being properly interpreted as including the building. The assessment must
prima facie be taken as being correct in amount. [Can. Pac. Ry. Co. v.
Maeleod School District (1901 . -5 Terr. L.R. 187, followed.]
Can. Northern Ry. Co. v. Omemee School District, 6 Terr. L.R. 2KL
C.P.R. LANDS EXEMPTION FROM TAXATION SALE PROPER ArrHORrrr TO
Lands vested in the Canadian Pacific Ry. Co. subject to a provision
that the same should, ^imtil they are sold or occupied, be free from taxa-
tion for 20 years," were by the company agreed to be sold and conveyed
to the appellants as trustees, who were to sell them, accounting for an
interest in the proceeds to the company. At the date of the assessment
of the lands, the consideration owine by the trustees to the company had
been paid: Held, that the lands had ceased to be exempt from taxation.
Held, also, Wetmore and McGuire. JJ., dissenting, that, in view of the
Ordinances relating to municipalities and to schools, the lands being situ-
ated partly within and partly without the municipality, the school district
was authorized to assess and need not make a demand upon the munici-
pality to do so.
Angus T. School Trustees of Calgary. 1 Terr. KR. 111.
EXEMPTIONS FROM TAXATION LAND SUBSIDIES OF THE CANADIAN PACIFIC
RAILWAT EXTENSION OF BOUNDARIES OF MANITOBA.
The land subsidy of the Canadian Pacific Ry. Co. authorized by 44 Viet,
f. 1 (D), is not a grant in praesenti and. consequently, the period of
twenty years of exemption from taxation of such lands provided by s. 16
of the contract for the construction of the Canadian Pacific Ry. begins
from the date of the actual issue of letters patent of grant from the Crown,
from time to time, after they have been earned, selected, surveyed, allotted
and accepted by the Canadian Pacific Ry. Co. The exemption was from
taxation ''"by the Dominion, or any Province hereafter to be established or
any municipal corporation therein": Held, that when, in 1S31. a portion
of the Xorth-West Territories in which this exemption attached was added
to Manitoba, the latter was a Province "thereafter established" and such
added territory continued to be subject to the said exemption from taxa-
tion. The limitations in respect of legislation affecting the territory so
added to Manitoba, by virtue of the Dominion Act, 44 Viet. c. 14, upon the
terms and conditions assented to by the Manitoban Acts. 44 Viet. (3rd
Sess.J, cc. 1, 6. are constitutional limitations of the powers of the Leg-
islature of Manitoba in respect of such added territory and embrace the
previous legislation of the Parliament of Canada relating to the Canadian
Pacific Ry. and the land subsidy in aid of its construction. Taxation of
any kind attempted to be laid upon any part of such land subsidy by the
Xorth-West Council, the Xorth-West Legislative Assembly, or any mu-
nicipal or school corporation therein is Dominion taxation within the
Can. Rv. L. Dig. 3.
34 ASSESSMENT AND TAXATION.
meaning of the sixteenth clause of the Canadian Pacific Ry. contract pro-
viding for exemption from taxation. Per Taschereau, C.J.: The case
of the Springdale School District, as the whole cause of action arose in
the North-West Territories, the Court of King's Bench for Manitoba had
no jurisdiction to entertain the action or to render the judgment appealed
from in that case and sucli want of jurisdiction could not be waived.
Appeals by North Cypress and Argyle dismissed; appeal by the C.P.R.
allowed; judgment of the King's Bench of Manitoba, 14 Man. L.R. 382,
North Cypress v. Can. Pac. Ry. Co., 35 Can. S.C.R. 550.
[Referred to in Toronto v. Grand Trunk Ry. Co., 37 Can. S.C.R. 256.]
