• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Main
 Statutory Rules and Orders, No....
 Statutory Rules and Orders, No....














Title: Leeward Islands gazette
ALL VOLUMES CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00076863/00163
 Material Information
Title: Leeward Islands gazette
Physical Description: reels. : ;
Creator: Leeward Islands (West Indies)
Publisher: Gov. Printing Office
Place of Publication: Antigua
Publication Date: 1872-
 Subjects
Subject: Politics and government -- Periodicals -- Leeward Islands (West Indies)   ( lcsh )
Genre: periodical   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Dates or Sequential Designation: 1- , 1872-
General Note: Two pages per frame.
General Note: Supplements, issued with some numbers, contain departmental reports, Meteorological registers, ordinances, statutory rules and orders, etc., of Antigua, St. Kitts and Nevis, Montserrat, and the British Virgin Islands.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00076863
Volume ID: VID00163
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: aleph - 001724221
notis - AJD6739
 Related Items
Succeeded by: Antigua, Montserrat and Virgin Islands gazette

Table of Contents
    Main
        Page 177
        Page 178
        Page 179
        Page 180
        Page 181
        Page 182
        Page 183
    Statutory Rules and Orders, No. 25 of 1952: Telecommunications (Amendment) Rules, 1952
        Page A-1
    Statutory Rules and Orders, No. 26 of 1952: Pensions (Amendment) Regulations, 1952
        Page B-1
Full Text



177


THE LEEWARD ISL


GAZETTE

ublirtal b. aut1)ormt)>.


VOL. LXXX.


THURSDAY, 9TH OCTOBER. 1,52.


IN otides.


BY THE GOVERNOR OF THE
LEEWARD ISLANDS.

A PROCLAMATION.
K. W. BLACKBURNE,
Governor.
WHEREAS by sub-section (3) of
section 7 of the Leeward lblands Acts,
1871 to 1950, as amninded, it is provi-
ded that whenever there is occasion ftr
the election of a representative mem-
ber to the General Legislative Council
from among the members of an Island
Council the Governor shall by Procla-
mation require the elected and nom-
inated members of the said Island
Council within such time as may be
specified by such Proclamation to
eleci such member within the time so
specified:

AND WHEREAS by the said sub-
section it is provided that the elected
and nominated members of the said
Island Council shall, in such manner
.as may be provided by the Standing
Rules and Orders of such Council,
but subject to the provisions of the
said Act, elect such member within
the time so specified:

AND WHEREAS there is now
occasion for the election of represen-
tative members from among the
Island Councils of Antigua, Saint
Christopher. Nevis and Anguilla,
Montserrat and the Virgin Islands for
the composition of the General Legis-
lative Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, I do by this
my Proclamation require the elected
a n d nominated members of the
Island Councils of Antigua, Saint
Christopher. Nevis and Anguilla,
Montserrat and tihe Virgin Islands,
respectively, on or before the 20tb
day of October, 1952 to elect,
from among the elected members of
the said Councils, in such manner as
may be provided by the Standing
Rules and Orders thereof but subject
to the provisions of the said Leeward
Islands Acts, representative members
of the said General Legislative Coun-
cil, that is to say, from the Island
Council of Antigua five representative
members, from the Island Council of
Saint Christopher, Nevis and Anguilla
five representative members of whom
at least one shall be an elected mem-
ber for Nevis and at least one shall be


an elected member for Anguilla, from
the Island Council of Montsr'rrat two
representative members and from the
Island Council of the Virgin Islands
one representative member.
AND the elected and nominated
members of the Legislative Councils
of the Presidencies of Antigua, Saint
Christopher, Nevis and Anguilla,
Montserrat ain the Virgin Islanus
and all others whom it may concern
are hereby required to take due notice
hereof and to govern themselves
accordingly.

GIVEN under my hand at the Gov-
ernment House. Antigua, this
9th day of October, 1952, and in
the first year of Her Majesty's
reign.
GOD SAVE THE QUEEN!
Ref. No. 18/00031.

LEEWARD ISLANDS.
SAINT CHRISTOPHER, NEVIS
AND ANGUILLA.

STATUTORY RULES AND
ORDERS.

1952, No. 26.
PROCLAMATION DATED THE 8!'H
OCTOBER, 1952, CONVOKING THE
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL OF THE
PRESIDENCY.
BY THE GOVERNOR OF THE
LEEWARD ISLANDS.

