CO129-388 - Governor Sir Lugard - 1912 [1-2] — Page 188

183

wif

La spy offer

ok ko m

I'

[QU15 birolov .mai

ylaiscoe #i talog wit

bam o gaitekiemun to ydimudroggo ed♪ beri jet.ro) cabacio see a nu athuoc tintind vody nd of maltommu trop end move. (Buode

helquons et dedi. Bingung of onts

* 2020OLL

Bu (20) .1.1 X-I?" .⠀, I .1001 neid matenfodu .V axarold. Co 6.3 3 otaqd .r makdi a a en İlag mindre mondi era * .** (.0.4)

to dwa maombinar an bolqueno auo117: alok.T .Itstueð yðmuot add han esofdert art to oetti mon datoj horobom eten enak ng slope ace hea took on MSAY AMURİDİİm

hood Jn. I bber mid gd telgu oo wal ang ut zot drag down a b kitqora sip wilt dels Bler ve gå to tweð nát .yag ein wont badopt

Jimmievað 5 to 10toqing 2: not boiquoad pregorg Vilidsæder mu?. opilog odd d beiquoo moɛlotq sais od yiqge con bib cimros ad N -1 dl of sIdrodem say meda o dom de ben eeoma! Inon en #tao IND -* .A.M Tel!! htol .mottage so aid to dooqɛor ni Toog end to tail-

To dang teunde erao Mto solIog out oû* bađa

Deying agnognug skiing # #80 * fdug tot beer al do..

t

old mi ane te vtraqung on sd of harmeb ad tap. na gathfind a doua zi sik net holqueso ni I daft samen est ni mvorü aid to noisjquoco 11* blue .b yot bad ** gaibited on, at #1 ↑ siloug ødd to ditem ~000 e190 epoltto soling aid tot neombie★ na bonu sia qnitlløð v

var #ambhlied mid Perclang wine fler and gbir-

He was then referring to the case above mentioned of Gambier v. Lydfor where certain prison officers occupied official residences beyond the walls of the prison which were held rateable some of whom paid rent for them and othes received less wages in proportion to the value of the premises occupied by them (See also R. v. Bridgehouse 20 L.T. (N.S.) 658).

There is some distinction between the foregoing authorities and the case here as in both of the cases I have cited either the rent was paid by the occupiers or the value of the occupa- -tion taken into account and the wages paid to the occupiers diminish- -ed, whereas in the premises under consideration the rent is paid I understand by the War Department and not by the actual occupiers which it may possibly be argued is a material difference.

The War department who pay the rent are however in fact the tenants and quasi occupiers and I am unable to arrive at the conclusion, having regard to the general principles governing the law, that there is other than a beneficial occupation of those premis- -es which would justify an exemption from rates.

I advise the rates be enforced and the War De-

-partment can resort to its legal remedy if so advised:

I hardly agree with His Excellency's construction of section 33 of the Ordinance. The primary obligation for payment of the rate is placed I think on the occupier.

21st. January, 1912.

(Sd.) W. Rees Davies.

wd gatitovos Alpe