"ROLLING STOCK, PLANT, AND APPLIANCES" CONSTRUCTION OF STATUTE
The Act 2 Edw. VII. c. 31, s. 1, amending s. 18 of the Assessment Act,
R.S.O. 1897, c. 224, provides by subs. 3 for the assessment as "land" of
"the rails, ties, poles, wires, gas and other pipes, mains, conduits, sub-
structures and superstructures" of companies of the kind referred to in
the section, "upon the streets, roads, highways, lanes and other public
places of the municipality," and by subs. 4, that "save as aforesaid,
rolling stock, plant and appliances" of such companies, "shall not be 'land'
within the meaning of the Assessment Act, and shall not be assessable":
Held, that upon the proper construction, this means that the rolling
stock, rolling plant, and rolling appliances of such companies, which is
found and used on the streets, etc., shall not by reason merely of the wide
words "substructures and superstructures" in subs. 3, be liable to assess-
ment as "land" save as mentioned in subs. 3. There is no intention to
exempt the companies in question from assessment in respect of such of
their plant and appliances, as is otherwise "land" within subs. 9 of s. 2
of the Assessment Act, but is not on the street, etc. Held, also, that the
lamps, hangers and transformers of an electric light company, though
easily transferable from one place to another, were "superstructures" upon
the street within the meaning of subs. 3.
Re Assessment Appeals, Toronto Ry. Co. et al., 6 O.L.R. 187 (C.A.).
VALUATION OF PROPERTY ELECTRIC COMPANIES RAILS, POLES AND WIRES
WARDS FRANCHISE GOING CONCERN INTEGRAL PART OF WHOLE.
The Act 1 Edw. VII. c. 29, s. 2 (Ont.) has made no difference in the
mode of valuing for assessment purposes the rails, poles, wires and other
plant of electric companies erected or placed upon the highways of munici-
palities, which was held to be proper by the decision in Re Bell Telephone
Co. Assessment (1898), 25 A.R. (Ont.) 351.
Re Toronto Elec. Light Co. Assessment, 3 O.L.R. 620 (C.A.).
[Distinguished in International Bridge Co., 12 O.L.R. 314.]
EXEMPTIONS RAILWAY BY-LAW OF MUNICIPALITY COMMUTATION
A city council in 1897 passed a by-law providing that a certain annual
sum should be accepted from a railway company for 15 years "by way
of commutation and in lieu of all and every municipal rate or rates and
assessment," in respect of certain lands owned by the railway company.
This by-law was passed under the authority of a special Act respecting the
railway company, 48 Viet. c. 65 (0.), s. 3 of which provided that it should
be lawful for the corporation of any municipality through which any line
of the railway had been constructed to exempt the company and its prop-
erty within such municipality, in whole or in part, from municipal as-
ASSESSMENT AND TAXATION. 35
sessment or taxation, or to agree to a certain sum per annum or otherwise
in gross or by war of commutation or composition for payment of all
municipal rates. By a subsequent general enactment, 55 Viet. c. 60. s. 4
(Q.), it was declared that no municipal by-law thereafter passed for ex-
empting any portion of the rateable property of a municipality from taxa-
tion, in whole or in part, should be held or construed to exempt snrh prop-
erty from school rates. The general Act did not by express words repeal
toe special Act: Held, that it did not effect a repeal by necessary impli-
cation generalia specialibus non derogant: Held. also, that there was
nothing to shew that the sum which the railway company were to pay was
not more than the school taxes which they would be liable to pay if tbvy
were not entitled to any exemption.
Way T. St. Thomas. 12 OJUR. 23S.
SPECIAL ATE Boxrs TO RATI.WAT.
By a by-law passed under the provisions of ss. 386, 694. 696 of the Mu-
nicipal Act, R.S.O. 1897, c. 223, a township corporation was authorized
to raise a sum by issuing debentures, to be met by special rate, to provide
a bonus in aid of a railway company, payable upon its compliance with
certain conditions, no time for compliance being limited. The debentures
were duly executed, but remained unissued in the possession and under the
control of the municipality: Held, that until the sale or negotiation of
the debentures, there was no debt on the part of the township, and that
the special rate was not leviable, though the time fixed for payment of
some of the debentures had passed. Judgment of Meredith, J_ 32 O.K.
Bogart T. King. 1 O.L.K. 496 (C-A-).
PASTCKE LAND VALUATION AKT. 942A, M.C.
