13 JUNE 1840, Page 5

The Court of Queen's Bench, on Monday last, decided that

tithes are liable to poor-rates. The Reverend Mr. Capel, Vicar of Watford, had obtained a conditional rule Ibr setting aside a rate which included his tithes; and this rule was discharged on Monday. As the point is con- sidered of very great importance, we give Lord Denman's judgment entire— This was an appeal against a rate made for the relief of the poor of the parish of Watford. The defendant, who was the incumbent of the parish, appealed against the rate, on the ground that the tithe-owner haul been too highly rated with reference to the other property in the parish. The Sessions had confirmed the rate on all the lands on the estimate of the rent at which such lands might reasonably be expected to let for, free from rates and taxes, and deducting from such rent the probable sum necessary for the purpose of maintaining them in. such a state as to command such rent. The vicarage had been rated tint,. The 'Vicar appeared to have received compensation for small tithes from the lands of the parish, calculated at the amount of (160!., but the rate WaS calcu- lated to hint on a payment to him of :340/. ; a deduction of 120/. luring made li the amount of collertion, &c. This rate was in furor str.ofly w.tom time fm.I and 7th Williatn 1V. c. 96; and if that statute embraced tithes as well as land, the rate would be good. Ilereditainents was a division under which lawyers would place tithes. They leer° &miscible at a yearly rent. It was true that many of the deductions required to be made from the rateable value of the property were not commonly incident to tithes ; but still there were deductions sufficiently similar in their nature, so far as the principle was concerned. The great principle was, drat all rates must be it jested on a sy.! r 61. equality. The COUri might not in all roar's be able to work out that prim iph: ir; its .lull extent ; but they would try to do so, and would consider the validity of a rate with err • press reliwenre to That principle. If' there bail been a failure in the application of that principle, it had been in consequence of calculating the rate in its ali- quot parts, and not as a whole, and by the reference to the arbitrary and fluc- tuating sense of the terms used on the subject of the rate. The Court, there- fore, felt that there was no variety in the principle regulating the making of it rate; but that principle was supposed to Le liable to an application of a parti- cular ease, awl the ease of the King rcrsais Joddrell hail been cited to show that land and tithes were under different liabilities as to rating. On that de- cision the Court would make a few remarks, That case was erroneomly sup- posed to have introduced a new law on the subject of rating. On the vont r:wy, it was cited, in Sex versus Plinnstcad, as recognizing an old prineill'. There the titheowner was not allowed a deduction in the rate of his corc-rent ; and the Court held that he was not rated on the proper principle of the net value of the tithes, but on the amount of the gross Clint for which such rent would let, while the landowners were rated on the actual rent received by them. and not inclusive of' the profit which was known as tenants' profits, and which it was said ought to he taken as limning part of the gross rent fookillich it v.-ould let. On account of that distinction in the rating, the Court Iton the rate bad. The lauguav of the judgment appeared Sr go further. If the farmer had hid the land in his own hands, he would, in fact, have nothing, to deduct from Iiis annual produce but the wages of his men : but who could puesitilv env that ;, calculation of the annual value of his thrill, made only after that

would be a calculation titiile made, and that the worth aids personal labour. for instance, could be fitirly withdrawn from consideration: case of the

King versus doddrell did not convince this Court that there was any difference

between the tithcowner and Oa occupier of land in the moaner in which his tithes were to be calculit ed. If there was any show that the role

