The Colouring of Margarine.

The Act is remarkable for one important omission, to which a brief reference may be made. Much disappointment has been expressed that the Act does not give effect to the recommendation of the Select Committee of 1896, and of the Royal Commission on Agricultural Depression in their Final Report of 1897, by prohibiting the artificial colouring of margarine to imitate butter-a prohibition which has long been advocated by many persons as the only effective means of entirely stopping the fraudulent sale of margarine. Without going further into details upon a subject that has recently caused a good deal of controversy, it may be pointed out that foreign governments whose domestic and social legislation is often in advance of our own have many of them either absolutely prohibited or otherwise placed restrictions upon the colouring of margarine. France, Russia, and Italy absolutely forbid colouring to resemble butter. Belgium places discretion as to the nature and the degree of the colouring in the hands of her Minister of Agriculture. In Denmark the margarine must not be of a deeper colour than certain defined shades of yellow; and German margarine must contain a percentage of sesame oil, by means of which the detection of adulteration is readily facilitated.

Reviewing the Act as a whole, there can be little doubt that it is a carefully drawn instrument for the suppression of frauds of which the producer and the consumer have been alike the victims. The provisions as to the proper marking of imported produce, the increased powers of the central authorities, the power to trace wholesale consignments of margarine and margarine-cheese, the statutory limitation of the amount of butter-fat in margarine, and the deterrent effect of a liability to imprisonment are so many additional weapons which the Legislature has placed in the hands of the various authorities whose duty it is to combat dishonest trading. Much, indeed everything, will depend upon the manner in which the Act is carried out. Given a fair amount of intelligence and vigour in its administration, there is no reason why eventually the agricultural and dairy producer should not feel that the keen. competition to which he is subjected is for the most part at least honest and legitimate, or why the general public should not have a surer belief that they are consuming the article for which they have asked and paid.

THE RATING OF GLASSHOUSES OVER MARKET GARDENS UNDER THE AGRICULTURAL RATES ACT, 1896.

THE case of Smith and Others (Overseers of the Parish of Worthing) v. Richmond (Surveyor of Taxes) has previously formed the subject of two notes in this Journal (3rd series, vol. viii., 1897, p. 770, and vol. ix., 1898, p. 186). On August 3, 1899, the case was finally

disposed of in the House of Lords, before the Lord Chancellor, Lord Watson, Lord MacNaghten, and Lord Morris, who decided that the ground covered by glasshouses in question is not entitled to relief under the Act of 1896. The subjoined report is quoted from The Times :

This was an appeal raising an important question under the Agricultural Rates Act, 1896-viz. whether the ground covered by glasshouses or greenhouses in a market garden is entitled to the benefit of the Act, Section 1 of which makes the occupier of agricultural land in England liable, in the case of every rate to which the Act applies, to pay one-half only of the rate in the pound payable in respect of buildings or other hereditaments. By Section 9 of the Act-"The expression 'agricultural land' means any land used as arable, meadow, or pasture ground only, cottage gardens exceeding one quarter of an acre, market gardens, nursery grounds, orchards, or allotments, but does not include land occupied together with a house as a park, gardens other than as aforesaid, pleasure grounds, or any land kept or preserved mainly or exclusively for purposes of sport or recreation, or land used as a racecourse." The same definition was incorporated with and set out in Article 1 of the Agricultural Rates Order, 1896, issued by the Local Government Board and having statutory effect. The appellants had in the case of certain hereditaments, consisting of land partly covered by glasshouses, inserted the gross estimated rental and rateable value of the whole of such hereditaments under the description of agricultural land. The Assessment Committee, on the objection of the Surveyor of Taxes, decided that land so covered was not entitled to the exemption. The appellants appealed to Quarter Sessions, and on the hearing of the appeal it was agreed, inasmuch as the hereditaments included in the notice of appeal were practically identical in character, to take the hereditament of Robert Piper, numbered 140 in the said notice, as a test case for the purposes of the appeal. With regard to this hereditament the following were the agreed facts :-"The said Robert Piper was a grower of fruit, vegetables, and flowers at Worthing, and described himself, and was commonly known, as a market gardener and nurseryman. He was the owner and occupier of a piece of land rather more than four acres in extent on which 57 glasshouses or greenhouses of various sizes were erected; the houses were used by the appellant for the purpose of growing tomatoes, cucumbers, and grapes, and to a smaller extent other vegetables for the purpose of sale. The plants and crops grown therein were watered and heated by artificial means, and grown upon soil placed upon prepared beds inside the houses, and matured much earlier than in the open ground. The vines are planted inside the houses, and the roots run partly in the soil under the houses and partly pass through the apertures in the walls into the soil outside. Fifty one of the glasshouses are thus used for growing vines. In the cucumber-houses (which are six out of the 57 houses) there are, inside the houses, dwarf brick walls supporting corrugated iron sheets, upon which sheets earth taken

