PETERSFIELD.
PETTY SESSIONS, Tuesday.—Present: Hon. J. J. Carnegie, chairman, Sir J. C. Jervoise, Bart., M.P., Sir W. W. Knighton, Bart, J. Waddington, Esq., and Major Briggs.
POOR RATE APPEAL. Mr. Benjamin Warner, of Standfast Farm, in the parish of Hawkley, appealed against the valuation of the Assessment Committee. The farm contains 66 acres, and had been assessed at £51 5s. 9d. rateable value. Mr. E. Blackmore, jun., Alresford, appeared for appellant, and Mr. E. Albery, Midhurst, for the Overseers of the Parish and for the Assessment Committee. A long discussion arose at the opening of the case as to the ??? standi of the appellant. Mr. Albery called the attention of the magistrates to the fact that the notice in the present case set forth a different ground of appeal from that contained in the notice of appeal to the Assessment Committee, the latter alleged ‟unfairness” and the present complaint was of ‟over-rating.” Mr. Blackmore contended that the notices were substantially identical, inasmuch as it was clearly ‟unfair” that a man should be ‟over-rated.” The chairman remarked that it was of the utmost importance especially as this was the first case that had come before them under the new Act, that the forms prescribed by the Act should be strictly complied with and that the terms of notices in each case should be the same. It appeared that the former notices had been drawn up by the appellant himself before Mr. Blackmore was called in, and hence the discrepance. After a very lengthened argument on either side the magistrates decided on hearing the case on its merits, but with the understanding of which a note was made by the clerk that their doing so should not be drawn into a precedent on any future occasions. Mr. Blackmore then called Mr. Henry Warner, who deposed that on the 2nd of February he appealed to the Assessment Committee on behalf of his brother, the appellant in the present case, and failed to obtain the redress he sought. He knew Standfast Farm well, his father had rented it up to March, 1859 at £50 a year, he then gave notice to quit and the rent was reduced to £40, which he witness considered its full value. Some draining had since been done by the landlord for which his father paid five per cent. on the outlay, viz., £3 7s., making a total rental of £43 7s., including tithes, which were commuted at £19 1?s. The soil was a poor clay, there were 12 acres of rough copse with a good deal of oak timber on it, three acres of hops, and 17 acres of pasture, the rest was rough ground, and he considered £40 quite its outside value. Cross-examined by Mr. Albery: My brother has been tenant about 18 months or two years. The farm adjoins some land in the occupation of my father whose farm contains 60 acres, and for which he pays £80 a year. I can’t tell why my brother took Standfast. I don’t know that it was that he might be put on the rate land and attend the vestry. He has no horses or waggons except those on my father’s farm. I was overseer some years ago. In 1863, Standfast was rated to my father at £37 9s. 2d., the rating of the whole parish at that time was £1,?23 ??s. ?d. I am not overseer now. The proportion of tithe to rent is is usually about one third. This valuation list handed to witness by Mr. Albery is signed by me, and is in my handwriting. (Following illegible)
farm was agreed to be put at. I told Mr. John Ayling that it was high than the rent, and that I had altered it. I won’y swear that it was not put at 16s. an acre. In this list, which is my handwriting, it stands at 12s. 6d. an acre. The total valuation of the parish at that time was £2,266 15s. 8d. All the other lands were put at what was agreed on at the vestry. I altered Standfast. I consider £21 19s. 2d. quite enough for it. I can’t say how many hops have been grown there, nor what they fetched. I believe they have sometimes fetched £7 per cwt.—Mr. Edward Wyatt, land surveyor, deposed to having gone over the farm about a fortnight ago, and the result of his estimate gave as the rateable value £26 9s. — Mr. Robert Shotter deposed to having gone over the farm with Mr. Wyatt, and that on afterwards comparing notes they found only a very slight difference in one or two items, which they adjusted, and agreed upon the same sum, viz. £26 9s. as the fair rateable value.— This was the case for the appellants. Mr. Albery addressed the Bench at considerable length for the respondents, and called Mr. Twynam, of Winchester, who deposed to having recently valued the parish of Hawkley, and gave as his estimate of this particular form the sum at which the committee had assessed it, viz.: £56 19s. 8d., and added that he felt quite sure it was worth every farthing of the money. Mr. Robert Thring, land agent and surveyor, deposed to the same effect, adding that he put it at a trifle more than Mr. Twynam did, and he felt confident he could obtain a tenant at the price. The Court was cleared while the Magistrates deliberated on their decision, and on the re-admission of the public the Chairman announced that the appeal was dismissed.—Mr. Albery applied for costs, but the Chairman said as it was the first case they had had they would not give costs, but ordered the same to be paid from the common fund of the union. There was another case entered for hearing, in which Mr. Henry Warner was the appellant, but Mr. Blackmore stated that as it rested upon precisely the same evidence as the last, he would not trouble the Magistrates with it.—Withdrawn.