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

View report page

St Mary (Islington) 1892

[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for Islington, Parish of St. Mary ]

This page requires JavaScript

3
This reduction may be taken as equivalent to a loss, assuming the rates
to be 5s. in the £, of about £4,000 per annum to the parish, which loss
has, of course, to be made good by an increase in the rates of other
ratepayers.
Beyond this, the ascertaining of the rateable value of the
Company's mains and pipes for the year 1890-91, and the apportionment
of that value among the parishes interested, nothing has been decided,
nor has any principle been laid down for the guidance in future of Assessment
Committees and Overseers in assessing the value of this or other
similar hereditaments.
The costs, on the other hand, have been, as was anticipated, very
heavy. The taxation of the Company's costs alone occupied the
Taxing Master for ten days, and although Islington has reason to
be thankful that the total costs of the Company were taxed down from
£9,300 to £3,174 4s. 6d., it may reasonably complain of the manner in
which the latter amount was apportioned among the several respondent
Assessment Committees. This appears to have been done on the basis
of losses, and although the adoption of such a principle was strongly
resented by the Committee's Counsel, it met, it is hardly necessary to
say, with the hearty concurrence of the other Assessment Committees,
who may, in fact, be said to have fought the Company at the cost, to a
large extent, of the Parish of Islington. The result is that Islington
has been ordered to pay more than one-half of the total taxed costs of
the Appellants, or £1,788 15s. 5d., while, on the other hand, the
Appellants have been ordered to pay the Committee's costs of the first
valuation:—£262 16s. 8d. The Committee did not accept the Taxing
Master's decision as to the apportionment of the costs without appealing
to the Judge (Sir Peter Edlin) who, however, confirmed it, and
moreover, before submitting to his decision, the Committee took
Counsel's opinion as to its power of appeal. Counsel, however, advised
that under the Valuation Act, 1869, absolute discretion was given to
the Court in the matter of costs, and the Committee had, therefore, no
option but to submit.
The total net cost of this appeal to the Parish of Islington has
been about £3,320.
It is more satisfactory to deal with the result of the appeal
against the totals of the Valuation List. These had been reduced by