Mr. John Young. ,00 MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE 1611 Sir Robert Ferguson.'] Has there been a depreciation in the value of houses of that description in Cork?- I do not mean a depreciation in the value 20 February > 838. Tmean the wear and tear of the house for 10 years; a house might be very well worth 6 / or 71, and in the course of 10 years not be worth more than 51. , 612 Mr F. French. 1 Was the house very badly built ?— No, it is a very poor man that lives in it, and he cannot afford to lay out money upon it 1613. Mr. Beamish.-] Are there not many poor men paying very high rents ? there are 1614 Mr Serjeant Jackson.] Have you exercised your judgment as a person experienced in these matters upon the tenement itself ?— I have. 1615. Did you examine it ?— I did ; I was speaking to the man a long time. 1616. Did you go into the house ?— I did. . . . 1617. And, with a view to put a fair value upon it, you examined it?— 1 1618. Did you judge of it from the condition it is in, and from the nature of the house itself, independently of any extrinsic circumstances ?— I did ; it is very narrow, in very bad repair, only a small shop, a small room behind it, and two rooms up- stairs. 1619. Mr. Beamish^ It appears that in 1832 lie was registered; do you suppose that the house in 1832 might have been of the value of 8 I. or 9 I. a year ?— I do not think it could. 1620. What value do you suppose it could have been in the year 1832 ?— I do not think it could ever be worth more than 6 /. or 7 l a year. 1621. Do you mean that that is the most which a landlord could get for it ?— Yes, in my opinion. 1622. Mr. Serjeant Jackson.] Suppose the tenement were yours, would you be satisfied with a rent of 5 J. a year for it ?— I think it would be the full value of it, and I would be very glad to let it for that. 1623. You were asked yesterday about the proportion which the valuation for the grand jury would bear to the valuation which the landlord would set upon the premises to let them; you stated that you had acted as a valuator under the Grand Jury Act ?— I have. 1624. Can you inform the Committee at what rate below the actual value you would value premises, as a valuator for the grand jury, for the local tax- ation ?— The valuation that I was on was principally to value the houses not valued in a fair proportion to those already valued ; but I then observed, that about 20 or 25 per cent, is the usual proportion under the rent that could be obtained for it, though there may be exceptions. 1625. According to your observation, from 20 to 25 per cent, under the amount that the landlord might be supposed to expect in the shape of rent for his premises, is the rate at which premises have been valued for the purpose of the taxation ?— Yes. 1626. Mr. Beamish.] Are you aware whether that proportion is kept up through all the different classes of houses; that is to say, houses that are let for rents up to 100 I. ?— I think, in general, it is the rule, but there may be exceptions; for my own house, on the Grand Parade, I pay 50 guineas a year, and it is valued at 401.; Mr. Charles Beamish's houses, upon the Grand Parade, he receives 70 I a year for them, and they are valued at 60 I. each. 1627. Sir Robert Ferguson.] Are those houses let on lease ?— I believe Mr. Beamish's houses to be let on lease. leas628' Chairman^ Is y° ur own on a lease> or a yearly holding ?— Mine is a 1629. Mr. Beamish.] Then your knowledge of the fact goes to sav, that that proportion is kept up with respect to houses of all the different degrees of opinion M 14 Valufors can judSe' there maybe differences of 1630 Do not you know any houses in Cork bringing rents of 100 I, and 1201, a } ear that are not valued higher than from 60?. to 70 I. >_ I do not know any such house. Barrack Z'Jl^ J" f; l0nl Did 7 ™ the house of Thomas Welsh, in Barrack- street, since last Christmas ?— I did. 1632. Did you go into that house?— I did beeper CuT" — the 1634. That