619
THE ESTATES GAZETTE
April 15, 1899.
We have had long to wait for the return of the net receipt of estate duty from each class of estates in the year ending March 81, 1898—that is to say, the document is just a year after date. The figures it contains demonstrate how very unfair and unequal the incidence of the duty is. Thus, less than 89 millions of capital from 411 estates were charged with very nearly £6,000,000 of duty. Eather more than £8,268,000 of duty was derived from only 1,517 estates of the aggregate capital value of nearly 138 millions ; but 58,474 other estates, with an aggregate capital of more than 108 millions, were charged with duty to the amount of only £8,300,000. More than £9,760,000 of the estate duty was obtained from 8,635 estates over £10,000 each, with a total of 176 millions of capital; and only £1,800,000 of of duty from 51,356 estates under £10,000 each, with a total of more than 71J millions of capital. Were it not for the large sums of money thus obtained, it would be inevitable that the amount and incidence of the duty should be overhauled speedily. As it is, however, we fear there is very little hope of any rearrangement—unless it be one which would produce even more revenue than the present.
(Duastnnai JELaits.
It was only natural that some of the Building Societies should not be altogether in love with the Workmen’s Dwellings Bill; and it is easy enough to understand their position and follow their argument. Seeing, they say in effect, that there are very numerous Building Societies scattered all over the country which offer the working man all the facilities he can possibly need for the purchase of the house in which he lives, what can be the necessity for a Bill introduced by the Government to do the same thing? We are happy to think that a very large number of the artisan class are already the owners of their houses, and many of them have, no doubt, bought them with the help of Building Societies. But, despite what has been done, the proportion of such men who have become their own landlords is still lamentably small; and it is from every point of view desirable that the number should be increased. The Building Societies have been only moderately successful, and there is nothing unreasonable in endeavouring to supplement them by municipal action.
The annual farce of an Evicted Tenants (Ireland) Ee-instatement Bill was performed in the House of Commons on Wednesday. Mr. O'Malley’s little measure provided modestly that evicted tenants should be restored to their holdings, and that a quarter of a million of money should be provided out of the Irish Church Temporalities Fund to start them in business again. As a matter of fact, it was a Dillon Belief Bill as much as anything. Why in the world should men who were able to pay rent, but refused to do so, acting under the orders of a political director, be helped out of public money to resume the holdings from which they were deservedly evicted ? Mr. Gerald Balfour was no doubt right in saying that the Bill was meant chiefly to make a show of activity ; but his speech, on the whole, was not a discreet one. However, the obvious impudence of the proposal ensured its rejection; but no doubt we shall hear of it again next Session.
^muittacg trf
AN INTERESTING SALE (p. 612).—Some interesting articles of antique furniture to be offered׳ to auction at tlie Old! Manor House, Hythe, next week, are described and illustrated׳ under this heading. BRIC-A-BRAC (p. 611)
CITY־ TOPICS (p. 626).
DEPRECIATION OP UNDERWOOD ip. 608).—A letter from a correspondent on this topic is of interest.
FARM AND FIELD (p. 624).
FORESTRY (p. 609).
FURNITURE OLD AND NEW (p. 610).—Sir Wm. Chambers’ influence.
INJURIOUS INSECTS (p. 620).—A notice of Miss Ormerod’s annual “Report of Observations of Injurious Insects and Common Farm Pests” is given.
LEGAL PROCEEDINGS (p. 512).—Several important cases are reported.
LEGAL TOPICS (p. 624).
LICENSED PROPERTY NOTES (p. 608).
MARKETS (p. 628).
MEMS. FROM THE MART ip. 625).
NOTES BY THE WAY (p. 620).
OBITUARY (p. 621).—Alderman J. C Collier.
PRIVATE TREATY SALES (p. 619).
PROPERTIES IN THE MARKET (p. 627).
PROVINCIAL PROPERTY SALES (p. 625).
PROVISION AGAINST FIRE (p. 609).
RATES AND RATING (p. 607).-The hearing of appeals by the Falmouth Assessment Committee against the reduction made in the assessment of various properties in the borough was continued at the Cornwall Quarter Sessions last week. Several cases, together with the decision of the Court in the whole, are reported.—Judgment (p. 620) was delivered at the Devon Quarter Sessions this week in the appeal of the Cattewater Commissioners of Plymouth against the assessment of their breakwater by the Plympton Union I ssess-ment Committee.
