Assimilation of other Rate 107 
the powers given in the act of 18061 Poole, which, 
as we have seen? taxed rather freely for the poor-rate, 
was equally erratic with regard to the church-rate. 
From 1751 to 1773 it rated stock-in-trade and ships, 
but not money or securities. From 1773 to 1792 it 
rated stock-in-trade and ships, and money and secu- 
rities. Then came the decision of the judges that 
the poor-rate on money, securities, furniture, and 
salaries was bad, and it is doubtless owing to that 
decision that from 1792 to 1800 stock-in-trade and 
ships, but not money nor securities, were rated to the 
church-rate. After 1800 ships were omitted, but in a 
case brought before it in 1823 the Court of Delegates 
decided that this was wrong.3 
During the eighteenth century and at the begin- 
ning of the nineteenth it was by no means uncommon 
for the legislature to charge a portion of a rate for 
building or rebuilding a church upon the landlords, 
whether resident or not. In the case of St. Leonard’s, 
Shoreditch, in 1735,4 St. Olave’s in 1737.5 St. Botolph’s 
in 1740, St. Matthew's, Bethnal Green, in 1742,” and 
St. Mary’s, Islington, in 17508 the local act charges 
two-thirds of the rate upon the owners. After this 
the proportion falls to a half in the case of St. John’s, 
Wapping, in 1755.9 Lewisham parish church in 1774,1° 
1 Compare § 54 of the local act 46 Geo. IIL, c. 89 (in the L.C.C. 
Enactments relating to London, Pt. i., Rating clauses, p. 272) with the 
extracts from the rate-books in Barnewall and Cresswell, Reports, 
vol. il. p. 315; and see above, pp. 79, 80. 
3 See above, pp. 81, 96, 97. 
3 Addams, Ecclesiastical Reports, vol. ii. p. 30 ff. 
4 L.C.C., Enactments relating to London. Pt. i, Rating clauses, 
p. 42. 
5 1bid., p. 202. 
8 Ibid., p. 208.