The C.P. By. Co. had acquired more than 200 arpents of land for rail-
way purposes, but. changing its intention, let it as a farm by an annual
lease, with the condition that it should only be used for pasturage, for
which it was entirely unsuited. The company had also prepared a plan
for dividing the land into lots, and had taken steps to have it adopted
by the corporation and the Government, and a cadastre ma>le. It even
gave notice of it* sale in lots. For assessment purposes the land had been
appraised at its real value, and the company petitioned the corporation
to reduce the valuation. This having been refused, the company appealed
to the Circuit Court, claiming that the land should be valued according
to its value for agricultural purposes only: Held, that the property
should be estimated at its real value, and not according to any value it
might possess for agricultural purposes alone.
Can. Pac. By. Co. v. Verdun, 20 Que. S.C. 194 (Cir. Ct-l.
COMPANY PROVINCIAL TAX MUNICIPAL BUSINESS TAX.
S. 3 of the Corporations Taxation Act provides that every express com-
pany doing an express business shall pay a tax to the province; and s,
18 provides that, where a company pay the tax. no similar tax shall be
imposed or collected by any municipality in the province: Held, that
a business tax imposed by a city corporation in respect of the premises
occupied by an express company in the city, under the Assessment Act.
63 & 64 Viet. e. 35, s. 2, was a "similar tax" to that imposed by the prov-
ince, which had been paid by the express company, and was, therefore, il-
legal and void. The Assessment Act and the Corporations Taxation Act
36 ASSESSMENT AXD TAXATION.
having been assented to on the same day, it was intended that s. 18 of the
later Act should govern and exclude the tax imposable under the earlier.
Dominion Express Co. v. Brandon, 15 W.L.R. 26 (Man.).
BTSINESS TAX EXPRESS COMPANY.
Dominion Express Co. v. Town of Niagara, 15 O.L.R. 78.
STREET RAILWAY SPECIAL PRIVILEGES ASSESSMENT ROLL DESCRIPTION
A municipal corporation which, under authority of a special Act, grants
to a street railway company, in consideration of the annual payment of
a percentage of its profits, the privilege of establishing its right of way,
and erecting poles and other necessary constructions on the streets and
elsewhere in the municipality, is not thereby deprived of its power to tax
such constructions, etc., under the general powers given to it by its charter.
A waiver in writing by a ratepayer of the prescription against collecting
his taxes is valid and prevents the time from running.
Montreal v. Montreal Street Ry. Co., 35 Que. S.C. 321 (Ct. Rev.).
RAILWAY ASSESSMENT ON BUILDINGS "LANDS" VALUATION OF BUILD-
Re Can. Northern Rv. Co. and Omemee School District, 4 W.L.R. 547
PROPERTY PURCHASED BY RAILWAY COMPANY FOR RIGHT OF WAY, BUT NOT
usEir AS SUCH ASSESSMENT AS OF LANDS OF PRIVATE OWNERS.
Re Edmonton and Can. Pac. Ry. Co., 6 W.L.R. 786 (Alta.).
SCHOOL TAXES EXEMPTION CANADIAN PACIFIC RY. Co. LANDS IN 24-
MILE BELT GRANTED TO COMPANY.
Re Spruce Vale School District, No. 209, and Can. Pac. Ry. Co., 6 W.L.R.
LEASE FROM MUNICIPAL CORPORATION USUAL COVENANTS TAXES.
Re Can. Pac. Ry. Co. and Toronto, 5 O.L.R. 71 (C.A.).
EXEMPTION FROM TAXATION BRANCH LINES "SUPERSTRUCTURE" VALUE
OF ROUNDHOUSES, FREIGHT SHEDS, AND OTHER BUILDINGS.