from the other parts of the nursery ground is placed. In this earth, so placed upon the iron sheets, the cucumber plants are planted. Beneath the iron sheets, and between them and the ground, there are hot-water pipes. The area actually occupied by the 57 houses is rather more than two acres. The rest (rather more than two acres) consists merely of vine borders, paths, and the stoke holes. The whole of the houses were built upon dwarf brick walls like an ordinary greenhouse. (The parts in italics were emphasised by the Lord Chancellor in his judgment.) In the Overseers' statement the property was described as "market gardens and nursery grounds," of the gross estimated rental of 6627. 19s. 6d., and of the rateable value of 4317. 58. It was entered under "agricultural land," and no estimate was given of the buildings and other hereditaments. The Court of Quarter Sessions allowed the appellants' appeal. A case was then submitted to the Divisional Court, which was divided in opinion. Judgment was given on August 2, 1897, by Mr. Justice Collins in favour of the appellants, and by Mr. Justice Ridley for the Crown, represented by the respondents, and the order of Quarter Sessions was affirmed. The respondents appealed, and on March 11, 1898, the Master of the Rolls and Lord Justice Rigby allowed the appeal, Lord Justice Vaughan Williams dissenting.2

Mr. Asquith, Q.C., and Mr. Clavell Salter, were for the appellants; the Attorney-General (Sir R. E. Webster, Q.C.), Mr. S. H. Day, and Mr. A. H. Trevor for the respondents. The arguments were heard on March 23 and 24 last, when judgment was reserved. The Lord Chancellor, in moving that the appeal be dismissed, said:

This appeal raises the question what is meant by the words "occupier of agricultural land" in the statute 59 and 60 Vict. c. 16. Apart from the provisions of the statute in question, the word "land" would be variously understood by different persons. To a farmer the word "land" would not mean his farm buildings; to a lawyer the word would include everything that was upon the land, fixed immovably upon it; but the statute has given an interpretation clause and has also in the enacting clause itself pointed out not obscurely with what subject matter it was dealing. The very enacting part of it gives the antithesis between land and buildings, since the relief the occupier is to get is that he is to be liable, in the case of every rate to which the Act applies, "to pay one-half only of the rate in the pound payable in respect of buildings and other hereditaments." Now the special case here finds that "the land" sought to be treated as agricultural land is of the character described in the 14th paragraph of the case as agreed to.

His Lordship stated the agreed facts as above, and continued:

I have emphasised some parts of this description, but it is extraordinary that any claim should be made that what is here described is agricultural land. It would be quite as reasonable to claim that any building, however solid and substantial, used for agricultural purposes was agricultural land,

See Journal R.A.S.E. vol. viii., 1897, p. 770. 2 Ibid. vol. ix., 1898, p. 186.

VOL. X. T. S.-40

3 E

because to a lawyer land would include it, and as its use was agricultural, it therefore became agricultural land within the meaning of the Act. I agree with the Master of the Rolls that the term "land and buildings" in this Act are mutually exclusive of each other. I must say I feel no difficulty in applying the interpretation clause to the construction of the Act, which seems so plain. A market garden or a nursery ground may, as part of it, have agricultural land, and if such part is used as arable, meadow, or pasture ground only it will not forfeit its claim to relief because it forms part of such an industry. But in what sense can these buildings be described as arable, meadow, or pasture? They are buildings, and not agricultural land at all. I am very clearly of opinion that this appeal ought to be dismissed with costs, and I move your Lordships accordingly.

