Hide Articles List

11 articles on this Page

Advertising

SYNOPSIS OF PREVIOUS CHAPTERS.

A CAMBRIAN RAILWAYS ARBITRATION.

Advertising

,---"-POOR RATES IX THE PARISH…

News
Cite
Share

POOR RATES IX THE PARISH OF TOWYN. STRONG COMMENTS BY A DISTRICT I COUNCILLOR. The following paper was read by Mr R Price Mo**gan before a meeting of the Tovvyn Debating and Literary Society. It deals with a question which is now engaging the earnest attention of the public ic the parish, vtz, the rating by the Machyn- lleth Board of Guardians. He said It may be asked what has the Macbvnlletb Board of Guardians to do with Towyn ? In reply I beg to sav it has nearly everything, as the whole of our rates or verv nearly the whole have to be paid over to the Board, and they have the distributing power, and if there is anything that. will tickle a human frame, I think I am safe in saying that the distributing of ruone. is the thing that will do it. The Machynlleth Union is made up of 12 parishes, the majority of which are in Montgomeryshire, but Towyn parish is by far the largest in the Union, and before pro- ceeding further I will read out a few figures, and in comparing Towyn with another town in the Union, that is Machynlleth, you will understand that I have no grudge against that town, but it is the only urban portion that I can fairly compare with Towyn, as all the other parishes are rural districts, and as such it wouid be unfair to compare one with another. Rateable Cost: per Head Paupors. Percentage. Yaluo. of Population. Received in Excess. Paid in Contribution. Excess. lowyn Mach. Towyn Mach. Towyn Mach. Towyn Mach. Penegoes. Mach. j Towyn. Mach. Excess. Excess. lowyn Mach. Towyn Mach. Towyn Mach. Towyn Mach. Penegoes. Mach. j Towyn. Mach. icon ,«• £ I £ £ s. d. s. d. £ s. d. £ s. d.j £ s. d. £ s. d.l £ s. d 1889 166 110 4 88; 4 97 16,113 6,189 i586 9 7 769 1 8 1896 115 102 3'181 4 53 16,582 6,418 3 7 4 1^ 107 8 0 91 16 11173 18 1 ljl717 13 5'668 3 11^ 1897 | 58 0 0103 6 8' ) 1898 108 97 2-881 5*31 18,200 7,103 3 2 4 3| 79 8 0 59 1 2^44 6 2|'l385 1 9 645 16 10* 1899 113 104 291 j 4'48 19,144 7,096 3 OJ 3 11,J 78 12 6 31 19 5*291 16 0|l676 18 6^65 13 5,-} | 323 8 6286 4 21 I You will note that the percentage in paupers and the cost per head of maintaining, is based on the population as it stood in 1891 which if it was taken as the population stands now at Towyn and Aber- dovey, would bring it down to two per cent against 2 91 in the abstract of accounts of the Guardians whereas owing to the rateable value and the popu- lation at Machynlleth being almost stagnant; or indeed is less in 1891 than it was in 1881, the per- centage in the case of Machynlleth parish would be more than shown in the abstract of accounts. My contention is, that owing to the great addition to the rateable value cf Towyn and the increase in population, it is inaccurate to base the cost of the Towyn paupers at so much per head of the popula- tion (as it stood in 1891) nor the percentage in the number of paupers, while it does not make so much difference in Machynlleth as the rateable value of the parish has not materially changed, and the population has not increased. I find that by com- puting the present population of Towyn that the cost per head of population as it now stands does not exceed 2s 9d against 3s Od as shown in the abstract for 1899, and as against 3s lljd the cost per head for Machynlleth, or in the case of Llan- brynmair and Isygarreg 58 lOJd and 5s lCid respectively. You will note from the figures I have quoted, that while the cost of maintaining our paupers is diminishing, the cost of maintaining paupers in other districts is increasing. Take for instance Llanbrynmair, in 1896 the cost per head of population amounted to 4s Ilid in 1899 they are put down at 5s lOJd. Isygarreg in 1896 was 4s 2Jd, in 1899 it was 5s 10id. Again I will call your attention to the poor rate return Lady Day, 1899. The amount of poor rate raised in Machyn- lleth was S928 with 104 paupers, and the amount raised in Towyn £ 2,207 with 113 