A PROCLAMATION.
K. W. BLACKBURNE,
Governor.

WHEREAS it is provided, inter
alia, by subsection (1) of section 25
of the Saint Christopher, Nevis and
Anguilla Constitution and Elections
Ordinance, 1952 (No. 5/1952) that the
Governor may at any time, by procla-
mation. summon the Legislative
Council of the Presidency of Saint
Christopher, Nevis and Anguilla:
AND WHEREAS it is expedient
that the said Council should be sum-
moned.
NOW, THEREFORE, I do by this
my proclamation summon the Legis-
lative Council of the Presidency of
Saint Christopher, Nevis and An-
guilla to meet in session for the


despatch of public business at such
time and place as may be appointed
under section 18 of the above-
mentioned Ordinance.

AND the members of the said
Council and all other Her Majesty's
Officers, Ministers and loving subjects
in the said Presidency and all those
whom it may concern are hereby
required to take due notice hereof
and to give their ready ob-dience
accordingly.

GIVE N at the Government House,
Antigua, this 8th day of Octo-
ber. 1952, in the first year of
Her Majesty's reign.

GOD SAVE THE QUEEN !
Ref. No. 18/0003:7.

BY THE GOVERNOR OF THE

LEEWARD ISLANDS.

A PROCLAMATION.

K. W. BLACKBURNE,
Governor.
I, considering that it is desirable
that Thursday, the sixteenth day of
October, l'.".-', should be observed as
a Bank Holiday in the Presidency of
Saint Christopher, Nevis and Anguilla
in the Colony of the Leeward Islands,
and in pursuance of the provisions of
the Bank Holidays Act (Chapter 114)
do hereby. by and with the advice of
the Executive Council of the said
Colony, and in exercise of the powers
conferred by the Act aforesaid, ap-
point Thursday, the sixteenth day of
October, 1952, as a special day to be
reserved as a Bank Holiday in the
the said Presidency, under and in
accordance with the said Act, and
I do by this my Proclamation com-
mand the said day to be so reserved
and kept. and all Her Majesty's
loving subjects in the said Presidency
to order themselves accordingly.

GIVEN under my hand at the Gov-
ernment House, Antiqua, this
4th day of October, 1952, and in
the first year of Her Majesty's
reign.

GOD SAVE THE QUEEN!
Raf. No. 47/00058.


328.


4cS 72


__ __


y 77







THE LEEWARD ISLANDS GAZETTE.


It is hereby notified for general
information that His Excellency the
Governor has issued a Commission to
the Hon. P. D. MACDONALD appoint-
ing him to be Governor's Deputy
duri ng His -Ecellency's absence from
Antigua, whilst paying a visit to the
Presidency of St. Kitts-Nevis-
Angoilla from the Ilth to the 25th
October, 1952.

The Secretariat,
Antigua.
7th October, 1952.

No. 13/00061


His Excellency the Governor has
been pleased to appoint Mr. S. T.
CHRISTIAN, O.B.E., to act as Puisne
Judge of the Supreme Court of the
Windward Islands and Leeward Is-
lands for the purpose of presiding
over the Criminal Sessions in Antigua
in October and of attending to other
urgent business in Chambers during
th- month. The acting appointment
will take effect from the 7th October,
1952.

The Secretariat,
Antigua.
3rd October, 1952.

C.S.O. M.P. 13/f4003.


It is hereby notified for public
information that following on the
relinquishment by Mr. CARL BRUER
of c'hargp of the American Consulate
General of Port of Spain. Trinidad,
Mr. WILLIAM P. MADDOX assumed
the charge thereof on September 14,
1952.

Adminii'f:cator's 0,
An i/juu;.
29th Sep'Jtmbmrf, !.':.'.

M.P. A. 19/3.


Under the provisions of section 4
of the Cattle Trespass Ordinance,
1910, His Excillency has been
pleased to appoint Mr. MALCOLM
ABBOTT as Pound-Keeper of the
Public Pound, Coolidge Field.

Administrator's Offie,

Antiqua,

6th October, 1952.

Ref. No. A. 50/39.


No. 96.

The following Statutory Rules and
Orders are circulated with this Gazette
and form part thereof:-

General Government.

