authorities are summed up in the exhaustive judgment of K. B. Div. Kindersley, V.-C., in Hambrook v. Smith (1). 1904. MILLER v. The discovery sought for, therefore, cannot be withheld on the ground that it might tend to forfeiture of the defendants' estate in WATERFORD the lands in question, as contended for by Mr. Battersby. BOYD and KENNY, JJ., concurred. Solicitors for the plaintiff J. & C. O'Connor. HARBOUR R. ST. J. C. IN THE GOODS OF KATE CASSIDY, DECEASED (2). CASSIDY v. FOLEY. Probate-Practice-Intermeddling with assets before administration— Where, shortly after the death of a tenant intestate, the landlord wrongfully entered and seized the goods of the deceased, the Court, on the ex parte application of the sole next-of-kin before administration, granted an injunction to restrain the defendant from interfering with the assets, the plaintiff giving an undertaking as to damages. MOTION. This was an ex parte application on the part of the plaintiff to restrain the defendant from interfering with the goods of the deceased. Kate Cassidy, spinster, died on January 16th, 1904, at 46 Lower Mount-street, Dublin, intestate, leaving the plaintiff Laurence Cassidy, her brother and sole next-of-kin, surviving. The defendant Matthew Foley was the landlord of the house 46 Lower Mount-street, of which the deceased was tenant. On January 19th the plaintiff's solicitor had an inventory taken of the property in the house, with a view to taking out administration for the plaintiff, and the premises were securely fastened and locked up. On January 20th bailiffs took possession of the premises in (1) 17 Sim. at p. 212. (2) Before ANDrews, J. K. B. Div. 1904. Jan. 25. K. B. Div. order to distrain for rent due to the defendant by the deceased, 1904. CASSIDY v. FOLEY. having, it was alleged, broken into the house. They refused to allow the plaintiff access to the house. The assets of the deceased, who carried on a private hospital and lodging-house, consisted principally of the furniture in the said house. On January 23rd a writ was issued by the plaintiff against the defendant, claiming (1) a declaration that the plaintiff was the lawful brother and sole next-of-kin of the deceased, and that the plaintiff, as such, was entitled to a grant of letters of administration; (2) that a receiver might be appointed over the goods of the deceased; (3) an injunction to restrain the defendant from intermeddling with the assets of the deceased. On January 25th this application was made ex parte. Moriarty, for the plaintiff : The defendant has made an illegal entry upon the premises of the deceased and intermeddled with her property. The Court has power to restrain the defendant on the application of the sole nextof-kin, pending the taking out of administration, but a writ is necessary. He referred to In the Goods of Moore (1); Salter v. Salter (2). ANDREWS, J., made the following order : "It is ordered by the Court that the defendant Matthew Foley, his servants and agents, be and they are hereby restrained until further order from removing or interfering with any of the goods, chattels, or personal assets of Kate Cassidy, deceased, and also from interrupting or interfering with free access by the plaintiff and his solicitor, R. Robinson Black, to the dwelling-house of the said deceased, No. 46 Lower Mount-street, in the city of Dublin; this order being without prejudice to such rights, if any, as the defendant has or may have with respect to the said goods, chattels, and personal assets, or any of them, and the plaintiff undertaking to abide such order as the Court may hereafter make in relation to any damages, if any, which shall or may be sustained by the said defendant by reason of this order." Solicitor for the plaintiff: R. Robinson Black. (1) 13 P. D. 36. W. L. (2) [1896] P. 291. THE PEMBROKE URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL THE COMMISSIONER OF VALUATION (1). v. Rating-Exemption-Hereditaments used exclusively for charitable or public purposes-Technical school-Fees paid by the pupils-15 & 16 Vict. c. 63, s. 16-17 & 18 Vict. c. 8, s. 2-62 & 63 Vict. c. 50, s. 30. The Commissioner of Valuation having included the Ball's Bridge Branch of the Pembroke Technical Schools in the revision lists of rateable property in the Pembroke Urban District, the District Council appealed to the Recorder of Dublin, who allowed the appeal, but, at the request of the Commissioner of Valuation, stated a case for the opinion of the King's Bench Division. The Branch School, which provided instruction in such subjects as bookkeeping, business methods, mathematics, mechanics, mensuration, shorthand, typewriting, drawing, cookery, dressmaking, laundry, and needlework, derived its funds from four sources, viz.—(1) a special rate levied by the District Council, (2) the Parliamentary grant at the disposal of the Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction, (3) the Equivalent Grants fund, and (4) a non-compulsory fee of 2s. 6d. per head charged to the pupils, and expended in providing light and fuel for the school and cleaning the school windows. The school was managed by a committee, which was partly composed of members of the Pembroke Urban District Council and partly of other persons interested in technical education, some of whom resided outside the district : Held, that the school was "dedicated to or used for public purposes," so as to be within the exemption of the Valuation Acts, and that the receipt of the fee of 2s. 6d. per head from the pupils did not, under the circumstances, disentitle it to the exemption. Guardians of the Waterford Union v. Barton ([1896] 2 I. R. 538) distinguished. CASE STATED for the opinion of the Court by the Recorder of Dublin, pursuant to the 23 Vict. c. 4, sect. 10. The matter came before the Recorder by way of appeal against the decision of the Commissioner of Valuation refusing to alter the valuation of the Pembroke Technical Schools (Ball's Bridge Branch), whereupon the Recorder held that the schools should be distinguished in the valuation lists as being of a public nature, and used exclusively for (1) Before LORD O'BRIEN, L.C.J., and ANDREWS and GIBSON, JJ. K. B. Div. 1903. Dec. 15, 16. 