This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1898 edition. Excerpt: ...being rated in the hands of the Ranger, affords no ground for exempting them. In the present Term, the judgment of the Comm' was delivered by Dsnmxn, Ch. J., who, after stating the case, proceeded as follows: With respect to the pipes laid in the Park, it was admitted by the learned counsel for the appellants, that, unless he could distinguish this case from those in which it was decided that pipes of similar companies laid in the streets were rateable, the rate in the present instance, in that respect, must be confirmed. The ground of distinction was, that here another person was rated for the surface of the land under which the pipes were placed. But we are clearly of opinion that this makes no difierence. That part of the soil which the Company occupied was not included in that rate. Upon this question the Counr expressed a clear opinion in the course of the argument. The only reason for deferring our judgment was, that we might have an opportunity of more attentively considering the eifect of the Royal warrant, under which the reservoirs were made. We have done so; and we are of opinion that it gave to the Company as much interest in the space where their reservoirs are made, as in that where the pipes are laid. It is impossible 'to distinguish one from the other. Their interest, indeed, in the former is expressly, in the latter by implication, at will only; but a tenant at will is, until the will be determined, an occupier of the land; and as the Company are, on the authority of the decided cases, the occupiers of the land filled by the pipes, they must be considered as the occupiers of that where the reservoirs are constructed. They appear to us to have the exclusive right in a portion of the soil in both cases, though...