No. 25 of 1952, "The Telecommu-
nications (Amendment) Rules, 1952."
1 pp. Price 3 cents

No. 26 of 1952, "The Pensions
(Amendment) Regulations, 1952."
1 pp. Price 3 cents


Aid to Pioneer Industries Ordi-
nance, 1951. (Montserrat
No. 3 of 1951.)


In pursuance of the requirements
of section 3 (2) of the Aid to Pioneer
Industries Ordinance, 1951, (Mont-
serrat No. 3 of 1951), it is hereby
notified for general information that
the Governor-in-Council proposes to
make the undermentioned 0Order
under section 3 (2) of the said
Ordinance.

Any person who objects to the
making of such Order should give
notice in writing of his objections
and of the grounds on which he relies
in support thereof to the Clerk of the
Executive Council on or before the
6th day of November, 1952.


.Js. H. CARROTT,

Ag. Clerk of the Council.

Commissioner's Office,

Plymouth, Montserrat,

2nd October, 1952.


Aid to Pioneer Industries (Man-
ufacture of Electric Current)
Order.

1. SHORT TITLE. This Order
may be cited as the Aid to Pioneer
Industries (Manufacture of Electric
Current) Order, 1952.

2. Di GLARATION. The establish-
menlt, maintenance, and operation in
the Presidency of the manufacturing
plant for the manufacture of Electric
Current is hereby declared to be a
Pioneer Industry for purposes of the
Aid to Pioneer Industries Ordinance,
1951. and the said Electric Current
so manufactured is hereby declared
to be a pioneer product for the said
purposes.

Made by the Governor in Council
under section 3 (1) of the Aid to
Pioneer Industries Ordinance (No. 3
of 1951) this day of 19


Ag. Clerk of the Council.
Ref. No. 47/00037.


Provost Marshal's Ofice,
Antigua.
26th September, 1952.

The list of Defaulters in payment
of Land Tax for the current year
having been lodged in my office
I hereby give notice to :ll persons
concerned that it is my intention to
take immediate proceedings for the
recovery, as the law directs, of all
amounts due.

N. A. BERRIDGE,
Provost Marshal.


[9 October, 1952.

Posts of Senior Agricultural
Instructor, Department of
Agriculture-Saint Vincent.

Applications are invited for the two
vacant posts of Senior Agricultural
Instructor, in the Department of
Agriculture, St. Vincent, B.W.I.

2. The salary of the post is in the
scale $1296 x 96 $16,80, the point
in the salary scale at which the suc-
cessful candidates will be paid will
depend on qualifications and experi-
ence. A Cost of Living Allowanceat
the prevailing rate ($314 per annum)
is payable, and a travelling allowance
according to the means of transport
approved by the Superintendant of
Agriculture. The posts are not pen-
sionable.

3. The appointment will be for
three years in the first instance, with
a probatio-nary period of one year.
Free passages will be provided for the
officer and his family, up to a total of
four persons, to take up his appoint-
ment in St. Vincent, and at the end of
his contract if satisfactorily concluded.
He will be eligible for one week's
leave for every three months of com-
pleted service.

4. The duties of the post will
include the following:-
Improv ment of both large and
small sea!- agriculture in a sound
system of land utilization. Paying
particular attention to the education
of agriculturists in better farming
methods, such as the application of
soil conservation measures, the
more appropriate utilization of
livestock in systems of mixed farm-
ing, the use of fertilizers, adoption
of co-operative methods in the
processing and marketing of agri-
cultural products, to undertake the
supervision and guidance of credit
organisatimos, land settlement and
animal improvement centres, and to
assist in tie administration of laws
relating to agriculture, and such
other duties as the officers may from
time to time be called upon to
perform.

5. Applications should be accom-
panied by copies of two (2) recent
testimonials and should be addressed
to the Establishment Officer, Govern-
ment Office, St. Vincent, and should
reach him not later than 30th
September, 1952.


RAINFALL FIGURES
Central Experiment Station,
Antigua.


Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct. 4th


1948. 1949. 1950.
2.82 1"50 5'41
*57 2'07 2'52
1.89 5-52 1'58
.59 3"54 2'14
2.80 1-98 2-06
3.38 3'35 1.66
1.37 2'10 1.85
2.29 6'66 10.71
3.79 10.92 6.34
.45 .44 .08


1951.
3'60
1"88
1'09
2"16
10'54
2'74
3"28
9"18
12.06
.22


1952.
2"41
1 60
1 62
3"14
3'07
5"74
8.38
8.43
5.55
.08


19.95 38.08 34.65 46'75 40.02







THE LEEWARD ISLANDS GAZETTE.


In the Court of Appeal for the Windward Islands and
Leeward Islands.

On appeal by way of Case stated from The Supreme Court of the Windward Islands and
Leeward Islands
(ANTIGUA CIRCUIT)
Civil Jurisdiction

Between:-
STANLEY R. WALTER Appellant
and
THE COMMISSIONERS OF INCOME TAX Respondent

In the matter of the Income Tax Ordinance 1945
Be'ore:-JACKSON, C.J., COOLS-LARTIGUE and DATE, JJ.

JUDGMENT.

This is an appeal, by way of case stated, from a judgment of a Judge of the Supreme
Court of the Windward Islands and Leeward Islands sitting in Chambers dismissing an appeal
from an assessment of the Commissioners of Income Tax made in respect of income tax payable
by the appellant in the year of assessment 1949.
The case stated by the learned Judge as required by section 48 (10) of the Income Tax
Ordinance, 1945, reads as follows:-
"Case stated on the application of the appellant under Section 48 Sub-Section 10 of
"the Income Tax Ordinance, 1945.
1. The return of the appellant for the year of assessment 1949, based on his income
for the year 1948, show-ed a loss of $558.94. The Commissioners of Income
Tax regarded this return as unreliable and assessed the appellant on an income
of $3445.01.
2. The books of the appellant showed that his capital account, which was $13288.29
on 31st December 1947, had risen to $26504.22 on 31st December, 1948. The
Commissioners regarded his explanation as unsatisfactory and assessed him on the
capital increase of $13215.92.
3. On appeal the appellant explained that this increase of capital was due to loans to
the business from its commencement in 1937, and in particular to a sum of
$9600, a gift to the appellant's wife by her father before his death in 1936. The
Court regarded the explanation as unsatisfactory and was not persuaded that the
Commissioners had been wrong.
4. The appellant then contended that the sum of $13215.92 must have represented
profit made more than two years before the year of assessment and that therefore
a re-assessment should be made for the years during which the profits were made.
5. The Commissioners had not given any decision on this point. Assuming that the
sum of $13215.92 represented undisclosed profits earned between 1937 and 1948 the
Court declined to issue any directions to the Commissioners as to how the amount
ought to be apportioned between these years. The Court was of opinion that the
appellant was responsible for the position in which he found himself; that the
apportionment of income during the previous years was a matter for arrangement
between the appellant and the Commissioners; and that, in the absence of a full
disclosure by the appellant, there was no material on which to base any such
direction.
6. The appellant also contended that the appellant had shown in his return for 1947
a profit of $298.55; that this amount had been assessed to taxation; that it must be
regarded as included in the above amount of $13215.92 and that it should therefore
be deducted and not assessed a second time. There was no evidence that any tax
had been collected on this amount of $298.55, or that it must necessarily be regarded
as included in the amount of $13215-92; and the Court declined to make any order
for deduction.


9 October, 1952.]







THE LEEWARD ISLANDS GAZETTE.


