View report page

20
Thin Conferenee held Severn! meetings, at which Islington wjih
represented by severnl members of I,Ik? Assessment- Committee and by
the Vestry Clerk. Evidence wji.h abundantly forthcoming by the
n.( I it i i hh i < > r i of rcprencntat ives of certain parishes Mm,I, I heir admin i strati on
of I,Ik? Valuation Act wjih l,<» say I ho least loose and principally ccn fined
l,o keeping Mk? rates down in I heir respective localities.
The Council ultimately resolved to take action, and gave? not,ice
of appeal against the Valuation Lists of Mk? (lil y of London, 81,. George
Hanover Bquare, SI/. Marylebone and other parishes, which were
alleged to |h? under assessed l.o I ho <• xI,<• 111, of CM00,000.
The fact Mini Mk? London County Council, aflor due consideration
and consultation with able valuers, iool< such a stop, is sufficient justification
for I,he n,el,ion of I ho local authorities of this parish ; and,
although I Ih^ total amount of the surcharges will possibly not be
sustained, Mio eontribul ions of iHlington in respect of metropolitan
chargOH will certainly be IThe fifth Quinquennial Valuation of the pjirisli having been
prepared by the Assessors in t he early part of I HJiO wjih depoHifed in
twelve books on the 30th May of that year. Kach book corresponded
to a rate collecting (1 i^l ric.t. The total number of nil cable hereditaments
contained in them wjih 411,01(1, the total grosn value £'2,(KJ8,(il4,
and the total rateabh? value £'1,(1011,190. TheHe figures Allowed an
inereiiHe on the provioUH Quinquennial Lint of about, 2,1500 in the number
of rateable hereditaments and £'711,1100 in their rateable value. Thin
increase wjih, however, solely due to two special classes of propert y,
vi: Public Companies and Public IIoiihoh. Indeed, but for these,
as indicated in the report of the AHHOHHinent Committee, the rateabh?
value <»' the parinli would have hIicwii a, considerable decline.
For further details, both ji,h to Mie preparation of the List, and the
mode in which it was subsequently dealt with by the Assessment
Committee, the reader iH referred to tin? reports of the Hoard of
Assessor* and of Mk? Assessment Committee, both of which are
appended.
In connection with the re-valuation it became noeoHsary to deI(Minim?
all the existing agreements under the "Poor Rate Assessment
and Collection Act, IH(!!)." Notice to this effect wan addresHod to all