An Explanation of the REASON the 1873 Return was called
for, WHAT the difficulties were and, WHY.
THE EARL OF DERBY asked the Lord Privy Seal (Viscount
Halifax) whether it was the Intention of her Majesty’s Government to take any
steps for ascertaining accurately the number of proprietors of land and houses
in the United Kingdom, with the quantity of land owned by each proprietor. He should not trouble the House at any
length, because he understood that the suggestion he had ventured to put into
his question was acquiesced in, and would be acted upon by the Government.
They all
knew that out-of-doors there was from time to time a great outcry raised about
what was called the monopoly of land, and, in support of that cry, the wildest
and most reckless exaggerations and mis-statements of fact were uttered as to
the number of persons who were the actual owners of the soil. It had been said again and again that,
according to the Census of 1861, there were in the United Kingdom not more than
30,000 landowners ; and though it had been repeatedly shown that this estimate
arose from a misreading of the figures in the Census returns, the statement was
continually reproduced, just as though its accuracy had never been
disputed. The real state of the case
was at present a matter for conjecture, but he believed, for his own part, that
300,000 would be nearer the truth, than the estimate which fixed the landowners
of the United Kingdom at a tenth of that number.
He entirely disbelieved the truth of the popular notion that small estates were undergoing a gradual process of absorption in the larger ones. It was true that the class of peasant proprietors formerly to be found in the rural districts was tending to disappear – for the very good reason that such proprietors could, as a general rule, obtain from 40 to 50 years’ purchase for their holdings, and thereby vastly increase their incomes. In the place of that class, however, there was rapidly growing up a new class of small owners, who, dwelling in or near towns or railway stations, were able to buy small freeholds. He believed this new class would fully replace, and perhaps more than replace, the diminution of the other class to which he had referred. He apprehended that through the agency of the Local Government Board it would be easy to obtain statistical information, which would be conclusive in regard to this matter.
The returns
ought to include the name of every owner and the extent of his property in
acres. He did not wish to have included
in the Return the exact dimensions of very minute holdings ; that could be met
by giving the aggregate extent of holdings not exceeding an acre each, the
number of separate owners being stated, but not the extent of each holding.
Other speakers followed: The Duke of Richmond, Viscount
Halifax, the Marquess of Salisbury, and the Earl of Feversham.
“IN ORDER that the nature and character of the Return,
and of the information contained in it, may be correctly appreciated, attention
should be given to the following preliminary statement, containing an account
of the public documents from which the Return is compiled, of the course
pursued in its preparation, of the difficulties which have been met with, and
how far they have been overcome, and, finally, of the actual value of the
results which have been obtained.”
“ALL THE statements and
information contained in this Return, with the exception of the addresses of
the owners, are derived from the valuation lists, which are made out for the
purposes of rating, in every parish.
A short time prior
to the year 1836 the Poor Law Commissioners had issued an order directing that
the poor rate should contain certain particulars, but the Parochial Assessment
Act of 1836 contains the first statutory provision which requires the poor rate
to be made out in a prescribed manner.
The present
valuation lists are, however, prepared under the provisions of the Union
Assessment Committee Act of 1862, which was introduced by the Right Hon. C.P.
Villiers, the then president of the late Poor Law Board. This Act provides for the appointment of an
Assessment Committee by the Guardians of every Union for the investigating and
supervision of the valuation of the several rateable properties in each parish
within the Union for the purpose of assessment, and as a preliminary step to
such investigation and supervision the overseers of every parish were required
to make out a list of all the rateable properties in each parish, with
the annual values thereof, in the following form, viz. :-
(The headings were :-
Name of Occupier
; Name of Owner ; Description of Property ; Name or Situation of Property ;
Estimated Extent ; Gross Estimated Rental ; Rateable Value.)