LIBRARY BRADFORD *1853, and the acts of the trustees done in pursuance of the same trusts, were also ratified, confirmed and agreed to by the shareholders of the said society. 0. CHURCH WARDENS OF [92] [ *91, n. ] Under the provisions of the said two deeds, and of the said laws and regulations, the society was managed, at the time of the rate above set forth, and was conducted, as one devoted to the purpose declared by those laws, rules and regulations in that behalf. Other property, taken under the deed of 4th August, 1853, had been let off in different lots to several tenants, who were all respectively rated to the poor in virtue of their occupancy, and which were not included in the premises rated as belonging to the Bradford Library and Literary Society upon which exemption is now claimed. On 5th May, 1857, the society was duly certified to be entitled to the benefits of stat. 6 & 7 Vict. c. 36. The rated premises in the occupation of the society are exclusively used for the objects of a library and literary society; and the funds by which the society is supported are derived from the under-mentioned sources, which are exclusively so applied. 1. From the purchase-money of the shares. 2. From the annual subscription of the members. 3. From the rents paid by the tenants occupying other portions of the society's property as before mentioned. 4. From payments received as for all claims they may have against 30. Every proprietor shall be allowed 33. Any subscriber who may lose a book shall pay the value of it, or replace it by another in as good a condition, paying all the forfeits which may have been incurred prior to the information given; but, if the book lost be one of a set, the person who lost it shall take the remaining volumes, and procure a new set for the library. And if any book or magazine be damaged, or be written in with pencil or otherwise, such a fine shall be paid as the committee may determine. Any proprietorrefusing to submit to these penalties shall be excluded from the benefits of the library. 34. Any subscriber who shall lend a book or magazine out of his own house, or take a book from the library with out its being entered by the librarian, or return it without the librarian's knowledge, shall forfeit five shillings. 38. On the printing of a new catalogue, every subscriber shall purchase a copy; the librarian shall, if requisite, forward a copy to each subscriber, the price of which, if not paid by the end of the year, shall be added to the annual subscription. And on the publication of a supplemental cata logue, a copy shall be supplied to each proprietor gratis. 39. No dividend, gift, division, or bonus in money shall be made unto or among any of the proprietors. LIBRARY r. CHURCHWARDENS OF BRADFORD. fines from such members as become subject thereto under the BRADFORD rules and bye-laws of the institution, and from the forfeited shares of proprietors, who cease to own their shares after nonpayment of arrears of subscriptions within three years of their first being payable. 5. From the sale of spoiled or useless works. 6. From the sale of new catalogues to the subscribers, from whom the payment of the purchase-money is made payable, as provided for by rule 38. 7. From money raised on mortgage of the building. 8. From the quarterly subscriptions of temporary residents in the town admitted to the use of the library in respect of such subscriptions. No dividend, gift, division or bonus in money is allowed, by the laws and regulations of the society, among any of the shareholders. The collection of books consists of the standard authors, and of reviews, magazines, pamphlets and novels, and of such other books as the committee of management determine shall be admitted: and these, together with the other effects of the institution, are the property of the shareholders, whose number is, by the laws and regulations, limited to 600; and this property cannot be sold or disposed of without the consent of not less than two-thirds of the shareholders, present at a general meeting specially convened for that purpose, and confirmed by the like number at the following annual meeting. The books and other literary property of the library are circulated solely among the shareholders and such temporary residents in the town admitted as subscribers by a quarterly payment as aforesaid. The library is open during certain hours of each day for the sole use of the subscribers and those non-residents of the town or neighbourhood to whom free introductions to the use of the library during a period of two months have been given by some of the proprietors. The opinion of the Court of Queen's Bench is therefore requested as to whether the said Bradford Library and Literary Society is entitled to the benefit of stat. 6 & 7 Vict. c. 36: and whether, under the provisions of that Act, the said society is or is not exempt from poor rates in respect of the building so occupied as such library as aforesaid. Maule, for the respondents: The society is liable to be rated. First, it is not "instituted for purposes of science, literature, or the fine arts exclusively," within the meaning of sect. 1 of stat. 6 & 7 Vict. c. 36. Secondly, if it be, it does not fulfil the condition of the proviso [ *93 ] LIBRARY CHURCH BRADFORD. [ *94 ] BRADFORD in that section, "that such society shall be supported wholly or in part by annual voluntary contributions." As to the first point: it was held in Reg. v. Brandt (1) that, to exempt WARDENS OF a society from rateability, its primary object must be science, literature or the fine arts; and that, if those were cultivated only incidentally, and the primary object of the society was not the promotion of those pursuits among others, but the gratification of the members themselves, the society was not within the exemption of the statute. And in Reg. v. Gaskell (2) (in which case PATTESON, J., in giving his judgment, referred to Reg. v. Brandt (1)) the same construction was put upon the word "exclusively." In Reg. v. Overseers of Manchester (3) the ground given by the COURT for holding the society there in question exempt was, that its chief object was, not the gratification or profit of the subscribers, but the promotion of literature generally. Now that is not the primary object of this society. Its purpose is rather that of a circulating library. Novels and magazines are admitted. [ *95] (LORD