Clause 16 (relating to exemption from taxation) of the agreement be-
tween the Canadian Pacific Ry. Co. and the Government of Canada, as
embodied in the Act, 44 Viet. (1881), c. 1, provides that "The Canadian
Pacific Railway Company, and all stations and station grounds, workshops,
buildings, yards, and other property, rolling stock, and appurtenances re-
quired and used for the construction and working thereof, and the capital
stock of the company, shall be forever free from taxation by the Domin-
ion, or by any Province hereafter to be established, or by any municipal
corporation therein ; and the lands of the company in the Korth-West Ter-
ritories, until they are either sold or occupied, shall also be free from such
taxation for 20 years after the grant thereof from the Crown." Clause 14
of the same agreement also provides that "the company shall have the
right, from time to time, to lay out, construct, equip, maintain, and work,
branch lines of railway from any point or points along their main line of
railway to any point or points within the territory of the Dominion":
Held, that clause 16 of the agreement is not applicable to the Crow's Nest
Pass Ry., but is applicable only to the main line of the Canadian Pacific
Ry. Co. and to such branches thereof as the company was authorized by
clause 14 of the agreement to construct from points on the main line, and
ASSESSMENT AND TAXATION. 37
does not extend to other distinct fines of railway which the company may
have been subsequently authorized to construct. Under the Ordinance
respecting the assessment of Railways, Con. Ord. 1898, e. 71, s. 3. the
n Okammm, station, or office buildings, section houses, employee's dwell-
ings, freight sheds, and other buildings of like nature belonging to a rail-
way company and situated upon it. are not included in the term "super-
structure, 7 ' but may be assessed separately as personal property under
the Municipal Ordinance. Such buildings should not be valued as* part of
the railway as a going concern, and as having a special value as such, hat
merely at what they are worth separate and distinct from other portions of
the railway. When only two and a half stalls of a roundhouse were sit-
uated within the municipality, and the roundhouse was shewn to be worth
$900 a stall, the assessment was fixed at $2^50.
Be Can. Pae. By. Co. and Macleod. 2 Can. Ry. Cas. 203, 5 Terr. L.R. 192.
[Followed in Grand Trunk Pacific Ry. Co. "v. City of Calgary. 21 Can.
Ry. Cas. 200, 55 Can. S.C.R. 104. 36 D.LJL 538.]
TAIATX BT SCHOOC DISTBICT UxPATtxTED LA.XD SET APAKT EXEMPTION
Crown lands which have been set apart for the land grant of the C.P.F..
COL, and earned by that company as part of its land grant under the sched-
ule to 44 Viet. (isgll, c. 1. -An Act respecting the Canadian Pacific Rail-
way." but which have never been sold or occupied by the company, are ex-
empt from taxation by School Districts in the Territories by virtue of s. 16
of the Schedule. Per Richardson, J.: On the ground that a School Dis-
trict is a "municipal corporation. 7 ' Per Wetmore. J.: On the ground
that the Territorial Legislative Assembly and consequently a Territorial
School District acts merely by authority delegated ly the Dominion
Parliament, and. therefore, that taxation by a Territorial School District
is taxation "by the Dominion. 7 * Per McOuire, J.: On the ground that the
Territorial School Ordinance exempts from taxation binds held by Her
Majesty, and does not authorize the taxation of any interest therein, and
that as to the lands in question the company is at best in the position of
purchasers who had paid their purchase money, but had not yet actually
received a conveyance, and, until conveyed, the hinds are held by Her Ma-
jesty. Semble, per Wetmore. J.: Territorial School Districts are not
"municipal corporation*." Semble. per MeGuire. J.: Taxation by a
School District is not taxation "by the Dominion." which latter means tax-
ation direct by the Dominion. A School District is not a "^municipal cor-
poration." The effect of the Act was not to make ipso facto a grant to the
company, nor to operate as a grant to the company as each 20 miles of rail-
way was completed, but to entitle the company as each 20 miles was com-
pleted to ask for and receive a grant of the land subsidy applicable thereto.
Construction of statutes discussed.
Balgonie Protestant Public School District v. Can. Pac. Ry. Co.. 2 Can.
Ry. Cas. 214, 5 Terr. LJL 123.
[Referred to in Xorth Cypress v. Can. Pac. Ry. Co^ 14 Man. L.R. 406, 5
Terr. LR. 573.]
EXEMPTION: STTPEBSTBCCTCKES BUDLDINGS.
An agreement between a city and a railway company which also con-
ducted an electric lighting plant exempting from certain taxes "the track*,
right of way, wires, rolling stock, and all superstructures and substrac-
tures and all the properties of the railway company* dot* mat entitle the
38 ASSESSMENT \ND TAXATION".
company to an exemption from taxes on its buildings, machinery, poles
and wires used in connection with its lighting plant.
Re Sandwich, Windsor & Amherstburg Ry. Co. and Windsor, 3 D.L.R.