1904. Feb. 15. K. B. Div. public purposes. The schools were managed by the Technical 1903. Instruction Committee, consisting of thirty-one members, of PEMBROKE whom nine were members of the Pembroke Urban District U. D. C. v. COMMR. OF Council, four were ladies, and the remainder was made up of VALUATION. representative clergy of the different denominations, of representatives of trades and industries, and of others interested in technical instruction, some of whom resided outside the district. The case stated contained the following summary of the evidence and arguments:-Mr. Charles P. Coote Cummins, Secretary of the Technical Instruction Committee, examined for the appellants, deposed "The Ball's Bridge School is a branch of the Pembroke School, Ringsend, which was established under the Technical Instruction Acts, 1889-1891. Pursuant to these Acts the Urban District Council of Pembroke, as local authority, assess a rate of one penny in the pound on the rateable value of the district, in aid of the technical or manual instruction in the schools. The rate last year realized £461, about one-fourth of which was expended on the Ball's Bridge School. The Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction, administering under these Acts the Parliamentary grants in aid of technical instruction, contribute £1000 a year to the school, besides £439 per annum from what is known as the "Equivalent Grants" fund. Both schools are under the same Committee of Technical Instruction. The Ball's Bridge Branch is under the general direction and supervision of the Principal of the Ringsend School, and is carried on, as far as found possible, by the teachers already conducting classes at that school. The Ringsend School is distinguished in the valuation lists as a tenement of a public nature, exempt from assessment, and has never been rated." The Committee of Technical Instruction form a scheme prescribing the subjects taught at each school respectively. The scheme is subject to the approval of the Department of Agriculture and Technical Instruction, and such approval was duly obtained for the existing scheme, viz. the Pembroke Technical Instruction Scheme for the session 1902 to 1903, comprising (1) instruction at the Pembroke Technical School, Ringsend, in the following subjects mathematics, mechanics, magnetism and electricity, machine construction and drawing, naval architecture, drawing 1903. PEMBROKE U. D. C. v. COMMR. OF (freehand, geometrical, and design), carpentry and joinery, steam, K. B. Div. electrical engineering, mechanical engineering, metal working, workshop arithmetic, commercial arithmetic, commercial correspondence, shorthand, typewriting, cookery, laundry work, dressmaking, machine knitting; (2) a branch evening technical school VALUATION. at Ball's Bridge, at which classes were held in book-keeping, business methods, shorthand, typewriting, drawing (including freehand, geometrical, and design), manual instruction, elementary mechanics, mensuration, cookery, dressmaking, laundry work, and needlework. The scheme for 1903-4 for Ringsend comprised mathematics, applied art, mechanical and electrical engineering, manual instruction in wood and metal, carpentry, and naval architecture, shorthand, typewriting, cookery, laundry work, dressmaking, needlework, and machine knitting; and for the following subjects at Ball's Bridge: mathematics, mechanics, mensuration, applied art, manual instruction in wood, book-keeping, shorthand, typewriting, cookery, laundry work, dressmaking, and needlework. The technical and manual instruction given in the schools does not qualify the pupils to practise any branch of handicraft, but is an educational or preparatory training in the principles of certain arts and sciences and their application to specific trades and industries. The session lasts about twenty-six weeks. As a rule a fee of two shillings and sixpence per head per annum is charged, but payment is not compulsory, or at any rate exacted in every case. The amount of fees received at the Ball's Bridge School for the session 1902-1903 was about twenty-eight or thirty pounds, which was expended in providing light and fuel for the school and in cleaning the school windows. The teachers do not participate in the school fees, but are paid exclusively from the public moneys derived from the Parliamentary grants or the rates. The cost of the teaching staff last year was about two hundred and ninety pounds. There is no private profit derived from the schools, and the Committee of Technical Instruction have no beneficial interest whatever. The accounts are audited by the Local Government Board auditor. The pupils are chiefly from the district, but both schools are open to all comers without exception, irrespectively of residence, whether within or without the district, and in Ball's |