There was moreover still considerable difficulty with respect to the valuations, and the difficulty was not a little increased by the complexity of the form in which the rate is directed to be made out. This form is expressly prescribed by the Amendment Act, and is rather calculated for the state of things in England, than for what exists in Ireland, although it is too minute and complex to admit of its working satisfactorily in either. The form was engrafted on the bill in the house of lords, with a view to other than poor-law purposes, and contrary to the author’s earnest representations. As the number and the business of the unions increased, it was found nearly impossible to adhere to this form, owing to the extreme subdivision of property.[116] In all the 130 unions the number of persons rated whose valuations did not exceed 5_l._ was 630,272, whilst the number whose valuations were above that amount was 550,866, and those at 50_l._ and upwards 46,565; thus showing that a considerable majority of the ratepayers were valued at and under 5_l._[117] Believing that such would turn out to be the case, the author had recommended that no occupier under 5_l._ should be called upon to pay the poor-rate, but that the rate on all such holdings should be paid by the landlord. It was however provided by the _72nd section_ of the Act, that instead of the exemption of 5_l._ holdings, the landlord might agree to pay the rate himself, and be allowed a rebate of 10 per cent. for so doing: but this provision has not been acted upon, and all the small tenements are required to be rated in the complex form of the _2nd schedule_ of the Act, comprising no less than eighteen distinctive columns, under penalty of the rates being deemed illegal. There can be no doubt that in the abstract, as the commissioners observe, “all property should contribute to the rate, and the whole population be interested in the prevention of pauperism, and in the well-being of the class for whose immediate benefit statutory provision has been made.” But the small ratepayers in Ireland are so numerous, and the amounts to be severally collected from them are so trifling, whilst the distinction between them and the destitute is often so little perceptible, that Ireland seems to constitute an exception to the general rule in this respect; and it would be a great convenience, and tend to facilitate the working of the Poor Law, if as was at first proposed, the burden of the rate on the smaller holdings were to be thrown upon the owner or immediate lessor, rather than on the tenant himself. ----- [116] See the author’s first Report on Irish Poor Laws, p. 160. [117]