7. The questions for determination are whether the Court was right in its decision on
the points as set out in paragraphs 3, 5, and ( above."
In his application to the learned Judge t,) state a case, the appellant states that the
questions upon which the opinion of the Court is sought are:-
1. Was the learned Judge right in holding that if the sum of $13:15.92 which had
"been shown in the hooks of the firm and in the statements submitted to the Income
Tax Commissioners for a number of years represented undisclosed profits (which is
"not and was never admitted) made in years prior to 1947 the respondents acted in
accordance with law in including- that gross sum in the Tax Returns for the year
"1949 and in assessing the appellant on the 10th April 1951 as though the
-13,215.92 were a part of the profits made during the year 19 18.
2. Was the: learned Judge right in holding as implied by the judgment in this case
"that not withstanding the provisions of Sections 6 and 47 of the Income Tax
Ordinance 1945 (No. 7 of 1945) the respondents are entitled to include in any
year of assessment amounts suspected by them to be profits made years before the
Year of assessment.
3. "Was the learned Judze right in holding as implied by his ieclininig to make an
'"order that the sum of .:.55 declared profits for the year 1947 on which tax had
"already been paid by the appellant and which was included in the sum of
13,215.92t transferred to Capital in the year 1948 is properly again included as
part of the profits for the year 1948 and as such again liable to tax.
A scrutiny of the latter makes it clear that the appellant is not now questioning' his
assessment by the Commlnissioners on an income of $31,15.01 as mentioned in para'raph 1 of the
case stated and though in his argument learned Counsel remarked that the method of assessment
in this connection was somewhat, arbitrary he conceded that there was no appeal before this Court
as regards this amount.
The question before us therefore is whether there has been any finding by the learned.
Judge that the sum of S13,2 15.92 shown in the appellant's balance sheet as an accretion to capital
in 1918 was in fact capital and not profits and, if it was profits, whether it represented profits made
in 191S and was therefore rightly assessable in respect of the year of assessment 1949.
In view of our findings hereunder, we consider we should set out the respective functions
of the Commissioners of Income Tax, the Judge and the Court of Appeal. The Commissioners
assess every pc. soi ch'argeablle witlh tax. Every person aggrieved may appeal to a J judge against
such assessmt it. The Jutdge (on hearing the ,appeal may confirm the assessment, reduce the
amount of such assessment or increase the saime'. The decision of the Judge healing the appeal
is final, except that he may state a case on a question of law for the opinion of the Court of Appeal.
It will be seen, therefore, that the functions of the Judge here are substantially the same as those
of the Special or General Commnissioners in England.
It has long been settled that in a case stated there should be set out the primary facts,
the contentions on either side and finally the conclusions of fact and of law at which the
Commissioners have arrived. The following remarks of Du Pareq, L.J. in the case of the
Royal (Choral Society vs. Commissioners of Inland Revenue (1943) 2 Ali E.R. at page 108 are
instructive:-
Not very long ago the court of which I was a member had to send a case back to
the Commiissioners because they had not stated it in a form which made it possible
"for the court to deal with it. They had set out the evidence, or some of the
"evidence, on both sides and then stated their conclusions without making it clear
"in the least what evidence they accepted and what evidence they rejected. In the
"present case that difficulty has not arisen, because very early, and no doubt
accurately, the Solicitor-General said that we were to treat tile statement of the
"evidence which is set out as the evidence of Bir George Dyson as being accepted
"by the Commissioners. 'That has made our task a possible one; but if we had been
asked to say that we must assume that they only accepted part of it, and rejected
part of it, then I should have thought that we should have had to remit the case
"to them..................................In ti:e case of Magistrates or Commissioners of
arbitrators who have to state a case, it is necessary that they should show to the
"superior court precisely what facts they have found. Nobody has been there to
"direct them as to the law. They imay have gone wrong about the law. We can
only tell whether they have gone wrong about the law by knowing what the facts
"are: and it is their province to tell us what the facts are. If they do that and
"then state their conclusion, it is possible for this court to see whether they have


[ 9 Octo!)er, 19,52.


180







THE LEEWARD ISLANDS GAZETTE.


