V. On the Manner of assessing Compensation. Under the provisions of the Consolidation Acts, compensation may be assessed-1. By justices of the peace; 2. By arbitrators; 3. By surveyors; 4. By a jury. sessed by two jus tices. And, first, as to the compensation assessed by justices of Compensation asthe peace. The 8 Vict. c. 18, s. 22, post, App., 122, enacts, that, if no agreement be come to between the company and the owners of, or parties enabled to sell and convey or release any lands taken or required for, or injuriously affected by the execution of the undertaking, or any interest in such lands as to the value of such lands, or of any interest therein, or as to the compensation to be made in respect thereof(i), and if, in any such case, the compensation claimed shall not exceed 501., the same shall be settled by two justices (k). So, in all cases where the company injure, or take temporary possession of any lands for any purposes connected with the railway, and the sum in dispute does not exceed 50%., the compensation is in like manner to be settled by two justices (1). And if the company enter upon any private road, and no agreement be made as to the amount of compensation which the owners and other persons interested in the road are to receive, the difference must be settled by two justices. (8 Vict. c. 20, s. 30, post, App. 166). So, where lands required to be taken by the company are in the possession of tenants for a year, or from year to year, and the tenants are required to deliver up the lands before (1) The preliminary steps to be taken have been already considered, ante, 145. (k) See also 8 Vict. c. 18, s. 68, post, Appendix, 130. (1) See 8 Vict. c. 20, s. 6, post, Appendix, 159; Ibid., s. 44, post, Appendix, 171, taken in connection with 8 Vict. c. 18, s. 22, supra. Report and Evidence on Compensation. only had one jury case hitherto, and the jury gave less than the sum offered. Has your valuer given you the value of the land itself first, not taking into consideration the severance, but merely the value of the land? He gives a statement of what he has ascertained to be the rent, and upon that he first assumes a certain number of years' purchase. What is the number of years' purchase upon that?—I have stated that the cases of which I was cognizant on the Grand Junction railway, I could not reduce them respectively into years' purchase, taken generally. That was not the average, I suppose?—Yes, including severance. Without including severance ?-Our surveyor always begins with thirty years' purchase or thirty-five years' purchase, and all the rest is damage. They put on a sum for what they call compulsory sale; five years' purchase, frequently. Supposing there was a strip like that which is occupied by that which belongs to the railway company, running through the lands of these various proprietors, have you any doubt they would readily pay quite as large a number of years' purchase in order to secure that line as they have obtained from you?-Not always; but I think they would very often, or generally. If I had an estate I would not willingly have a piece taken out of the middle of it if I could prevent it. You stated, as I understand you, that it was about thirty-three years' purchase that they got for the value of the land?—Yes; that is the beginning of the calculation, to ascertain what the landowner is ultimately to be paid. As to the value of the land itself, without severance?—Yes, it would not matter how you work out the process. You would decompose the demand of the landed proprietor, and see how much was the rental value, and how much you could afford to pay for severance?-If it were an unreasonable sum that he asked in gross, we should object, but not otherwise. Do you think landowners could be put in a better position than they are by the bill that passed this session-the Land Clauses Consolidating Bill?-I do not; because I think, with the option of a special jury on the one hand, or arbitration on the other, they really have, as it appears to me, every sort of protection you can conceive; and, generally speaking, I think that the reasonable prejudice of the jury is in favour of the landowners. V. On the Manner of assessing Compensation. Under the provisions of the Consolidation Acts, compensation may be assessed-1. By justices of the peace; 2. By arbitrators; 3. By surveyors; 4. By a jury. sessed by two jus tices. And, first, as to the compensation assessed by justices of Compensation as the peace. The 8 Vict. c. 18, s. 22, post, App., 122, enacts, that, if no agreement be come to between the company and the owners of, or parties enabled to sell and convey or release any lands taken or required for, or injuriously affected by the execution of the undertaking, or any interest in such lands as to the value of such lands, or of any interest therein, or as