on an average, the wealthiest inhabitants: on Romney
Marsh and in the border hundreds the average payment was as high as
4s., and in the fertile districts of north-central and north-east
Kent the figures were 4s. 5½d. and 4s. 3d. respectively. On the
less fertile chalklands of Thanet the average assessment was 3s. 3d.
and on the Downs west of Dover it was 3s. 7½d. The only surprising
feature of this comparison was in north-west Kent, where the
inhabitants for the hundreds of Hoo, Shamwell and Toltingtrough paid
on an average only 3s. 4d. For some inexplicable reason this region
was both less populated and wealthy than in the fertile areas east
of the Medway. Apart from this instance, it has been noticed that
the wealth of the inhabitants depended fairly closely on the
fertility of the soil. There is no evidence that the presence of
open fields on the downlands of east Kent and Thanet and on the rich
loam soils of north Kent, and the predominance of enclosed farms in
the rest of the county affected the pattern of the distribution of
wealth.
A comparison of the wealth of the major geographical
regions of the county is only one use for the assessment figures.
Contrasts in the average tax payments may often be found within
individual regions, among hundreds with soils of similar quality. In
the eight hundreds within and on the edge of Romney Marsh the
average assessments were, in descending order, 6s. 1d., 5s. l0d.,
4s. l1d., 4s. 9d., 4s. |
|
4d.,
2s. 8½d., 2s. 8d., 2s. 6d. ; in six hundreds in north-east Kent the
figures were 5s. 1d., 4s. 11d, 4s. 9½d., 3s. 9d., 3s. 5½d.,
2s. 9d. There is no possibility that the use of different minimum
figures in the preparation of the assessments was a major cause of
these variations. In six out of the eight marshland hundreds the
smallest payments were 9d., 10d., 1s. (2), and 1s. 4d. (2); in the
hundred with the highest average assessment (St. Martin : 6s. 1d.),
the minimum was 1s. ; in the hundred with the lowest average
assessment (Aloesbridge : 2s. 6d.) it was l0d. Further, the contrast
between the figures is too great to be explained by the possible
adoption by the sub-assessors in each hundred of different
conventional valuations for the more important items of personal
estate such as livestock and corn. In fact, a study of the
individual assessments in six of the eight marshland hundreds (see
Table) suggests that the contrasts in the average tax payments
reflected a real difference in the distribution of wealth. Street
and St. Martin were the most heavily taxed hundreds, primarily
because they included twelve out of thirteen people with the largest
personal estate, taxed at between £1 and £1 6s. 8d. They also had
a comparatively small proportion of people assessed at under 2s. 6d.
This second feature was also true of Oxney and Newchurch, although
they were without the wealthy inhabitants which distinguished Street
and St. Martin. The people of Longport and Aloesbridge paid on the
average |