London's Pulse: Medical Officer of Health reports 1848-1972

View report page

Shoreditch 1897

[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for Shoreditch, Parish of St. Leonard]

This page requires JavaScript

62
Your Committee have held 16 meetings for hearing 139 objections to the
Provisional Lists for the year with the result that they have reduced Assessments in
111 cases, and confirmed Assessments in 28 cases.
VALUATION (METROPOLIS) ACT, 1869.

The following return shows the alteration effected in the total gross and rateable value of the Parish during the year :—

Particulars.Value as finally determined by Assessment Committee.
Gross.Rateable.
££
Valuation (6th April, 1897) upon which the County and Police Rates were levied845,155693,732
Add—
Increased Valuation effected by Supplemental Valuation List, 1897, as finally deposited741595
Total Valuation (6th April, 1897) upon which the County and Police Rates are levied845,896694,327
Less—
Amount carried to the City of London, in respect of the General, Sewers and Consolidated Rates pursuant to Act 11 & 12 Vict., cap. 1637,7086,166
Total Valuation (6th April, 1898) upon which the Rates for School Board and Local Purposes were levied838,188688,161

SUPPLEMENTAL LIST, 1897.
(a) PUBLIC LIBRARIES.
By the Supplemental List, 1897, the Public Libraries, 236, Kingsland Road and
91, Great Eastern Street were taken out of Assessment and the London County
Council lodged a Notice of Objection but afterwards withdrew same, as Public
Libraries have been held by the Courts to come within the exemption from Rates of
Scientific Institutions.
(b) RIGA WHARF, CANAL ROAD.
An appeal against the Supplemental List, 1897, was made by Messrs. King & Co.,
whose premises, Riga Wharf, Canal Road, were entered in that List at the increased
assessment of £200 Gross £167 Rateable (the previous figures being £150 Gross £125
Rateable). This appeal was heard at the Special Assessment Sessions held at the
Town Hall on the 6th December, 1897. The appellants asked for £120 Gross £100
Rateable and were represented by Mr. Montefiore (instructed by Messrs. Mills, Lockyer
and Co.), and the Vestry Clerk represented your Committee. Mr. Eve as valuer to
the Committee gave evidence that the alterations made since the last quinquennial
valuation would only justify an increase of about £5 on the rateable value. The