to the compensation to be made in respect thereof(¿), and if, in any such case, the compensation claimed shall not exceed 50l., the same shall be settled by two justices (k). So, in all cases where the company injure, or take temporary possession of any lands for any purposes connected with the railway, and the sum in dispute does not exceed 50%., the compensation is in like manner to be settled by two justices (1). And if the company enter upon any private road, and no agreement be made as to the amount of compensation which the owners and other persons interested in the road are to receive, the difference must be settled by two justices. (8 Vict. c. 20, s. 30, post, App. 166). So, where lands required to be taken by the company are in the possession of tenants for a year, or from year to year, and the tenants are required to deliver up the lands before (i) The preliminary steps to be taken have been already considered, ante, 145. (k) See also 8 Vict. c. 18, s. 68, post, Appendix, 130. (1) See 8 Vict. c. 20, s. 6, post, Appendix, 159; Ibid., s. 44, post, Appendix, 171, taken in consection with 8 Vict. c. 18, s. 22, supra Compensation assessed by Two Justices. the expiration of their term, two justices are authorised to assess the amount of compensation. (8 Vict. c. 18, s. 121, post, App., 148). In both the last-mentioned cases, the jurisdiction of the justices seems to attach, although the amount of compensation in dispute may exceed 50%. Two justices are also empowered to apportion the amount of rents payable in respect of copyhold lands, when only part of the lands are required to be taken for the purposes of the Railway Act, (8 Vict. c. 18, s. 98, post, App. 141). And they may, under the like circumstances, apportion the amount of rent-charges, &c. (Id., s. 116, post, App. 146). So, if lands are comprised in a lease for years unexpired, and a part only of such lands are required by the company, the rent of the remaining portion of the land is to be apportioned by agreement, or by two justices; and, after such apportionment, the lessee is liable only for the rent apportioned. (Id., s. 119, post, App. 147). The following is the mode of proceeding directed in all cases of disputed compensation authorised to be settled by two justices. Any justice, upon the application of either party, may summon the other to appear before two justices, at a time and place to be named in the summons; and, upon the appearance of the parties, or, in the absence of any of them, upon proof of due service of the summons, the justices may hear and determine the question in dispute, and for that purpose may examine the parties, or any of them, and their witnesses, upon oath; and the costs of every such inquiry are in the discretion of the justices, and they may settle the amount thereof (m). In order to give the justices jurisdiction, they must be acting justices for the county or city, &c., where the mat (m) 8 Vict. c. 18, s. 24, post, Appendix, 123. See also 8 Vict. c. 20, s. 142, post, Appendix, 193. ter requiring their cognisance arises, and not be interested in the matter; and, if the question arises in respect of lands situate not wholly in any one county or city, justices for the county or city where any part of the lands are situate may act; and in all cases the two justices must be assembled and acting together. (8 Vict. c. 18, s. 3, post, App. 118, (n)). The justices, in estimating the purchase-money or compensation, are required to regard the damage which may be sustained by reason of the severing of the lands taken, from other lands of the owner. (Id., s. 63, post, App. 130). Two justices are also authorised to determine differences as to the kind or number of accommodation works, and the repairing thereof (0), and as to deviations (p); also to hear objections to the taking of lands (q): but their powers in these and similar matters, do not properly belong to the subject-matter now under consideration. Compensation assessed by Two Justices. sessed by arbitra tion. 1. The provisions inserted in the Consolidation Acts, Compensation aswhereby parties are enabled to refer their claims for compensation to arbitration, are altogether new. Upon this subject, the stat. 8 Vict. c. 18, enacts, that, if the compensation claimed or offered, in respect of lands required to be taken for the railway, or injuriously affected thereby, exceeds 50l., the party claiming the compensation shall have the option of submitting the claim to arbitrators, or to a jury; and if the party claiming the compensation desires to have the amount settled by arbitration, he must, before the company have (n) See also 8 Vict. c. 20, s. 3, pendix, 178. post, Appendix, 158. (0) See 8 Vict. c. 20, s. 62, post, Appendix, 175; Id., s. 69, post, Ap (p) Id., s. 11, post, Appendix, 160. (q) 8 Vict. c. 20, s. 36, post, Appendix, 168. |