793 
The Assessment of Agricultural Land. 
by the owner, and amounting to 70/. per acre, the assessment on which the 
tenant paid rates was 150 /, and no deduction was allowed in respect of the 
tithe, for which the owner was separately assessed. 
In many cases of the worst land in Essex the rent now paid is only a 
few pounds in excess of the tithe, but the assessments are maintained at a 
rate higher than the rent without any deduction for the tithe. 
I wa9 informed by a gentleman, in whose statement I have confidence, of 
these farms, where the rates actually paid amounted to 36 shillings, 60 
shillings, and even 120 shillings in the pound on the rent minus the tithe. It 
was stated that the assessment committees have been very unwilling to 
reduce the assessments to the low rates at which farms are in many cases 
let, lest they should have to raise the rates in the pound to a point which 
would cause discontent among other ratepayers. 
I promised to look into the matter, and although I have no authority to 
give directions or advice to assessment committees, and the appeal from 
them is not to the Local Government Board, but to the Quarter Sessions, it 
may he of some value that I should express an opinion on the subject. 
As a general rule land ought to be assessed at the amount for which it 
will let from year to year, deducting the tithe where it is paid by the 
landlord. For this purpose the rent agreed upon between the owner and 
the tenant is primd facie a measure for the assessment. The rent, 
however, is not inclusive, for it may be that the land is worth more than 
it is let for, as in the case of a beneficial lease ; or, on the other hand, it 
may be that the general value of land in the neighbourhood has gone down, 
and the tenant under an existing lease has still to pay the agreed rent. In 
such cases the assessments should be above or below the agreed rent, as the 
case may be. 
With this reservation the rent should, as a general rule, be the basis of 
the assessment, and I cannot think that the assessment committees are 
justified if, as alleged, they keep up the assessments on land in order to 
avoid raising the general rate in the pound. 
The effect would be to relieve the tithe owner and the owners of other 
property from the burthen which should fall upon them in consequence of 
the depressed condition of agriculture, where land has fallen into such a 
deplorable condition, as is the case in many of the farms I saw, and it 
will only let for a nominal rent after deducting the tithe. I think the 
occupier is entitled to have his assessment reduced in the same proportion. 
The low assessment and the consequent smaller payment of rates would 
bean inducement to many persons to take such farms, while the reverse acts 
as a deterrent. 
The effect of this would undoubtedly be to throw some greater burthen 
on other property in the union. 
Let me illustrate by the Unions of Maldon, Chelmsford, Billericay, and 
Braintree. From a recent return it appears that the aggregate valuation of 
land in these unions is 222,000/., of houses 210,000/., and of railways and 
other property 82,000/. I lune no means of ascertaining wliat the tithe is, 
but I will assume that it is about 55,000/. a year. The deduction of the 
tithe would reduce the assessment on the occupiers of land to 167,000/. The 
rates, which average about 8s. in the pound, would produce about 77,000 /. 
If the assessment of land were reduced by one-half, the aggregate valua- 
tion would be only 431, (.00/. ; and in order to r,dse 77,000/. it would be 
necessary to raise the rates in the pound by 8 <7. The result would be that 
land would pay 15,300/. in lieu of 25/100/., the tithe owners 10,000/. in lieu 
of 8,200/., the owners of houses 38,000/. in lieu of 31,000/., and railway and 
other property 15,000/. in lieu of 12,000/. 
The relief, therefore, to land would be considerable in proportion to the 
