CATHOLIC SCHOOL PROPERTY.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 548, 1 July 1909, Page 2

CATHOLIC SCHOOL PROPERTY.

■ ,' ■ A QUESTION OF, RA'IES

THE FEILDING CASE DECIDED. ■ (By Telegraph.—Spccial OonespondenO ,Palmerston North, June 30. i , At the last sitting of the Supremo Court in Palmerston North, .an appeal caso of great interest was argued before■': Mr..: Justice : - Chapman, when; Mr; ,:C. A. iLouglman (on behalf :of tfco Roman y Catholic Church- of Foildmg) sought to havo thd decision of Mr. A. D. Thomson, S.M., reversed; in regard' ta •> tho .payment; of. iateß on coftaiu property • held in connection witlr tho Roman Catholio .School, aud. claimed to be exempt under 1 " Section 2 of; the-Rating Act,. 1908. Tho facta. . " as dotenmncd ,by: tlio Jlagistrate. were, that) some of tho nuris engaged:in i.tmning, ieitiies<!V-' f ' in tlie, cbnyeht or ; in the'church,-also gave'; ' instruction in music, both vocal and ih'Btnji ' mental, .in ', tho convent to persons. otlie* • than attending ' the ordinary. school, ■ >'•- and, for/ this, they received payment. They • , accounted to tho Reverend Mother in \Yanganui, for. all moaeys received from ' ■ all-" souroes; and these ' moneys; were used to r 'defray tho expenses of the school, but ihad to be supplemented ' by donations, bazaars, eto.: ~'lt was': stated, in appellant's evidence. that one sister principally taught music, and , .the other."three taught in the day: school.A number' of - pupils' received music and sing* ■ inc. teaching, for which they . pa-id in tli» '• ! ordinary way, audj but for that, tho school ; could not bo earned on'- at all. On thesv • I facts the. Magistrate found that it had not I boon shown ..that tho occupation of the building was for tho purposes solely of a > school. '.. ■- , .'■■■■ : <• " " Hi 3 Honour Mr. Justice Chapman said lie - would not be entitled to revise that finding, even if lie saw anything in i.t with which ho ' did not agree. His Honour (xmtinued: "It is .argued, however, that'to• entitle ;.a person; in. appellants' position to the exemption, tho uso need hbt:he solely- for the purposes of y tho school; that it isVnough that it is substantially required and used for tho pur- > poses of. tho, school." Mr. Lougluian argued ;■ .that tho'tcaching of music..was to bo regarded aa ono of tho purposes of the'school. 1 cannot 'agree'- that this' is 'so.Tho persons ' taught are 1 not scholars,' havonotliingto do ' . with, tho Bchooi, ! 'and ■ are; not within its dis-, ■ .cipliuoas a.scboo)., Tlip rorl position, is that the only connection; betweciv" the teaching of music and'the school is that tho teaching , : of niusic is' used as ;_'a means of making' a -■ profit, and thus securing -financial aid for, tho . purposes of tho school. This is n uso apart tromi.tho sehool, and from tho, school hours,' and, if the. building were, not available, the system, could onljj be carried on by hiring , another' room. which' would' not bo exempt. If this secured'an exemption, it. would, havo to bo extended to 'other : systematic means ■■ of financo, such as. teaching gardening in tho grounds,'or even conducting some profitearning, venture, such as. an orchard. . I .do . not tlitnk that such-. matters ore within tho moaning of the statute." ■ : Judgment was affirmed, and .tho appeal dismissed' with costs ,- £7. 75.; Mr, J. ..P; .' Innos appeared for the, Foilding ; BeirougU , Council all through tlie proceedings/ and ■' Messrs. Oiiglcv and Kelly were the solicitors ? , for ' the ..appellants,''.for whom Mr.-C; A. . '.: I/oughnau appearcdintho Supreme-Court./ y