HAULTAIN, C.J.S.:—The plaintiffs, during each of the years 1925 and 1926, carried on business as lumber manufacturers within the defendant municipality.

HAULTAIN, C.J.S.:—I agree with my brother Martin that the plaintiff is not entitled to the repayment of the amount of $241, which was paid at the request of Turnbull & Barnum on account of the 1923 and 1924 taxes.

AUDETTE, J.:—This is an appeal, under the provisions of sec. 15 et seq. (now 58 et seq., R.S.C. 1927, e. 97), of The Income War Tax Act, 1917, and amendments thereto, from tne assessment

AUDETTE, J.:—This is an appeal, under the provisions of sec. 15 et seq. of the Income War Tax Act, 1917, and the amendments thereto—from the assessment of the appellant‘s income for the year 1922.

AUDETTE, J.:—This is an appeal,—under the provisions of sec. 19 et seq. of The Income War Tax Act, 1917, and amendments thereto—from the assessment of the appellant company in the sum of $8,371.14 in respect

AUDETTE, J.:—This is an appeal, under the provisions of secs. 19 et seq. of The Income War Tax Act, 1917, as more specially amended by sec. 7 of 13-14 Geo. V, c. 52, from the assessment during

AUDETTE, J.:—This is an appeal, under the provisions of. sections 15 et seq. of The Income War Tax Act, 1917, and amendments thereto, from the assessment for the plaintiff company’s fiscal year, ending 31st

AUDETTE, J.:—This is an appeal, under the Income War Tax Act, 1917, and amendments thereto, as in force in 1922, from the assessment for the year 1921, upon that part of the appellant’s income only which comprises his salary as

MACLEAN, P.:—This is an appeal from an assessment made against the appellant, under the Income War Tax Act, 1917, and the appellant asks that the said assessment be set aside.

HAZEN, C.J.:—Immediately after judgment had been delivered in this matter, on November 18 last, Mr. Doiron on behalf of the defendant made an application for costs, bringing himself within the rule of Budenberg v. Roberts (1876) L.R. 2 C.P.