SAYINGS AND DOINGS (p. 610).
SURVEYORS’ INSTITUTION (p. 623).
RAIN WATER STORAGE (p. 606).—An interesting paper on “ Rain Water—Means of Collection and Storage—Its Importance—Its Neglect, as emphasised in the 1898 draught,” by Mr. E. Brand, of Lewes, was read at the last meeting of the East Sussex Farmers’ Club.
VALUE OF BRICKFIELDS NEAR CHATHAM (p. 627).—The arbitration proceedings׳ in the important case of “ Batchelor v. Brompton. Chatham, Gillingham and Rochester Water Company,” were continued at the Surveyors’ Institution on Saturday, and again adjourned.
But, it is argued, the Government proposal is mere State socialism. A form of Socialism it may be ; but what of that ? It is Socialism to make rates for lighting or paving, or to call upon the taxpayer to maintain prisons. And if we may combine for “the punishment of wickedness and vice,” why may we not do likewise to help men of small means to obtain what used to be called “ a stake in the country ” ? It is a matter of such cardinal importance that this class should be fixed and sobered by being, as far as possible, anchored to the soil, that we are quite prepared to welcome a charge of a penny in the pound on the rates to achieve so admirable an object. But it must always be remembered that it is a permissive Bill, and that no local authority is compelled to adopt it, and still less to throw charges on the rates for its working.
We have called attention, more than once, to the injustices which attend the collection of the Land Tax, and we have pointed out the extraordinary state of things which permits of land tax, which was redeemed long ago, being still imposed. This week Lord Stanley of Alderley has sent to the “ St. James’s Gazette ” an astonishing case in point. He writes :—
“ A Carnarvonshire gentleman had two farms in Anglesey, and he redeemed the land tax upon them on March 25, 1799, shortly after the passing of the Eedemption Act of 1798. I purchased these farms in 1886, and now I find that the tenant of one of these redeemed farms has for years paid 8s. 8d. land tax, and by reassessment since 1896 has been made to pay £2 6s. 5|d. in 1898, and £1 19s. 6d. in the present year. It is not probable that the fact of redemption should have been lost sight of at the time it was carried out, and more probable that the tax was reimposed on a change of tenancy by a local tax-gatherer ; but how was it that this was not checked at Somerset House ; and that, after the passing of the Act of 1896, Somerset House did not supply the local tax-collectors with information as to redeemed lands.” It is obviously not to the interest of Somerset House to supply information of this kind too readily ; but it is a scandal, nevertheless, that it is not forthcoming In the change of a hundred years it is not surprising that a good many redemptions should have been lost sight of.	1
them cheap. We are very indisposed to interfere with any man’s freedom of action ; but flimsily built houses entail so serious a danger from fire that it is to the public interest that far more control should be exercised than is the case at present. There is really no difficulty about building in a reasonably fire-proof way, and still less about avoiding the more obvious facilities for fire. There is, for instance, that utter abomination the lath and plaster wall, which is found in the vast majority of English houses. Nothing helps a fire so much, except perhaps it be lath and plaster ceilings. This is inflammable stuff, flares up so readily, that a house is a furnace in a few minutes. Yet, as another correspondent of the “ Times ” shows, there is no difficulty whatever about replacing the wooden laths by metal ones. Their cost, it is true, is slightly greater, but the whole thing is a mere flea-bite, which ought to deter no man who is really anxious for safety. This same correspondent brings a serious charge against the insurance companies, whom he accuses of standing in the way of improvement by charging just the same premiums in cases where buildings have been erected in a really fire-proof way as where no precautions whatever have been taken. It would certainly seem to be to the interest cfthe insurance companies to place a premium upon safe building, and perhaps as we learn better to realise the great importance of the whole matter, they will be more disposed to grant favourable treatment to those who endeavour to save themselves, their neighbours, and the public from disaster.
THE ESTATE MABKET.
