Reports relative to valuation for poor rates, and to registered elective franchise in Ireland (local reports) (second series): second appendix

Back to Search Bibliographic Data Print
VALUATIONS for POOR RATES, IRELAND. 
229 6 finished with as little delay as possible, to enable the clerk to complete a copy of the valuation. 
Apr-E\ni\ Resolved,—That the clerk be directed to prepare a correct copy of the valuation, prepara-torv to striking a rate; and that he be directed to apply to Mr. 
Thorn for a rate-book, and Dunmanway. 
to have it forwarded as soon as possible. 

27th January, 1841. 
At a meeting of the Board of Guardians, Dunmanway, held this day, Resolved,—That it is the opinion of this Board that at the next day of meeting on the Rate oi dered to be 27th of February, a rate should be struck for the Dunmanway Union, the valuation beino-struck-completed; and that the Commissioners be requested to issue an order for the appointment of a rate collector. 

Evidence. 
Evidence. 
Mr. 
William Pattison, valuator; examined. 
Mr.Pattisou,' 
Was appointed on the 1st of February, 1840, with Messrs. 
John Whelply and Mr. 
William Gilman (who are at present absent from Dunmanway), to value the Union conjointly. 
None of the three were professional valuators, but farmers residing within the Union. 
Mr. 
Qualifications. 
Whelply had previously been employed in making a valuation of the West Division of East Carbery, for thp purpose of equalizing the county cess, about 16 years ago. 
The valuators were furnished with a copy of the Poor Law Act, the Commissioners' circular Documents, furnished, on valuation and rating, the tithe composition books, and the county cess applotments for the parishes of Fanlobus, Drinagh, Inchigeela, and Kilmichael. 
They did not apply for or obtain any rentals from landlords, but got maps of their estates Nn rentals applied for from some of them. 
or obtained. 
The thiee valuators always valued together. 
They used the tithe composition and county Valuators, acted cess applotment books, for the purpose of ascertaining the areas of the different farms, which t(>gether. 
in general they found to be correct, but did not use either of them for the purpose of ascer-(urn^edcuments taining the value, because the county cess valuation wTas much below the real value, havino-been calculated according to a low scale of the prices of farming produce, and the tithe composition was often too high, although the value of land in the Union has greatly improved since that valuation was made ; but always used both to assist them in forming their opinion as to the true value. 
Did not estimate the gross produce and reduce it by the outgoings of the tenant, in order Did not estimate; to ascei (ain the value. 
£roi,s I'*"-"*-. 
Adopted the same system of valuation in the towns and villages as in the rural districts, System of valuation except lhat they took into consideration the higher letting value in towns. 
same intowns an(l In estimating local advantages or disadvantages took into consideration the proximity to Local circumstances 

* 

market towns, to public roads, to limestone quarries, and to public strands for procuring sand considered. 
for manure. 
Visited c\ery tenement in the Union. 
The inquiries made by them on \isiting each tenement were, as to its extent, the names of Inquiries made on the landlord and occupant, and the amount of rent. 
The replies to all these inquiries, except j^tnigeach the last, were in general satisfactory, but in some cases the tenants refused to state the amount of their rent; and when they did so, it was generally under what they paid, so that the valuators could not depend on it, and ne\er took it down in their field-books. 
The te&t of value which they adopted was, not the utmost that could be got from a solvent Tost of \ahie. 
tenant, but such a rent as they considered the tenant could afford to pay, and fairly live by.