CAMERON, J.:—This is an appeal by the Minister of National Revenue from a decision of the Income Tax Appeal Board, dated March 22, 1950, 2 Tax A.B.C. 55 at p. 60, which Board unanimously allowed the respondent’s appeal from an assessment to

THE CHIEF J USTICE :—The following questions of law, touching the interpretation of the British North America Acts, 1867 to 1949, have been referred to the Supreme Court of Canada for hearing and consideration :

CAMERON, J.:—This is an appeal from an assessment to income tax dated May 17, 1946, in respect of the taxation year 1944.

THORSON, P:—This is an appeal from the decision of the Income Tax Appeal Board dismissing the appellant’s appeal against his income tax assessment for the year 1946. The facts from which it rises are simple. The appellant is a barrister and solicitor

RINFRET, C.J.C.:—I would allow the appeal and reduce the valuation of the asset in question at $67,230, on the basis of the income being $9,000.00 per year. The appellants should have their costs here and below.

CAMERON, J.:—By agreement of Counsel this matter was heard at the same time as the case of The King v. Pacific Bedding Company Limited, [1950] C.T.C. 236. The facts in this case do not differ materially from those

CAMERON, J.:—In this matter the plaintiff claims from the defendant company the sum of $1,366.70 said to be due and owing for sales tax under the provisions of section 86 of The Excise Tax Act, R.S.C. 1927, ¢. 179, and amendments

WILLIAMS, C.J.K.B. :—The Court is asked to interpret certain provisions in the will of the late Thomas Creighton, of Flin Flon, who died, unmarried, without issue, April 6, 1949, leaving a will dated February 28, 1930, which was proved June 16, 1949.

PARKER, J.:—Charles E. Lewis Ltd. (hereinafter called the "Company’’), a Company carrying on a large manufacturing business in the Town of Truro, executed and delivered to the Royal Bank of Canada (hereinafter called the ‘‘Bank’’) a document endorsed as a "‘General

JEAN, J.:—Les défendeurs, par leur inscription en droit partielle, veulent faire rayer de la déclaration les par. 9, 10, 11, 12 et 18 par lesquels la demanderesse allègue qu’à la suite du décès de son mari, victime d’un accident, dont elle tient les défendeurs