404 DISQUALIFICATION BY INTEEEST IN VALUER. 



feigned issue, under the Tithe Commutation Act, 6 & 7 Will IV. c. 71, 

 s. 46 {S(Oidi/s V. Maijor, Ar., of Bevrrhi/). Error does not lie on a judg- 

 ment of a superior court upon a feigned issue brought under such 

 section (Thorpe v. Ploirdcn). Since 5 & 6 Will. IV. c. 74, if any tithe, 

 oblation, or composition not excepted in 7 & 8 Will. III. c. G, or exceed- 

 ing £10 yearly value, due from any one person, is in arrear, it must be 

 proceeded for before two justices. And if the title of the claimant, or 

 liability of the party sought to be charged is undisputed, two years' 

 arrears may be there recovered ; whereas, if such title or liability is 

 denied viva voce before the justices, or at any time in wi'iting, the 

 claimant may proceed by suit in equity, and recover six years' arrears 

 {Robinson, clerk, v. Purdajj). 



Expenses incurred by the emploijmejit of mi attorney by the landoivners 

 of a parish to conduct the proceedings toivards a commutation of the tithes 

 of the parish, under 6 & 7 Will. IV. c. 71, are not "expenses of or in- 

 cident to making the apportionment" within the 75th section of that 

 act, and the attorney may therefore recover the amount of his bill for 

 such services in an action against the landowners who were parties to 

 employing him {Ilinchcliffe v. Armistead, clerk). 



Disqualification by interest in a valuer was the subject of The Lan- 

 caster and Carlisle Railway Company v. Heaton. Here, under a local 

 tithe commutation act (5 Geo. IV. c. 28), on application made to the 

 quarter sessions, that court was to appoint " one or more fit and proper 

 ])ersons not interested in the said tithes or dues" to value the lands in 

 a certain township, with a view to the apportionment between different 

 landowners of the corn rent-charge substituted in lieu of the vicarial 

 titlies ; and the sessions ap]5ointed as valuer a shareholder in a railway 

 which passed through the township in question. No steps were taken 

 to set aside the order of sessions ; but afterwards the collection of the 

 rent-charge, as assessed on the valuation, was resisted. The Court of 

 Queen's Bench held, in an action of replevin, that even if the valuer ap- 

 pointed was an interested person within the meaning of the local act, 

 the sessions had jurisdiction to make the appointment, and that, at all 

 events, the validity of that order could not be questioned in that way ; 

 but semble, that he was not disqualified by interest. 



And where the person appointed to act as tithe valuer was required 

 before acting to take and subscribe an oath in the words following : — 

 " I, A. B., do sicear faithfully to execute the powers, dr., so help me God," 

 it was held by the Court of Queen's Bench that a person who had sub- 

 scribed an oath in which the words " So help me God" were admitted, 

 had substantially complied with the statute (ib.). 



It was decided by the Court of Queen's Bench, in Rey. v. GoodcMld 



