il
floors might be illegal, yet as iss- vernment had not seen fit to inter- fere and institute numerow
·prosieu. for such offences, movers of
oroners of pro- perty could not be held responsible for breaches of the law which had
horw
been possed proved they
over
though it was not
were known officially,
and that, therefore, it was not equi- table to make deductions from pents
enhanced by overcrowding.
Again,
it
erv
bu.
лидел half of
the
Government that, where résuurus in form A had been made to the Assessor under section 23 of the Rating Ordinance N. 15 of 1888, clai - mants were stopped from attempting to prove that such retions of rental
were inaccurate and under the mark, Nevertheless,
though
the arbitrators. announced on the 30th December 1894 (see "Daily Press " sifs enclosed under date 31th December, 1894) that, in order
Û..
to arrive at a
550
fair compensation, the
rental should be taken and that in
every future case there should be clear evidence of the rental returns. made to the Assessor for the last 3 years, they,
on some vecasions, clearly
did not base their calculations on the actual resures of renta, made to the
Treasury.
Towards the end
of
the
-sittings, the arbitrators made certain awards in cases where the claims ad_ much in excess of
vanced were
very
the offers made and in which the
ted evere but she
granted
slightly above the Government offers. The question of costs was reversed for argument - during the argument I referred
: the Board to its presiones declaration regarding costs where excessive claims
and
were sent in.
On the 30th December 1894
the
the arbitrators said "we reserve
to
"right