J.:-For the reasons given by me in City of Sherbrooke et al. v. Le Bureau des Commissaires d'Ecoles Catholiques Romaines de la Cit6 de Sherbrooke et al. (ante, p. 476), I think all the items here in question, except the incoming cables, are to be regarded as immoveables, having been placed upon the premises by the owner for a permanency, completing, as they do, the telephone exchange, for the purposes to which the premises are devoted. This result is not affected by the fact that while some of the items are attached by "iron and nails", as the Courts below have found, the switchboard proper merely rests upon the floor by its own weight.
I cannot agree that the assessed items, taken as a whole, are not to be considered as machinery within the meaning of the statute here in question. They do, in my opinion, come within the definition given in the Oxford Dictionary to which I referred in Northern Broadcasting Company Limited v. The Improvement District of Mountjoy (1). I would dismiss the appeal with costs.
Appeal dismissed with costs. Solicitors for the plaintiffs, appellants:
Venne, Montreal.