thus applied according to the stat file worked an ihjoiv on the titheowne;•, he had the Mill` Way ill which to relieve himself as the loMlowner. Fluke these circumstances, the rule for setting aside the rate must be discharged. In reference to this decision, Mr. Biehard Jones, the Tithe Com- missioner, has addressed the following letter "'1'o the Clergy of Eng- land and Wales "— , " Gentlemen—I am pledged to so many persons to let them have the earliest Information of the decision of the Ilaeen's Bench as to the proper uncle of rating tithe, that I adopt this as the only mode in which I can rapidly fulfil my promises. "'rite decision of the Queen's Bench as to the particular point submitted to the Court is against the Clergy ; and they have decided, that under Mr. Poll- lett Scrope's Act, in spite of the Archbishop's prtiviso, tithes and rent-charges must he rated like lands, at what they will let for. "The law so declared, I conceive, we are bound at once to accept and sub- mit to. It so happens, however, that while this ease has been actually pend- lag, another case has been decided by the QUeell'i Bench, which heaves the general law as to rating in a state as unsettled and as unsatisllictory as it Was before this decision was given. At the Marlborough Street Office, on Wednesmiay. Mr. Morgan John O'Connell, M.P., and 'Sir. Redington, M.P., were charged with riotous conduct in the streets. The two honourable Members were not placed in the prisoners' dock. but were allowed to stand it front of the Magis- trates' bench, while a Policeman stated the charge against them— About five o'clock that inortling, while on duty at the end of Jermvn Street, St. James's, he saw the del'entlams knock at several doors, pull a hell-handle out to the extent of sear: inches, cad bend it, and also hantowr at the shut- ters of a shop. In consequence of which, he with some other Pedice-co'istablec, took them into custody, and conveyed them to Vine Street. Station-house. Mr. O'Connell—" Your stateimmt is not correct. We did not himek at the doors. I deny it most unequivccallv. I aff.o:i rat t lin!: at the shatters ; and as we were passing, I saw the hell-pall had been drawn out and bent down, and we merely bent t the other way." The witness swore 'smith-. la that the Sew doors at blot. Mr. O'Connell again denied it. 'Iwo other Police-constables swore distinctly to the (net.

Mr. Redington asked the Polleomen, if either Mr. O'Connell or himself were the least intoxicated.

The Policenwo said they certainly were not.

Mr. Long said, he should not have expected that gentlemen in their station of society mold have been aniusinm themselves in the manner described. lie

must klieve the testimony It mid would th.T.-fore tine the detinularts forty shillings each. Mr. 31. t Ill, fori v shillings and costs." The Esher of the Court said there were no costs.

The defendants smilingly paid their respective fines, and left the °nice.

At the Cuildhall, on Thursday, Francis Si01;es, a whitesmith, was remanded ou a eharg,e of attempting to kill his wife by cutting her throat with a razor.

At the Thames Police•.!Vrol:0, tics Cie S:1110 (lay, xard Crouch was remanded on a charge of en film; and maiming his wire.

At Bow Street, yesterday, John Sweehey, a livid:1:1er, living in Ship Yard, near Tempi,. lisr, was renenidsd on a eharge of kiliing his wife. It appeared that the wife Call..? 11011.e drank, and quarrelled with her husband; who knocked her on the head. She fell upon the floor, and after moaning two or three expimA. It did not appear that she fell from the violence of the 1,1o.a.. ibe unr,mtunate woman be- loaged to the Temperance Soei,-ty, and the 'loupes:ince medal.

Mr. Ifardwicke, the 3 .!rme who sits at the Marylebone Police- office, has taken It bettor c.:1!'••V for preventing reckless driving of omnibuses than the imposition ii_ht nines. On hVed»esday he com- mitted n dri•Nr, who had over:nravd a lior,e mat curt in Oxford Street when racing with aim; her omnibus, to a noalith's imprisonment, with hard labour, in the House of Correction. " It has been decided in the case of c the Queen versus Lumsdaine,' that all stock in trade is still liable to be rated. It seems to follow, and was admitted in argument, that when the farmer's profits from his farm are not rated, lie may as an inhabitant be rated like any other inhabitant on the profits of his stock.

" At all events it is clear that when all profits on stork in trade are omitted, any rate may be quashed on an appeal. " This state of things has naturally attracted the attention of the Legisla- tore, and will be followed, no doubt, by some comprehen-ise measure of legis- lation.

" Sonic of you have done me the honour to ask me for advice as to your in- dividual course of proceeding: to such gentlemen I venture with some diffi- dence to suggest, that it will be highly expedient nut to anticipate the ultimate decision of the Legislature by immediate litigation. " 1 have the honour to be, gentlemen, your faithful servant, " R. JONES."

A -writ of error has been brought against Lord Demnan's decision in the Braintree case, which made the consent of the rated parishioners essential to the validity of a church-rate. The Venerable Hugh Chambers Jones, Archdeacon of Essex, and the Venerable William. Hale Husk, Archdeacon of St. Alban's, have put in bail upon the writ.