43, 3 O.W.N. 575.
EXEMPTIONS BUSINESS TAXES.
Under the Assessment Act, 4 Edw. VII. ( Out. ) , 1904, c. 23, s. 226, pro-
viding that the Act shall not affect the terms of any agreement made witli
a municipality, a railway company is exempt from the ordinary business
tax under an agreement with the city exempting its property from all
taxes other than school rates.
Re Sandwich, Windsor & Amherstburg Ry. Co. and Windsor, 3 D.L.R.
43, 3 O.W.N. 575.
ASSESSMENT AND APPORTIONMENT OF RAILWAY PROPERTY.
The assessment of the real property of a steam railway company does
not become fixed for the next following four years, under s. 45 of the On-
tario Assessment Act, 1904, upon the mere formal recei'pt by the clerk of
the municipality of the company's annual statement of such property, and
the transmission to the company of a notice of the amount of the assess-
ment thereof, such amount being the same as the amount of the previous
year; the only assessment which remains so fixed is an actual assessment
after inspection and valuation.
Re Steelton and Can. Pac. Ry. Co., 3 D.L.R. 402, 3 O.W.N. 1199.
STREET RAILWAY TAXES.
A city by-law relating to the taxation of an electric street railway com-
pany, which provided that the company should keep and maintain within
the city limits all of its engines, machinery, power houses and shops, will
not prevent the company importing, for the operation of its plant, electric-
ity generated at a point beyond the city limits.
Winnipeg Elec. Ry. Co. v. Winnipeg, *4 D.L.R. 11(5,  A.C. 355.
EXEMPTIONS RAILWAY PROPERTY.
The exemption privilege given to railways under s. 14, e. 40, R.S.S. 1909,
providing that the railway and the land comprised in the right-of-way,
station grounds, yards and terminals, and all buildings, structures and
personal property used for the purposes of the operation of a railway shall
be free and exempt from taxation, does not apply to arrears of taxes which
were a charge on the land in question before if was purchased by the rail-
way company, nor to assessments for local improvements made on the land.
The exemption privilege given by s. 14, c. 40, R.S.S. 1909, to railway com-
panies may be claimed by a railway company on land having a maximum
area of one mile in length by 500 feet in width, which amount of land they
are allowed to expropriate under s. 177 of the Railway Act 1906, for sta-
tions, depots, yards and other structures for the accommodation of traffic.
even though the land in question is not actually used or immediately
needed for railway purposes, and whether the land had been obtained by
expropriation proceedings or by voluntary sale or otherwise; and to exempt
a further area the railway must shew that the additional land is neces-
sary for the purposes set out in s. 177 of the Railway Act. A railway
company is not entitled, under the statute R.S.S. 1909, c. 40, to an exemp-
tion from taxation on land in excess of the area they are allowed to ex-
propriate under subs, (a) of s. 177 of the Railway Act giving them the
right to take for right of way land 100 feet in width, and under subs, (b)
giving them the right to take for stations, yards and other structures for
ASSESSMENT AXD TAXATION. 3
of traffic aa area one mile in leagth by 500 feet is breadth,
iadudiag tie width of the right-of-way. nates,. they shew ***** the addi
tioaal am is necessary for the purpose. set oat in Whs. (bjt : h ueeca-
shy mill be presumed if the additional area was obtained inr peimiuaiua of
the Board, as provided ia s. 178 of the Act. but aot otherwise.
Prince Albert T. Caa. Northern Ry. Co. (S*sk.. 10 DJLJB. 121 15 Caa.
Exutrnox rxTH_ ULVDS -sot~ Eimruox FOB 20 TEAK? AFTEX ^
Certaia bads graated to a railway oampaey were exempted from tax-
atioa -until they are either - old or oceapied. -for 30 year?' after the gnat
thereof from the Ciwra": Held. (II That the wwd ^sohT" iarohvd a eo
pleted safe; aad P that the proper eaaia* of the expre^ioa ~graat froai
the Crowa" mas a coanyaace by ktter? pateat wader the Gnat SeaL aad.
therefore, that ia the ease of laads aot sold or occupied the period of exeaip-
tioa fromt taxatioa raa froai the date of the letters patmt toBTeyiag the
bads to the railway eoaipaay.