CAMPBELL, Ch. J.: I think you can hardly contend that a novel is not a literary work.) The It is not a literary work which tends to the promotion of literature within the meaning of the statute. The committee, moreover, are at liberty to introduce books of any description. Further, the rules as to the purchase and transfer of shares, and to the issue of books from the library, and the restrictions upon the introduction of persons not shareholders to the use of the library, show that it is intended by the society that the advantages of the institution shall be confined, if not exclusively, at all events principally, to the shareholders. Legislature cannot have intended to throw an additional burden. upon parishes in respect of an institution of which the benefits are not extended to the inhabitants generally. As to the second point: the society is not supported by voluntary *contributions. The subscriptions are paid by the shareholders in pursuance of rule 7: and the shareholders are bound, by the provisions of the deed of settlement, to obey all the rules. The payment, therefore, cannot be said to be voluntary. (LORD CAMPBELL, Ch. J.: The execution of the deed of settlement is voluntary. That point was decided against you in Churchwardens of St. Anne v. Linnean Society (4).) In Russell Institution v. (1) 83 R. R. 538 (16 Q. B. 462). Vestry of St. Giles (5) the COURT (4) 97 R. R. 764 (3 El. & Bl. 793). 97 R. R. 565 (3 El. & Bl. 416`. LIBRARY SOCIETY ተ. CHURCH expressed its opinion that there might be ground for contending BRADFORD that the word "contribution" meant a gift, made for the benefit of others, and not the voluntary payment of money for value received, or expected to be received, by the party paying WARDENS OF And in Marylebone Vestry v. Zoological Society (1) the COURT adopted that construction. it. Pickering, contrà, was not called upon. LORD CAMPBELL, Ch. J.: I am of opinion that the society is within the exemption from rateability created by stat. 6 & 7 Vict. c. 36. I do not say that there may not be some hardship in making the inhabitants of Bradford pay for the maintenance of an institution from which they, as a body, derive little or no benefit: but the language of the statute is explicit; and there can be no doubt that this is a "society instituted for purposes of " "literature" "exclusively," within sect. 1. It does not resemble any of the institutions which, in the cases cited by Mr. Maule, were held rateable. No doubt London club rooms, or concert subscription rooms, were not intended to be exempt from rateability. But this *society is constituted exclusively for the purposes of literature. It is a public library, containing books of every description, scientific and literary. It has been urged that it possesses publications, such as magazines and novels, which cannot be said to be scientific works, nor even literary works, in the highest sense of the word; and that there. is a possibility of bad books being admitted. Of that, however, there is no reasonable probability, looking at the general character of the institution: and I cannot agree that novels or magazines are not to be considered as literary productions, or the reading of them as not tending to the general advancement of literature. Nor is there anything to show that pecuniary benefit is contemplated by the shareholders: as regards that question, I think the case falls within the principle of Churchwardens of Birmingham v. Shaw (2). The argument that the contributions are not voluntary is answered by the decision in Churchwardens of St. Anne v. Linnean Society (3), where the COURT held that a contribution paid under an obligation voluntarily incurred is a voluntary contribution. I think, therefore, that this society fulfils all the conditions required by the statute to exempt it from liability. (WIGHTMAN, J. was absent.) (1) 97 R. R. 774 (3 El. & Bl. 807). (2) 74 R. R. 523 (10 Q. B. 868). (3) 97 R. R. 764 (3 El. & Bl. 793). BRADFORD. [ *96] ERLE, J.: BRADFORD SOCIETY v. I also am of opinion that the appellants are not rateable. The words of sect. 1 are very wide: and the construction put WARDENS OF upon them by this Court appears to have been uniform and CHURCH BRADFORD. [ *97 ] 1858 Nor. 13. 1858. Nov. 15, [111] consistent. The Legislature, I think, intended to protect from rateability all institutions *of which the object was to improve the public tone of mind; an object far more valuable than any pecuniary saving to the parish which would be attained by rating such institutions. To produce that improvement, the memory, the reason and the imagination must each be cultivated to exclude works of fiction, therefore, from the library of an institution founded for the purpose of such improvement would be to thwart its object. Further, I think that money paid for the purpose of maintaining an institution of this character, though it be paid under an obligation to do so, is, if that obligation be voluntarily incurred, a voluntary contribution. The member paying it receives, no doubt, a benefit in return, in the widest sense of the word, but not such a personal benefit as has been held by this Court to render a society rateable: a benefit, that is to say, derived from something in the nature of an investment of money, for the purpose of receiving either money or money's worth in return, for the private benefit of the person investing. I am therefore of opinion that the appellants are entitled to our judgment. (HILL, J. was absent.) Judgment for the appellants. REG. v. NUISANCES REMOVAL COMMITTEE FOR (1 El. & El. 98 -110; S. C. 28 L. J. M. C. 41; 5 Jur. N. S. 622; 7 W. R. 37.) PIPE v. FULCHER. (1 El. & El. 111-- 117; S. C. 28 L. J. Q. B. 12; 5 Jur. N. S. 146.) In an action of trespass quare clausum fregit, the defendant, in order to prove that there was a public highway across the locus in quo, put in evidence a copy of a map made by order of a former lord of the manor of which the land in question formed part. The map had been used for more than thirty years by the deceased and present stewards of the manor for the purpose of defining the copyholds. The map set out a road across the locus in quo, but did not describe it as a highway; and it was proved that other roads, similarly set out, were only occupation roads: Held, that the map was not admissible as amounting to a declaration by a deceased person as to public right; inasmuch as, first, |