. 345) reversed.-KNIGHTS DEEP v. INLAND REVENUE COMMISSIONERS, C.A., 198; [1900] 1 Q. B. 217; 69 L. J. Q. B. 66; 81 L. T. 625.

28. Stamp duty-Mortgage to secure debentures— Substituted security-Stamp Act, 1891 (54 & 55 Vict. c. 39), 8. 86 (11), Schedule I.-By a trust deed made between a joint-stock company and trustees for the debenture-holders, the former stipulating that they might redeem the debenture stock after giving certain notice, covenanted that after giving such notice they would redeem at nominal value, plus 10 per cent. By further clauses of the deed certain freeholds and leaseholds were assured to the trustees to secure payment of all principal moneys, bonuses, and interest which might become payable in respect of the debenture stock, and a floating charge on all the company's property was created for the same purpose. There was a clause giving the company power to withdraw any of the freeholds or leaseholds assured to the trustees and substitute other property of equal value.

By a subsequent indenture a small part of the leaseholds so assured was withdrawn and other leaseholds belonging to the company assured to the trustees to be held on the trusts of the earlier indenture. This second indenture contained no covenant for payment of the debenture principal money or interest, and no express declaration of the trusts on which the property assured was to be held.

Held, that the second indenture was a "6 'mortgage" within section 86 (1) of the Stamp Act, 1891, and a "substituted security " within Schedule I. and heading "Mortgage, Bond, Debenture, Covenant" of that Act, and that therefore the Commissioners of Inland Revenue were right in holding that the stamp duty was to be calculated at the rate of 6d. per £100 on the whole principal money of the debenture stock.-GARTSIDES v. INLAND REVENUE COMMISSIONERS, Q.B.D.; 82 L. T. 686.

29. Stamp duty-Partnership dissolution —Record of transfer of property-" Conveyance on sale”"Release or renunciation "-Stamp Act, 1891 (54 & 55 Vict. c. 39), Schedule I.-J. F. and his brother J. W. carried on business in partnership. J. F. in pursuance of the power for that purpose contained in the articles of partnership, gave J. W. notice to determine it, and J. W. gave J. F. notice of taking over his share in the partnership upon the terms prescribed by the articles. Two instruments were executed to give effect to the dissolution of the partnership-the first a conveyance, whereby the share and interest of J. F. in the real estate of the partnership was released and transferred to J. W. This deed was duly stamped with an ad valorem