The IGaister of Publie Works of the Proriace of Alberta T. Caa. Fae.
Ey. Co.; The Kiag r. Caa. Pae. Ry. C*. (1911)1, 2* Tiaws LJS. 251 (P-C-).
By 3f Viet. e.37,s.. aawadia* the Soprene aad Exeheqoer Coarts Act,
aa appeal lie* ia eertaia ea$s to the Sopreaw Court of Caaada froai
courts. ~of last report created wader promiatial kgidatioa to adjodkate
the ac^emaaeat of property for prariaeial or aiaakipal par-
mhere the persoa or pereoas pnesidias over snea Coart is or
are appoiated by pronarial or atnaicipal authority.^ By the Ontario Act.
i Vkt. c. 4*. as laaraded by 5$ Met. e. 47. aa appeal lie froai rulia*<
of Mnakipal Courts of rerisioa ia autters of aaeessaaeBt to the Coaaty
Coart Judges of the Coaaty Coart district mhere the property has beea
wf mm i OB aa appeal froai the deosioa of the Coaaty Coart Judges aa-
der tike Oatario statates: Held. King. J_ di^ntiBg, that if the Coaaty
Court Judges eoastitmed a -Coart of Last Resort" mitaia the awaaiag of
-52 Tirt. e. 31. & 2. the persoas presidiag over such eoart mere aot ap-
by prorianal or atnaieipal authority, aad the appeal mas aot ail-
by the said Art: Held, per Gmyaae. J, that as ao biadiag effect
i> givea to the derisioB of the County Court Judges, under the Ontario
Acts cited, the Court appealed froai was not a -Court of Last Resort 7 * with-
ia the awaaing of 52 Yict. e. 37. & 2. Quaere. Is the deeiskni of the
Coaaty Court Judges a -fiaal judgment-" withia the awaaiag of 52 Virt.
e. 37,k. 2?
Toroato v. Toronto Ry. Co_ 27 Caa. S.C.R. (MO.
[Leave to appeal to Privy Council refused.]
ACTIOX FOB MTTSlCIrJU. AX SCHOOL TAXEs JCaBSOiCTfOS
la a suit ia the Superior Court, elaiaung amaiicipal taxes to aa aatoual
exnediag $100, accoaipaaied with a denmaad for school taxes, a declinatory
exception asking the dismissal of that portion of the ill nil which i> for
school taxes, on the ground that the Circuit Court has exclusive jurisdic-
tioa, mill he maintained, notwithstanding Art. 170 C.CP-. it being impossi-
ble ia such a caw to transmit the whole record to the Circuit Court.
DudsmeD T. Quebec Ceatral Ry. Co., 19 Qne. S.C. U (White. J-).
40 ASSESSMENT AND TAXATION.
TAX SALE INJUNCTION APPEAL TO COURT OF REVISION ESTOPPEL.
An injunction may be granted to restrain a tax sale. It is not necessary
that exemption from taxation should be raised before the Court of Revi-
sion, and a party, wrongfully assessed by reason of exemption, is not es-
topped by appealing to the Court of Revision.
Can. Pac. Ry. Co. v. Calgary, 1 Terr. L.R. 67.
INJUNCTION LEVY OF ILLEGAL TAX BY MUNICIPALITY.
A party who brings an action against a municipality for a declaration
that he is not liable for a tax imposed upon him, and for an injunction to
restrain the attempted levy of such tax, is not entitled to an interim in-
junction to restrain such levy, as he has another adequate remedy, namely,
to pay the tax under protest and sue to recover it back.
Dominion Express Co. v. Brandon, 19 Man. L.R. 257, 20 Man. L.R. 304.
APPEAL GENERAL PLAN OF ASSESSMENT LAND AND BUILDINGS.
Under ordinary circumstances it is incumbent upon an appellant who
complains that he is assessed too high to shew that the property is not
worth the amount for which he is assessed, but where, although this is
not shewn, it appears that under the general scheme of assessment, lands of
a particular description are assessed generally at a certain fixed sum per
acre, and that the appellants' lands of that description, which are of no
greater value either by reason of their situation or otherwise, are assessed