"accurately applied the law, or whether they have erred in point of law. Sometimes
"il iS ncesjary to set out a great di 0o tih evidence, as, for instance, when the
"point of law stated is that there was no evidence to support the finding at which
"they have arrived. Usually it is neither necessary nor right to set out the evidence
"as such at all. Indeed, any tribunal stating a case ought to state the facts which
"they have found in more or less detail, depending on the circumstances and on the
"point of law which emerges. I say that because it seems to me to be of great
"importance that it should he fully understood by the Commissioners who have to
"deal with these important cases."
On this same point in the judgment of the Court delivered by Luxmoore, L.J., in the
case of Russell vs. In/andl Hcrenue Commissioners (1944) 2 All E.R. at page 194 the following passage
occurs:-
Apart from what was stated in the four paragraphs referred to, there was no
"paragraph setting out the findings of fact of the Special Commissioners, and it was
"left to the tribunal to spell out such findings from the paragraphs in question.
"This iL no part of the duty of the tribunal. It is, we think, essential that the
"Special Commissioners, when stating a case, should put their findings in clear and
"unambiguous terms. These findings must necessarily be based on the evidence
"submitted by both sides which must be considered and weighed and accepted or
"rejected by the Special Commissioners."
Having carefully considered the case stated by the learned Judge, we are constrained to
hold that it is not in conformity with the principles above enunciated. Nowhere is there
specifically set out the primary facts or the conclusions to which the learned Judge has arrived.
It was suggested to us by Counsel for the appellant that in order to arrive at a decision
the learned Judge should have taken evidence on oath from the appellant and his witnesses.
It may be that the taking of that course was desirable, but there is no suggestion that any evidence
was tendered or refn-e'd and we deprecate that criticism coming from the appellant who could,
and should, have called that evidence.
After due deliberation we have reached the conclusion that the proper course is to remit
this case to a Judge sitting in Chambers for re-hearing and for specific finding's in respect of the
sum of $13,215.92 the assessment on which is being challenged, and for the determination of all
relevant and appropriate questions thereto relating.
The unsatisfactory manner in which this case was presented to the learned Judge was
largely due to the appellant. We therefore feel a just award would be that each party should
bear his own costs here and in the proceedings below, and we so order.
D. E. JACKSON,
Chief Justice.
ALEX R.. COOLS-LALTIGUE,
Puisne Judge.
W. A. DATE,
Puisne Judge.
29th September, 1952.


9 October, 1952.]







THE LEEWARD ISLAND) GAZETTE.


In the Court of Appeal for the Windward Islands and
Leeward Islan(s.
On appeal by way of Case stated from an Order made by a Judge in Chambers.
(ANTIGUA CIRCUIT).
Civil Jurisdiction.
In the matter of the Income Tax Ordinance, 1945.
Between:
THE COMMISSIONERS OF INCOME TAX Appellants
Snd
GEO. W. BENNETT BRYSON & Co., LTD. Respondent

Before:- JACKSON C.J., COOLS-LARTIGUE & DATE J.T.

JUDGMENT

The respondent company carries on in Antigua the business of general wholesale and retail
merchants, combined with shipping and commission agencies. In 1935 it ,lso owned sugar estntes, and
in that year purchased about 750 acres of land to be used as a stock farm to provide animals for the
sugar estates. In 1938 it disposed of its sugar estates and no longer needed the land bought for use as
a stock farm. It decided to realise it :ln, in the absence of any offer for the whole area, proceeded to
sell in portions of varying sizes as and when opportunity offered. By the end of 1947 the amount
realized from such sales exceeded the price, p:id by the company for the whole area. In 1948 and 1949
further sums of $912 and $14,909.76 re-piectivelv were realized and the Commissioners assessed the
company to income tax on these sums. The company disputed the assessment and requested the Com-
missioners to review it. As the parties w(re unible to reach agreement, the company appealed to a
Judge in accordance with the provisions of section 48 of the Income Ttx Ordinance, 1945, on the follow-
ing ground: The Commissioners erred in treating as income a sum of $912 capital gain on the sale of
lands of Villa Estate in 1948 and a further sum of $14,909.76 capital gain on the sale of other lands of
Villa Estate in 1949 as a taxable profit from the taxpayer's business and not as a capital gain and as
such not liable to income tax."
In their statement of material facts for the consideration of the Judge the Commissioners (who
were respondents at that stage of the proceedings) stated, inter alia: The respondents do not con-
sider these sales of land as casual sales. In view of all the circumstances, it is believed that in so far as
Villa lands are concerned the appellants are engaged in a real estate business."
At the hearing in chambers, in addition to the documents already mentioned, copies of certain
other documents were produced to the Judge, including a copy of a letter from the company to the
Commissioners dated 7th December, 1950, in which this passage appears:-
Sale of Land at Villa-The sale of land does not form a part of the normal business routine
of this company. The Villa was purchased for a Stock Farm some years ago but as it has not material-
ized the Directors are anxious to dispose of it. It has frequently been offered for sale in one lot but no
one person has had sufficient funds to purchase it. It has therefore been sold as offers are received.
Part of the sales were at the request of Government, who wished to purchase the lands for re-habilita-
tion of ex-servicemen. The Senior Assessor has informed us that had the Estate been sold in one lot it
would have been a capital transaction, but because we are splitting it up it is assessable to tax. We are
unable to see the justice of this argument, especially when it was done at the request of Government and
the City Commissioners who purchased a small area as a refuse Dump."
After'hearing the admissions and arguments of counsel on both sides, the learned Judge deliv-
vered a written judgment in which he held that the company, in disposing of the land, was not carrying
on a business and was not liable to income tax on the profits from the sales. In the course of the
judgment he referred to the contentions of the respective parties and the authorities cited, and added:
"The principle to be deduced from the authorities was stated in Californian Copper
Syndicate v Harris 5 Tax cases, 159.....................' It is quite a well settled principle
in dealing with questions of income tax that where the owner of an ordinary investment
chooses to realise it, and obtains a greater price for it than he originally acquired it at,
"the enhanced price is not profit assessable to income tax. But it is equally well
established that enhanced values obtained from realisation or conversion of securities
"may be so assessable when what is done is not merely a realisation or change of
investment, but an act done in what is truly the carrying on, or carrying out of a
business."


