MACLEAN, J.:—These are appeals, consolidated, from decisions of the Minister of National Revenue affirming assessments made in 1937 upon the Dominion Textile Company Ltd., hereinafter to be referred to as ‘‘the Company,’’ under The Business Profits War

May 21st, 1940. RIDDELL J.A.:—I had read the proceedings below and carefully considered them in connection with the relevant cases in Stroud’s Judicial Dictionary and "Words and Phrases,’’ and could find nothing to complain of in the judgment appealed from either

THE CHIEF JUSTICE :—The contract in this case was a contract for building the superstructure of a bridge and the erection of it and the securing of it; and the contract price was an entire price for the entire job. It was not, in the ordinary

ANGERS J.:—The suppliant, Dominion Bridge Co. Ltd., a body politic and corporate, incorporated under the laws of the Dominion of Canada, having its head office in the City of Montreal, in the Province of Quebec, claims from His Majesty the King the refund

Murphy, J.:—The municipality derives its powers of assessment from the Municipal Act, R.S.B.C., 1936, ce. 199. Section 223(1), prescribes how a municipality must proceed in ascertaining values for assessment purposes. It reads as follows:

MACLEAN, J.:—This is an appeal from a decision of the Minister of National Revenue in which he declared the net taxable income of the appellant, hereinafter to be called "‘the company,’’ to be $52,762.02, for the fiscal year ending November 30, 1958.

THe Chief Justice—The pertinent words of clause 4 of the will are these:

ROBERTSON C.J.O.:—Appeal from order of MeTague J. of 14th December, 1938, on an originating motion for order construing and interpreting certain parts of the will of the late Sir Albert Edward Kemp.

MCTAGUE J.:—Sir Albert Edward Kemp died on the 12th day of August, 1929. In his will dated 1st day of December, 1927, by clause 3, he gave and devised his residence, known as "Castle Frank’’ to his trustees upon certain trusts, viz., to allow

FoRMAL JUDGMENT: The appeal of the above named appellant from the judgment of the Exchequer Court of Canada pronounced in the above cause on the 26th day of February, in the year of our Lord one thousand nine hundred and forty, confirming the