paupers. Mach- ynlleth contributes out of the sum raised £ 665 13s 5Jd, to 104 paupers in that parish in 1899. Towyu contributes £ 1,676 18s 6d to 113 paupers in this district. You will notice that Towyn has only nine paupers more than Machynlleth, yet it pays a lump sum nearly three times as much as Machynlleth, and this sum goes towards maintaining the paupers of other parishes. The following figures will go a long way to prove what I have just said. Llanbrynmair received in excess of what it con- tributed the sum of £ 31 lis Id in 1896, while in 1899 the sum it has received in excess of its contri- bution has increased to zCl58 13s 9d. Towyn, on the other hand, in 1896 paid S173 18s lid I in excess of what it received, and in 1899 this has increased annually to the large sum of £ 291 16s. Further, Llanbrynmair and Machynlleth are not exceptions, I will call your attention to another parish which is benefiting from Towyn, and that is Penegoes (a rural part which contains a large number of very well-to-do farmers). Penegoes received in excess of its con- tribution in 1895 the sum of £ 107 8s, in 1898 C79 8s, and in 1899 278 12s 6d. I will not say that I Towyn is the only parish that pays more than it receives. There are others but nothing to compare with the Towyu parish. The injustice comes in that three comparatively rich parishes like Llan- bryumair, Machynlleth, and Penegoes, which to- gether during the last four vears have received the large sum of £ 926 5s lid more than they oontri-, buted, while Towyn parish has paid during the same time C900 Is 5d more than it received. It may be argued that it is only right that the weak parishes should benefit from the stronger parishes, and that it would be unjust to deprive them of the benefit that this parish bestowes on them. I don't think it would be an injustice in this case, as the Union is quite large enough to be divided into two separate Unions, and we in this portion of the parish would be doing the part of the good Samaritan with another portion. I allude to Pennal, which has during the last four years received the sum of Cl26 lgi lOd more than it has contributed, and as Pennal is adjoining the Towyn Parish I would suggest that with Towyn it should form a contributory Union. I admit that the question of forming this parish into a contributory ] Union presents some difficulties, and which were, at the time that this question was under considera- tion before, some years ago, rather formidable, but since ihen the rateable value of the Towyn and Aberdovey sub-districts have increased be- tween C2,000 and X3,000, if not more, and what seemed then unpracticable has now become prac- ticable. The matter now forms itself into a question— In what way can Towyn be better represented and have the full benefit of the rates paid by the Tov y n parish ? Without being too selfish I would sugt ■ st that we should not take any of the parishes wh;cli like Towyn pay more than they receive from e Union, but we would take Pennal, which is o- the parishes of the Union, and which to a t extent is included in the circuit of the officer.- >t the Union, and which officers would still be retained by the proposed new Union. If this were done then the question of the accommodation of indoor paupers would present some difficulty, and it may be asked with some justification, what are we going to do with them if we are separated from Machynlleth ? This may be overcome bv the Towyn parish paying for their maintenance "at the Machynlleth Workhouse. It is well known that this parish has a very large interest and claim in the Machynlleth Workhouse, as it has contributed more towards it than any other parish in the Union, To give an instance of this. Tne rateable value of this parish is not much less than four of the largest parishes put together, which will include Machyn- lleth, Llanbrynmair, Penegoes, and Cemmes. There- fore our interest and claim to the Machynlleth

Advertising

THE DEATH ROLL.

REVIEWS.

LOCAL PATENT.

Advertising

,---"-POOR RATES IX THE PARISH…