1 9 October, 1952-.







THE LEEWARDl ISLANDS GAZETTE.


The Coin:is:;iouners have now appealed to this C',rt, invoking sulsecfion (10) of section 48
of the Oei.hce, .. ce .lt)'es aI fIol,-:-
The decision of the J udse is:tring the appeal ;;hail be final: Provided that the Judge
hearing such appeal rmayv, f Ihe so desires, and s )ill, on tie appli. action of the appellant
Sor the Commissioners, state a cas- on a question of law for the opinion of the Court of
SAppeal for the Windward Islands i(nd Leeward Islandi."

The case stated by i'he learned .1 ud' e sets out in some detail the facts that were admitted; our
duty then is to d -terminie what question of law, if any, emerges for our consideration, for the role of a
Judge in Antigua at the hearing of income tax appeals is closely analogous to that of the Special or
General Conmmiisioner in LEnlaid. The lJudge is the ;sole judge of fact, and an appeal lies from him
to this Court on a point of law. This Court can disturb his findings on questions of fact only if he was
guilty of misdirection or if there w.is no evidence on which lie could properly base his decision of fact.
To use the words of Scruttion L.J. in lee's Ro/,orbo Development S'nudicate, ,Ltd. v oninis,/ioners of in-
land Revenue, (1928) 1 K.I*). 507, at page 517: If there is a finding ;of fact, it is unappealable if there
was evidence on which .ie finding could lb he made, even if the Courte wotl i not have made such a finding.
If it includes a finding oi law, it is appeal:ble on the law." The matter was also considered in the
House of Lords in Inland icvenue C omnissioners v'. Lqma/ht, (1928) A.C. 234, and Lord Sumner is
recorded as having said, at page 243: "It is well settled that, when the Commissioners have thus
ascertained the facts of the c:ise and then have found the conclusion of fact which the facts prove, their
decision is not open to review, provided that they had before them evidence, from which such a conclu-
sion could properly be drawn, and that they did not misdirect themselves in law in any of the forms of
legal error, which amount to misdirection." Of course, it, has been truly said, if the facts are undisputed
and admit of but one inference then the question is one of law; but that is not the case here.
As to whether the Judge's finding that the respondent conmpiny, in disposing of its land,
was not carrying on a business is a finding of fact or a finding of law, we again t'.rn to the lucid judg-
ment of Scrutton L. J. in the case of Rees Rotirrbh De)'clopmente S'/ndicale, /,Lt. r. Cionnis, oners of
Inland '(,cenue (sup:-;) at p. 517: In mv view, thl point at which sales of assets resulting in a
profit are of such a nl.iiumer and nature as to constitute a trade or buhLiaess, or the point when a sale of
an asset is so connected with a trade carried on that profits received from it are profits of a trade, is a
question of decree, and of fact. How many sales of pictures will make a man a picture dealer is a
question of degree. I agree with the view of Atkin L. J. in ('Coor r. ,/ubdb,, (1(025) 2 K.B. 753,
772, that questions of degree are questions of fact, and that whether a trade is bcig carried on is a
question of degree and fact."
Similarly in Martin, vi. Loinr, (1926) 1 K.B. 550, where a wholesale machinery merchant
had purchased the whole surplus stock of Government aircraft linen and sold out in smaller quantities to
various wholesale firms and then contended he had not carried on a trade or business, for his own calling
was that of merchant engaged in tie business of wliolesale machinery, a business which had no part in,
or affinity to, the trade in linen, Pollock M. I;. said at page 555: Whatever view may be taken by
the Court, upon such a p,,int, it is a question of fact which it is for the Commissioners to determine
...................... It is not possible to ;la down defiinire lines to mark out what is a business or a trade, or
adventure, and to define the distinctive characteristics of each; nor is it necessary, or wise, to do so.
The facts in each case may be very different, but the facts establish the nature of the enterprise embark-
ed upon."
Applying these general principles to the matter now before us, we hold (i) that the learned
Judge's finding that the company was not carrying on a business is a finding of fact; (ii) that there is
ample evidence, proved or admitted, to support that finding, and (iii) that there is nothing to show
that the learned Judge misdirected himself.
The appeal is dismissed with costs and the order of the learned Judge is affirmed.
D. E. JACKSON,
Chief Justice.
ALEX R. COOLS-LARTIGUE,
Puisne Judie.
W. A. DATE,
Puisne Judqe.