With the Easter recess well over, business was continued at the London Auction Mart this week with much vigour. Heavy batches of small freehold and leasehold investments were dealt with and the competition in many instances was very keen. A few West-end residences were submitted but nearly all were withdrawn. One of the principal attractions during the week was the sale of a freehold City ground rent of £780, secured upon office premises in Poultry, with reversion in 47| years, which realised £30,250, or nearly 39 years’ purchase• Stocks and shares in various undertakings were offered with a fair amount of success ; and substantial contributions to the week’s total of £176,641 came from this source. The aggregate realisation cannot be compared with that for the corresponding period in last year, that being Easter week.
J^ates by Jribaff featju
Messrs. Sales and Clarke have just sold Nos. 26 to 36, Liffler-road, Plumstead, bought in at their recent auction, for £1,150.
Messrs. Trollope have disposed of the leasehold premises, No. lb, King-street, St. James’s-square, S.W., which were not sold when offered to auction by them, at the London Mart, on December 8 last.
Messrs. Eiloart and Co., of Folkestone, have recently sold! No. 64, Broadmead-road, Folkestone, for £800 (lease 96 years, ground rent £5); also No. 5, Cheriton-place, for £650 (lease 52 years, ground rent £4).
Lots 2, 3 and 4 of the building sites in City-road and St. Luke’s, E.C., which were not sold when offered at the London Mart on June 28 last, by Messrs. Debenham, Tewson, Farmer and Bridgewater, have now been disposed of by that firm.
A valuable little estate, situated in the Leeds suburb of Knostrop, which was announced for offer to auction by Messrs. Oliver and Appleton, of Leeds, on the 25th inst., has just been sold by them, and will not, therefore, now be submitted. The property comprises several large plots of excellent building land, and the ancient mansion house of Knostrop Old Hall, the ancestral home of the Maude family.
®state ®ajtttz
A JOURNAL
Devoted to Land, House Property and Agriculture.
The Oldest Paper1 Published in the Landed Interests.
LONDON, APETL 15, 1899.
FIEE PEEVENTION AND FIEE EXTINCTION.
For a practical people we are singularly short-sighted. There is nothing over which we lament more bitterly than the loss of life by fire which is continually going on in this country, and particularly in London and other great towns. Yet we do absolutely nothing to reduce the likelihood of such catastrophes. We wring our hands in despair every time a life is sacrificed in this wanton and terrible fashion, and then go to sleep until the occasion arrives for fresh wailing. Even when the opportunity of doing something is presented to us, we are careful not to embrace it. Take, for instance, the Fire Brigades Bill, which Mr. Pym brought before the House of Commons on Wednesday. It is notorious that the means of fire-extinction in country districts are, oftener than not, either primitive in the extreme or absolutely non-existent. The object of the Bill was to ensure that rural fire brigades should be made and kept efficient, and it was proposed to ensure this by a system of inspection, to be paid for out of the present Exchequer contribution to the county funds ; and where pressure was to be placed upon local authorities to compel them to carry out existing legislation, it was to be exercised by the Local Government Board. These seem to be very simple proposals, and something may yet come of them, since the Bill was withdrawn that the whole question may be referred to a Select Committee of the House of Commons.
But what was the attitude of Mr. Chaplin, as representing the Local Government Board ? He had two points to make. The Board, he said, was overworked, which is likely enough. Any public department which is worth its salt exists to be overworked. Then he fell back upon the extraordinary plea that there were “ not sufficient grounds ” for the Bill, since the Local Government Board “ had no information as to the inefficiency of the Brigades.” As though any information were required about any fact so notorious ! Moreover, Mr. Chaplin is surely not simple enough to suppose that the local authorities in the rural districts are going to confess voluntarily their sins of omission to a Government department ! But his most extraordinary defence was that 1,122 out of the 13,000 local authorities empowered to incur expenses for fire brigades have actually done so. That is less than 10 per cent., and yet Mr. Chaplin is satisfied. It is a strange attitude for a minister. Happily, the matter cannot rest where it is. The appointment of a Select Committee to consider the whole subject will keep public attention fixed upon a difficulty which may, at any moment, become of vital importance to any one of us. If Cabinet Ministers have time to read newspapers we would recommend Mr. Chaplin to glance through some letters upon fireproof con-truction, which have appeared this weeks n the “ Times.” Perhaps their perusal may convince him of the necessity of taking the matter in hand seriously.
Take, for instance, the letter in which Mr. Maurice B. Adams, the well-known architect, points out that one reason why houses are built in a flimsy way is that the clients of architects will insist upon getting