Lord Watson

I have done my best to examine the statute in question, and I have been quite unable to arrive at any result other than that which is embodied in the judgment appealed from. I agree with all the observations of the Master of the Rolls and with the brief but cogent reasoning of my noble and learned friend on the Woolsack.

Lord MacNaghten and Lord Morris concurred.

THE AUTUMN OF 1899.

THE weather of last autumn was of a rather changeable character. As a rule the conditions were fair and dry, but at intervals the weather broke up completely, the rainfall at these times being unusually heavy, especially in the eastern and southern districts. Thunderstorms were very frequent in September, and a considerable amount of fog and mist prevailed between October 18 and 24, and also during the latter half of November.

With the exception of a brief thundery period between the 5th and 7th, the early part of September was mostly fair, with temperatures well above the average. Towards the latter part of the month, however, there was a gradual deterioration, the weather ultimately becoming stormy, changeable, and cool. This state of things appears to have culminated between September 29 and October 1, when very heavy rains occurred in nearly all parts of the country, with severe thunderstorms in places. On the afternoon of October 1, a whirlwind was experienced in some portions of Berkshire, Wiltshire, and North Hants. After about the 4th of the month a decided improvement set in, and although a short spell of showery weather was experienced between the 10th and 12th the conditions were otherwise fair and dry until very nearly the close of the month, the third week being distinguished by fine warm days, but cold foggy nights, with sharp frosts in most of the inland districts. After the 25th, however, the weather again broke up entirely, and from this time onward to about November 11 the atmosphere was extremely rough and unsettled, strong southerly and south-westerly gales being experienced over nearly the whole

kingdom on November 3 and 4, and again on the 7th and 8th. On the 10th another gale occurred, but this time from points between west and north-west. The rainfall during the whole of this period was extremely heavy, more especially on October 26 and 27, and on November 3, 5, and 7, most of the larger falls being reported at places in the south and east of England. After November 11 the weather again cleared up, and with the exception of slight showers between the 18th and 20th the remainder of the month was chiefly fair and dry, with however a considerable amount of fog or mist in places. The winds were at first rather variable, and although the day temperatures were fairly high, the nights were cold, with sharp frosts between the 18th and 20th. Later on, however, a gentle breeze from south-west and west set in over the whole country, and the weather became unusually mild for the time of year, no further night frost being experienced until quite the close of the month.

The leading features in the weather of last autumn are shown in a statistical form on p. 764, the following remarks giving further details of interest in the history of each particular element.

Temperature. Between the middle of September and the middle of October the mean temperature was below the average, the deficiency of warmth being, however, very slight in the early part of the period. At other times there was an excess of heat, this being especially the case at the beginning of September and the beginning and end of November. Taking the season as a whole, the mean temperature was above the average, the excess varying between a degree and a degree and a half over our northern, eastern, and midland counties, but amounting to nearly two degrees in the southern and south-western districts, and to more than two degrees in the Channel Islands. A further analysis shows that the excess of warmth was much greater in the daytime than at night, this being especially the case in the northern, eastern, and central parts of the country; in the north-east of England the night temperatures were, in fact, very little above the normal. Comparing the past autumn with those of recent years, we see that over the country generally it was not nearly so warm as that of 1898, but that it differed little from those of 1897 and 1895. It was, however, warmer than that of 1894, and much warmer than that of 1896. The highest temperatures of last autumn were registered early in September,-mostly on the 5th, when the thermometer rose to 80° and upwards in all but the northern districts and the Channel Islands, and to 85° and upwards in many parts of the eastern, midland, and southern counties. The highest reading of all was attained in London, where the thermometer on the 5th rose to 89°, this being with two exceptions the highest September temperature observed in the metropolis for nearly sixty years past. In 1898 the thermometer on the 8th of the month rose to 91°, while in 1868, on the 7th, it reached a maximum of 92°. In all parts of the country the highest autumn temperatures were lower than those of 1898, though much higher than those of the two preceding years. The lowest temperatures of the past season were observed, as a rule,