29th Septemb r, 1952.

ANTIGUA.
Frintei at the Government Printing Office. Leeward Islands, by E. M. BLACKMAM
Government Printer-By Authority
1952.
[Price 15 cents.]


9 0C'tc;ber '952.]


1b3









LEEWARD ISLANDS.
GENERAL GOVERNMENT.

STATUTORY RULES AND ORDERS.
1952, No. 25.
THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS (AMENDMENT) RULES, 1952, DATED
OCTOBER 4, 1952, MADE BY THE GOVERNOR IN COUNCIL
UNDER SECTION 18 OF THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACT,
1949 (No. 13/1949).

1. Citation. These Rules may be cited as the
Telecommunications (Amendment) Rules, 1952, and shall
be read as one with the Telecommunications Rules, 1951,
(S.R. & 0. 1951, No. 16) hereinafter called the Principal
Rules.

2. Amendment. Paragraph (b) of rule 2 of the
Principal Rules is hereby amended by the substitution of
a colon for the semi-colon at the end thereof and by the
addition thereto of the following proviso-
Provided that the Governor in Council, with the
approval of a Secretary of State, may, in any particular
case, authorise the issue of a licence, with and subject
to such additional conditions, to be included in the
licence, as the Governor in Council may deem expedient,
to a person who is not of British nationality."

Made by the Governor in Council this 4th day of
October, 1952.
A. E. PENN,
Clerk of the Councl.









ANTIG U A.
Printed at the Government Printing Office, Leeward Islands,
by E. M. BLACKMAN. Government Printer.-By Authority.
1952.


75/00001-430-10.52.


[Ptric, 3 cents.









LEEWARD ISLANDS.
GENER AL GOVERNMENT.

STATUTORY RULES AND ORDERS.
1952, No. 26.
THE PENSIONS (AMENDMENT) REGULATIONS, 1952, DATED
OCTOBER 4, 1952, MADE BY THE GOVERNOR IN COUNCIL
WITH THE SANCTION OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE UNDER
THE PROVISIONS OF SUBSECTION (2) OF SECTION 3 OF
THE PENSIONS ACT, 1947 (No. 12/1947).

1. CITATION. These Regulations may he cited as
the Pensions (Amendment) Regulations, 1952, and shall be
read as one with the Pensions Regulations, 1947, contained
in the First Schedule to the Pensions Act, 1947, hereinafter
referred to as the Principal Regulations.

2. AMENDMENT OF PRINCIPAL REGULATIONS. Regu-
lation 24 of the Principal Regulations is hereby amended
by the substitution of the following for paragraph (b) of
sub-regulation (2) thereof:-.
(b) in the case of an officer who is transferred to
the service of the Colony from other public service, not
later than six months after the date of his transfer or
one month after the earliest date on which, if retired in
the circumstances aforesaid, he might be awarded
a pension under the Act, whichever is the later."

Made by the Governor in Council this 4th day of
Oclober, 1952.
A. E. PENN,
Clerk of the Council,








ANTIGUA.
Printed at the Government Printing Office, Leeward Islands,
by E. M. BLACKRAN, Government Printer.-By Authority.
1952.


591000213-430-10.52.


Price 3 cents.




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs